Saturday sabbath or Sunday-does it matter?

[Ken]

Right. That is my question that I asked you. Not your claim.

What is the proof/evidence of these huge gaps in the last 2000 years you claim exist?


Do you have proof that their seven day week is messed up?

Do I think this is an article of faith you have (that the 7 day week has been out of kilter) can be demonstrated and supported by the historical record? I don’t know. That is what I’m trying to figure out. Where is your evidence for your faith?

What gaps do we have in the past 2000 years? Much of what we have for the late Roman Empire in the 3rd Century is very sketchy. Plagues, wars, sacking of cities, civil unrest, Barbarian invasions (Huns, Mongols, Goths, Vandals, etc.) in an age before the printing press meant most written records that did exist are lost to time. Same thing for the so-called "dark ages" after the fall of Rome in the west. And in the east, centers of knowledge and repositories of historical records like Baghdad were sacked and razed to the ground by the Mongols.

Rolling back the clock further into the Bronze and Iron ages we have entire missing centuries for which we know basically nothing.

We have misplaced entire centuries. Yet you want to claim that we have never misplaced a Wednesday? I mean, OK. Maybe. I'm simply saying it is an article of faith to believe the Hebrew Bible is precise and accurate to the exact day going back 5785 years to the seven days of creation. And that is not even touching on archaeology which portrays an entirely different narrative.

The argument seems to be that because we today cannot look back through the lenses of time and see clearly, that those people must have what, forgotten how to count to seven? Imagine 2,000 years into the future, everything about us is lost to time. That would not be evidence that we don't know how to count today, or that we somehow lost track of the Sabbath.

Religion and culture - as you well know - are one of the most enduring elements of humanity. And so on balance, I find it harder to believe that the Jews would accidentally lose track of one the single most important things in their religion and culture. If, on the other side of the argument is merely, "well we don't have non-Jewish records that verify their records".

We don't have Jewish records either. Entire centuries are missing there as well.

We also have an immense amount of archaeological records of human habitation in Europe and the Levant going back 50,000 years and before. Which, you know, conflicts with the 5785 year Hebrew Calendar as well.

[R7ehr]

What gaps do we have in the past 2000 years? Much of what we have for the late Roman Empire in the 3rd Century is very sketchy. Plagues, wars, sacking of cities, civil unrest, Barbarian invasions (Huns, Mongols, Goths, Vandals, etc.) in an age before the printing press meant most written records that did exist are lost to time. Same thing for the so-called "dark ages" after the fall of Rome in the west. And in the east, centers of knowledge and repositories of historical records like Baghdad were sacked and razed to the ground by the Mongols.

Rolling back the clock further into the Bronze and Iron ages we have entire missing centuries for which we know basically nothing.

We have misplaced entire centuries. Yet you want to claim that we have never misplaced a Wednesday? I mean, OK. Maybe. I'm simply saying it is an article of faith to believe the Hebrew Bible is precise and accurate to the exact day going back 5785 years to the seven days of creation. And that is not even touching on archaeology which portrays an entirely different narrative.

The argument seems to be that because we today cannot look back through the lenses of time and see clearly, that those people must have what, forgotten how to count to seven? Imagine 2,000 years into the future, everything about us is lost to time. That would not be evidence that we don't know how to count today, or that we somehow lost track of the Sabbath.

Religion and culture - as you well know - are one of the most enduring elements of humanity. And so on balance, I find it harder to believe that the Jews would accidentally lose track of one the single most important things in their religion and culture. If, on the other side of the argument is merely, "well we don't have non-Jewish records that verify their records".

We don't have Jewish records either. Entire centuries are missing there as well.

Mute point, on the balance.

[Bootstrap]

The argument seems to be that because we today cannot look back through the lenses of time and see clearly, that those people must have what, forgotten how to count to seven?

Or maybe the Sabbath wasn't important enough to Jews to keep track?

Through all of written history, whenever leap days were added or other major changes were made to months or years, weeks remained intact.

[Bootstrap]

I'm inclined to use Ken Sylvania's thread to explore dynamics, and to use this one to answer the questions we come up with about the actual subject.

Would that make sense?

It's hard to discuss both in the same place.

[JohnH]

I'm inclined to use Ken Sylvania's thread to explore dynamics, and to use this one to answer the questions we come up with about the actual subject.

Would that make sense?

It's hard to discuss both in the same place.

Sounds good to me. I’ve enjoyed the scholarly discussion in this thread.

[Bootstrap]

When I read that thread, here's what I see (condensed):

I think I did answer these questions, but let me do it again. And in more length.

Were you meaning that God commands a day of rest?

I think that God commanded a day of rest for the Jews at Mount Sinai. The root of Shabbat (Sabbath) comes from the Hebrew verb שָׁבַת (shavat), which means to cease, to stop, to rest. It does not come from the Hebrew word for seven, but it sounds a lot like it, and this is used as a kind of word play in Genesis 2:2-3 and Exodus 20:8-11.

I think that the beginning of Exodus Chapter, which contains these commandments, is very clear that it is part of his covenant with the Jews. There is no mention of any of the patriarchs observing the Sabbath or saying anything about the Sabbath before Sinai. Nothing in the Old Testament implies that the Sabbath is for Gentiles, and Jews have generally said that it is not.

Nothing in the New Testament says or implies that Gentiles are to keep the Sabbath. They celebrated The Lord’s Day (Sunday, resurrection day), but they did not observe Jewish Sabbath rules. They didn't move the Jewish Sabbath to another day. It was a day for worship, teaching, fellowship.

In that context, were you meaning to say that the Sabbath was made for the Jews, not the Jews for the Sabbath? ... Did I misunderstand you?

Yes, I think that's fair.

The Pharisees treated Sabbath as a test of loyalty, but Jesus reminds them it was always a gift, not a burden — meant to serve the life of God’s people, not to enslave them. And then he raises the stakes: the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.

That doesn’t put Gentiles under Sabbath law. It shows that even Israel’s central covenant sign must now be read through him. Jesus reframes the law, not by abolishing it, but by centering it in his own identity and mission.

[ken_sylvania]

For instance, in the Sabbath thread, what exactly were you trying to say about the topic?

I was saying that God established a day of rest for the benefit of mankind, and His instructions on how to observe that day of rest were for the benefit of mankind. Some of the Pharisees in Jesus' day had twisted God's intent for the Sabbath to where they were willing to rescue cattle but not rescue fellow human beings on the Sabbath day. Jesus set the record straight, reminding us that the Sabbath was intended for our benefit.

If we use "the Sabbath for man, not man for the Sabbath" to salve our consciences when we engage in carnal pleasure or profit-seeking business on the Lord's day, it seems we are missing the whole point that Jesus was driving at when he said that quote.

The above assumes a person feels some conscience that a day of rest ought to be observed (otherwise the idea of the Sabbath being for man is totally irrelevant), a matter which would be a separate discussion.

[Bootstrap]

For instance, in the Sabbath thread, what exactly were you trying to say about the topic?

I was saying that God established a day of rest for the benefit of mankind, and His instructions on how to observe that day of rest were for the benefit of mankind. Some of the Pharisees in Jesus' day had twisted God's intent for the Sabbath to where they were willing to rescue cattle but not rescue fellow human beings on the Sabbath day. Jesus set the record straight, reminding us that the Sabbath was intended for our benefit.

If we use "the Sabbath for man, not man for the Sabbath" to salve our consciences when we engage in carnal pleasure or profit-seeking business on the Lord's day, it seems we are missing the whole point that Jesus was driving at when he said that quote.

The above assumes a person feels some conscience that a day of rest ought to be observed (otherwise the idea of the Sabbath being for man is totally irrelevant), a matter which would be a separate discussion.

Thanks, that's clear and helpful.

And even if Sunday is The Lord's Day - which is how I understand it - I think we should embrace that gift, without turning it into the Jewish Sabbath.

[Bootstrap]

As to the question, however, I do not see any Biblical evidence of an early switch to the first day of the week (our Sunday), as opposed to the 7th day, the Sabbath. But it is what it is, and I'm fine with it being Sunday.

I see some evidence:

• Acts 20:7: “On the first day of the week we came together to break bread.”
  This shows gathering for worship, teaching, and communion on Sunday.
• 1 Corinthians 16:2: Paul instructs believers to set aside offerings “on the first day of every week.”
  This implies regular gatherings on Sunday when collections could be taken.
• Revelation 1:10: John says, “I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day.”
  This is the only direct NT reference to “the Lord’s Day.” Most early Christian writers identify this as Sunday, the day of Jesus’ resurrection.

Jewish believers continued to attend synagogue on the Sabbath (Acts 13:14; Acts 17:2), but the distinct Christian practice centered on the first day as a celebration of the new creation in Christ.

I also see Paul telling Gentiles not to be compelled to observe the Sabbath (e.g. Colossians 2:16–17).

!!! SNIP !!!

All in all I do not find these passages to be clear evidence that Sunday was henceforth to be the special day of gathering & worship. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. I have not been heavily involved in ministry with Jews in recent years or for any extended period of time, but the Christian choice of Sunday is one of the sort of 'smoke-screen' objections they raise when confronted with the Gospel. (I THINK it is a 'smoke-screen', but maybe it goes deeper than that. I do not know for sure either way. It seems, however, to be an unnecessary 'stumbling block' that prevents the 'stumbling block of the cross' to have its full intended effect.)

I don't think I ever responded to this post, and I should have.

You said you don't see any evidence for The Lord's Day. I said I think there is "some evidence", but I agree that the New Testament alone does not provide "clear evidence that Sunday was henceforth to be the special day of gathering & worship".

I don’t see any evidence that Gentiles were ever expected to observe a Jewish Sabbath. What we do see is a clear call for Christians not to neglect “the gathering of the saints,” and the NT passages above seem to suggest that this gathering often happened on the first day of the week, which is Sunday.

I also see that the Apostolic Fathers point to this practice, which seems to confirm what the NT hints at. I recognize, though, that for some Jewish friends this remains a stumbling block, and I appreciate your concern there.