What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Sabbath Keeping in Church history

G

guibox

Member
Found this (not an SDA website that I can tell), paper on Sabbath keeping. It is quite scholarly, very well researched and quite long (over 64 pages).

I took a bit to post here with the link below to look a the whole thing. There is much much more than what I have edited below.

It seems that the whole issue of Sabbath abrogation and Sunday worship isn't as clear or precise as our brethren here on this forum would like to think. We see that Sabbath worship was kept up even after the disciples died by important churches who should have known better if the Sabbath was truly done away with.

We see that bible makes no distinction of Sabbath abrogation (we see that both Christ and Paul observed it) nor that the issue of Sunday observance was accepted or a replacement for Sabbath in early church history.

Notice that Origen's take on Hebrews 4 is the same as what Dr. Bacchiocchi says and not the 'Christ is the Sabbath rest' that Heidi and others here are so keen on espousing.

Notice also the very last quotes by Irenæus who existed at the same time as Justin Martyr. Notice the time period as well. We see that Sabbath was still in existence for the Christians even though Sunday began to rear its ugly head.

This speaks volumes...(bold face phrases are my emphasis)

This paper is available from the World Wide Web page:
http://www.logon.org and http://www.ccg.org

General Distribution of the Sabbath-keeping Churches

Background

From an examination of the history of the Sabbath-keeping Churches, we are able to draw some important conclusions about them and also trace a system of observance, which shows that the biblical model as established by Christ, has never ceased. There are a number of significant examples, which show a sequential history of the Sabbath-keeping Churches throughout the early Christian world and in Europe, before and during the Middle Ages. These continue on into, and through, the Reformation. The Sabbath-keeping churches, termed also Sabbatati, have existed at one stage or another over the greater part of the planet. These Churches also appear to have, in their central core, from the earliest stages, kept the Holy Sabbath

It was kept in Egypt as the Oxyrhynchus Papyrus (c. 200-250 AD) shows:
“Except ye make the sabbath a real sabbath [Gr. sabbatize the Sabbath], ye shall not see the Father (The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Pt. 1, p. 3, Logion 2, verso 4-11, London: Offices of the Egyptian Exploration Fund, 1898)â€Â.

Origen also enjoined Sabbath-keeping:

“After the festival of the unceasing sacrifice [the crucifixion] is put the second festival of the Sabbath, and it is fitting for whoever is righteous among the saints to keep also the festival of the Sabbath. There remaineth therefore a sabbatismus, that is, a keeping of the Sabbath, to the people of God [Hebrews 4:9] (Homily on Numbers 23, para. 4, in Migne, Patrologia Græca, Vol. 12, cols. 749, 750)â€Â.

Similarly the Constitution of the Holy Apostles (Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 7, p. 413; c. 3rd century) states:

“Thou shalt observe the Sabbath, on account of Him who ceased from His work of creation, but ceased not from His work of providence: it is a rest for meditation of the law, not for idleness of the hands.â€Â

Sabbath-keeping, the original position of the Church, had spread west into Europe and from Palestine, it spread East into India and then into China. The introduction of Sabbath-keeping to India caused a controversy in Buddhism in 220 CE. According to Lloyd (The Creed of Half Japan, p. 23) the Kushan Dynasty of North India, called a council of Buddhist priests at Vaisalia, to bring uniformity among the Buddhist monks on the observance of their weekly Sabbath. Some had been so impressed by the Old Testament writings that they had begun to keep the Sabbath.

The Sabbatati of Europe were not an inconsiderable force. The Church established in Milan kept the Sabbath.

“It was the practice generally of the Eastern Churches; and some churches of the West ... For in the Church of Millaine [Milan]; ... it seemes the Saturday was held in a farre esteeme ... Not that the Easterne Churches, or any of the rest which observed that day were inclined to Iudaisme [Judaism]; but that they came together on the Sabbath day, to worship Iesus [Jesus] Christ the Lord of the Sabbath (Dr. Peter Heylyn History of the Sabbath, London 1636, Part 2, para. 5, pp. 73-74; original spelling retained).â€Â

The western Churches under the Goths, had allegedly fallen into neglect of the Sabbath, because of the influence of Rome, even though the Goths themselves were not Catholic, but Subordinationist or so-called Arians. Sidonius says that under Theodoric in 454-526

“It is a fact that it was formerly the custom in the East to keep the Sabbath in the same manner as the Lord's day and to hold sacred assemblies: while on the other hand, the people of the West, contending for the Lord's day have neglected the celebration of the Sabbath (Apollinaris Sidonii Epistolæ, lib. 1,2; Migne, 57).â€Â

From canon 26 of the Council of Elvira (c. 305), it appears that the Church in Spain had kept the Sabbath. Rome had introduced the practice of fasting on the Sabbath to counteract Sabbath-keeping. Pope Sylvester (314-335) was the first to order the Churches to fast on the Sabbath, and Pope Innocent (402-417) made it a binding law in the Churches that obeyed him.

The Sabbath-keeping Churches in Persia underwent forty years of persecution under Shapur II, from 335-375 specifically, because they were Sabbath-keeping.

“They despise our sun-god. Did not Zoroaster, the sainted founder of our divine beliefs, institute Sunday one thousand years ago in honour of the sun and supplant the Sabbath of the Old Testament. Yet these Christians have divine services on Saturday (O'Leary The Syriac Church and Fathers, pp. 83-84, requoted Truth Triumphant p. 170)â€Â.

Socrates the Historian says:

“For although almost all Churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries [assumed by Catholics to be the eucharist or Lord's Supper so-called] on the Sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, refuse to do this (Socrates, Ecclesiastical History, Bk 5, Ch. 22, p. 289).â€Â

The Sabbath was observed into the fifth century by Christianity (Lyman Coleman Ancient Christianity Exemplified, Ch. 26, Sec. 2, p. 527). Certainly, as at the time of Jerome (420), the devoutest Christians did ordinary work on Sunday (Dr. White, bishop of Ely, Treatise of the Sabbath Day, p. 219).

Augustine of Hippo, a devout Sunday keeper, attested that the Sabbath was observed in the greater part of the Christian world (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (NPNF), First Series, Vol. 1, pp. 353-354) and deplored the fact that in two neighbouring Churches in Africa, one observed the seventh day Sabbath, while another fasted on it (Peter Heylyn, op. cit., p. 416)

The Churches generally held the Sabbath for some time.

The ancient Christians were very careful in the observation of Saturday, or the seventh day ... It is plain that all the Oriental churches, and the greatest part of the world, observed the Sabbath as a festival ... Athanasius likewise tells us that they held religious assemblies on the Sabbath, not because they were infected with Judaism, but to worship Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath, Epiphanius says the same (Antiquities of the Christian Church, Vol. II, Bk. xx, Ch. 3, Sec 1, 66. 1137,1136).

In the last half of the fourth century, the bishop of the Sabbath-keeping Abyssinian Church, Museus, visited China. Ambrose of Milan stated that Museus had travelled almost everywhere in the country of the Seres

The Sabbath Churches were established in Persia and the Tigris-Euphrates basin. They kept the Sabbath and paid tithes to their Churches The St. Thomas Christians of India were never in communion with Rome. They were Sabbath-keepers, as were those who broke off communion with Rome after the Council of Chalcedon, namely the Abyssinian, the Jacobites, the Maronites, and the Armenians and the Kurds, who kept the food laws and denied confession and purgatory

In 781 the famous China Monument was inscribed in marble to tell of the growth of Christianity in China at that time. The inscription of 763 words was unearthed near the city of Changan in 1625 and allegedly now stands in the Forest of Tablets at Changan. The extract from the tablet states:

“On the seventh day we offer sacrifices, after having purified our hearts, and received absolution for our sins. This religion, so perfect and so excellent, is difficult to name, but it enlightens darkness by its brilliant precepts (M. l'Abbe Hue Christianity in China, Vol. I, Ch. 2, pp. 48-49).â€Â

The Abyssinian Church remained Sabbath-keeping and in Ethiopia the Jesuits tried to get the Abyssinians to accept Roman Catholicism. The Abyssinian legate at the court of Lisbon denied they kept Sabbath in imitation of the Jews, but rather in obedience to Christ and the Apostles

The Sabbath in Italy

Allegedly, Ambrose of Milan kept Sabbath in Milan and Sunday in Rome, hence giving rise to the saying when in Rome do as Rome does (Heylyn, op. cit., 1612). Heylyn identifies the Church at Milan from the fourth century, as the centre of Sabbath-keeping in the West (ibid., part 2, para 5, pp. 73-74). It is thus not surprising that the Sabbatati had their school there, as recorded under the Vallenses at the time that Peter Waldo joined them. The Sabbath had been observed in Italy for centuries and the Council of Friaul (c. 791) spoke against its observance by the peasants at canon 13.

“We command all Christians to observe the Lord's day to be held not in honour of the past Sabbath, but on account of that holy night of the first of the week called the Lord's day. When speaking of that Sabbath which the Jews observe, the last day of the week and which our peasants observe ... (Mansi, 13, 851).â€Â

There was thus a nucleus of Sabbath-keeping tradition in Europe between Milan and Lyons, which became the centre of The Poor Men of Lyons, a branch of the Sabbatati or Insabatati, later termed Waldensians. The Milan-Lyon nexus was facilitated by Pothinus and Irenæus (c. 125-203). Both were disciples of Polycarp, disciple of John and both were Sabbath-keepers.

Irenæus was a Unitarian, as was Justin Martyr and all the Ante-Nicene Apologists. He stated that the Church held one constant belief, i.e. that there was but one Creator of the world, God the Father (ANF, Vol. 1, Against Heresies, Bk. II, Ch. IX, p. 369). He stated that the Church position was that:

“Perfect righteousness was conferred neither by any other legal ceremonies. The decalogue however was not cancelled by Christ, but is always in force: men were never released from its commandments (ANF, Bk. IV, Ch. XVI, p. 480).â€Â

He quotes Ezekiel (Ezek. 20:12) and Moses (Ex. 21:13) referring to the Sabbaths as the sign between God and His people. The Sabbaths were given as a sign, which was also symbolical. The Sabbaths taught that we should continue day by day in God’s service. Man was not justified by them, but they were given as a sign to the people (ibid., p. 481).
Click to expand...
 
In the Greek Orthodox tradition, Saturday is Sabbaton, the Seventh day. The question is how the day is to be kept, just as the question should be aksed as to how Sabbath was kpet and what it meant in the early Church. There was some diversity among the churches, with the East being more Semitic in nature and worship. The Quartodecimans for example, keepers of Nisan 14 Pascha, were from the East (Asia Minor).

Our contention is that the Sabbath remains, but is altered and understood in the light of the Resurrection. Altered is not synonymous with abrogated. Rather, keeping the Sabbath holy- and in the NT, the Day of Resurrection holy- are commands that remain.

Of course, we are to make every day holy, but our humanity requires rules and stipulations. If we say "fast when the Lord leads," people rarely fast. If we say "fast with us on Wednesday, they learn to do so.
 
Orthodox Christian said:
Our contention is that the Sabbath remains, but is altered and understood in the light of the Resurrection. Altered is not synonymous with abrogated. Rather, keeping the Sabbath holy- and in the NT, the Day of Resurrection holy- are commands that remain.

That is so not true, OC, and this is where so many people are being led astray. We've debated this issue many times previously and debating it yet again is not going to get us any place. However, there was NEVER a command in the Bible for Sunday to be given any 'holy' status whatsoever.

Sunday was always known as the first day ...the first of the original Creation six. These days were referred to by number only. The seventh-day, however, was known only as 'the Sabbath'. Why? Because the seventh-day was SPECIAL. You'll note in the scriptures that the first-day is NEVER referred to as anything other than 'the first-day' ...even when the apostles broke bread on that (and every other) day. That's because the first-day has no particular significance. MAN made the first-day into a 'holy day' ...NOT God.

If one chooses to 'keep' Sunday because that's the day the doors of their church are open - fine. But please, don't imply that they are doing so because of a command from the Bible. This is simply not true and, if anything, this is adding to the Bible which we are told NOT to do.
Click to expand...
 
Yes, there is no statement in the NT anywhere that commands us to keep the resurrection day holy. No-one can show any verse stating this at all, OC. Not even you. "The Lords Day" is most likely to be Sabbath (Saturday) or the end of time. Nothing more nothing les. It is man's tradition that makes it resurrection day. Biblically, the Sabbath is the seventh day and nothing else. It is the only day ever made holy and sanctified. No other has ever had this done to it except by man. (And I would follow God over man any time.)

Rad.
 
(sidebar)

The Lord's Day is used only once in the entire Bible, so it's hard to discern from scripture what day it refers to. It could mean the Sabbath, but the Bible is explicit in it use of the word sabbath. The same applies to The Day of the Lord. The Wrath of God is the only phrase I know of that is used instead of The Day of the Lord.

The only other place we see The Lord's Day used is in early church 'fathers' epistles. They use it to describe the first day of the week; the day set aside for commemorating the resurrection of our Lord. I believe it was Ignatius and Justin Martyr that first wrote about it.
 
Vic said:
(sidebar)

The Lord's Day is used only once in the entire Bible, so it's hard to discern from scripture what day it refers to. It could mean the Sabbath, but the Bible is explicit in it use of the word sabbath. The same applies to The Day of the Lord. The Wrath of God is the only phrase I know of that is used instead of The Day of the Lord.

I pretty well agree with you on this, Vic. I feel that John would simply have referred to the day as 'the Sabbath' had it been the Sabbath and not 'the Lord's Day'. It more seems to fit with 'the day of the Lord' since John was shown 'in vision' events yet to come. Whatever the day was, it sure was NOT Sunday.

The only other place we see The Lord's Day used is in early church 'fathers' epistles. They use it to describe the first day of the week; the day set aside for commemorating the resurrection of our Lord. I believe it was Ignatius and Justin Martyr that first wrote about it.

That's right. It's a man-made tradition, not a command from God.
Click to expand...
 
Radlad72 said:
Yes, there is no statement in the NT anywhere that commands us to keep the resurrection day holy. No-one can show any verse stating this at all, OC. Not even you. "The Lords Day" is most likely to be Sabbath (Saturday) or the end of time. Nothing more nothing les. It is man's tradition that makes it resurrection day. Biblically, the Sabbath is the seventh day and nothing else. It is the only day ever made holy and sanctified. No other has ever had this done to it except by man. (And I would follow God over man any time.)

Rad.

Good grief, Radlad ...where did you come from? I thought you'd been raptured or something!
Click to expand...
 
SputnikBoy said:
I pretty well agree with you on this, Vic. I feel that John would simply have referred to the day as 'the Sabbath' had it been the Sabbath and not 'the Lord's Day'. It more seems to fit with 'the day of the Lord' since John was shown 'in vision' events yet to come. Whatever the day was, it sure was NOT Sunday.

That's right. It's a man-made tradition, not a command from God.
Click to expand...
Aah, it's always nice to have someone agree with me, but... (lol)

My post was composed to point out that Sabbath and Day of the Lord are explicit terms used frequently in the Bible. If John had meant one of those days, I think he would have used a term already consistant with the Written Word. Insdead, he chose a phrase coined by one of the earlier church fathers. I lean towards that when interpreting Revelation 1:10. I'm not dogmatic about it though.
 
I am not going to get into this again (yet anyways :wink: ) but I wanted to respond to one thing posted:SputnikBoy wrote
Whatever the day was, it sure was NOT Sunday.
Click to expand...
What a contradiction this is. WHATEVER DAY but NOT Sunday? If it can be WHATEVER DAY, then why could it NOT be Sunday?
 
Collier said:
I am not going to get into this again (yet anyways :wink: ) but I wanted to respond to one thing posted:SputnikBoy wrote
Whatever the day was, it sure was NOT Sunday.
Click to expand...
What a contradiction this is. WHATEVER DAY but NOT Sunday? If it can be WHATEVER DAY, then why could it NOT be Sunday?

Silly, silly, Collier. You've got me on a mere word technicality that has nothing to do with the initiating of a new 'holy day'. I just assumed when I made that comment that the readers would know where we were at in this discussion. We were referring to Revelation 1:10 and whether or not 'the Lord's Day' was the Sabbath (the 7th-day) OR the Day of the Lord (the day of Jesus' return). In my opinion, it has to be one or the other. Okay?

My remark was, "Whatever the day was (the Sabbath or the Day of the Lord), it sure was NOT Sunday." Yes, even though the Day of the Lord John refers to COULD have been Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday, or any other day, John was NOT making reference to a NEW 'holy day'. John was not saying, as many Christians SO desperately want him to have been saying, that SUNDAY will henceforth be known as the 'new Sabbath.' And THAT is what I meant in my post.
Click to expand...
 
I would like to get back to the original post rather than just make this a generalized Sabbath/Sunday debate.

How about it Sunday/no more Sabbath promoters? Are these people and churches completely wrong and complete Judaizers/Old Covenant?

We have Christian people right after the Bible times (and most likely steeped in Paul's writings) still worshipping on Sabbath and main Christian churches all over the known world keeping Sabbath. Don't you think these people so close to the time of John and Paul should know better that apparently the Sabbath has been done away with?

Another interesting note: When guys like Barnabas and Justin Martyr appeal to Sunday over Sabbath, nowhere that I can see do they refer to Paul's writings such as Colossians 2 and Hebrews 4 to support that Sabbath is no longer binding. Rather we see that their main issues was anti-semitism (the Sabbath was a Jewish custom) and that the Lord created the Sun and light on the eight day, thus paralleling the resurrection. And yet we have Iraenius of the same order, at the same exact time promoting Sabbath keeping.

Yet our friends here on this forum seem to use Paul to support the abrogation of Sabbath and that the Bible supports it. History nor scripture shows such a thing. Rather we see the exact OPPOSITE in Christian churches (and the head church in Jerusalem up to the council of Laodicea being Sabbath keepers).

So the question remains. do you follow mans traditions that Christ warned about "in vain they worship me teaching the doctrines of men for the commandments of God"
or do you obey the Lord God and His holy day He created at the beginning of time for all mankind?

Are you a true Sola Scriptura Protestant or are you merely a Catholic sympathizer emphasising early church tradition alongside the scriptures?

The choice is yours.
 
Vic said:
SputnikBoy said:
I pretty well agree with you on this, Vic. I feel that John would simply have referred to the day as 'the Sabbath' had it been the Sabbath and not 'the Lord's Day'. It more seems to fit with 'the day of the Lord' since John was shown 'in vision' events yet to come. Whatever the day was, it sure was NOT Sunday.

That's right. It's a man-made tradition, not a command from God.
Click to expand...
Aah, it's always nice to have someone agree with me, but... (lol)

My post was composed to point out that Sabbath and Day of the Lord are explicit terms used frequently in the Bible. If John had meant one of those days, I think he would have used a term already consistant with the Written Word. Insdead, he chose a phrase coined by one of the earlier church fathers. I lean towards that when interpreting Revelation 1:10. I'm not dogmatic about it though.

Okay, I'm with you now. While I agree with you (as mentioned in my last post) about John perhaps making specific mention to 'the Sabbath' by that term if that's what he meant, I don't know that we can simply assume this. This IS the Bible we're talking about here and it hardly reads like a child's story at the best of times. Analyzing and interpreting the words, the inflections, the terminology, the thoughts, the motives, the perceptions, etc. of the ancients is not an exact science. We on this forum, however, have a tendency to make our own interpretations and analyses of these things according to our own specific beliefs. If Sunday is 'our thing', then Sunday is what Revelation 1:10 will mean.

As for 'the Lord's Day', however, I would suggest that there is FAR LESS evidence (in fact 'zilch' evidence, let's face it) to suggest that John was making a reference to Sunday in Revelation 1:10 where NO previous scripture supports this assumption. Let us look at it this way ...after reading Revelation 1:10, is anyone SERIOUSLY going to make a 'Sunday doctrine' out of that scripture, run off and build a church and worship God on Sunday simply because that's the day they perceive that 'John was in the Spirit?'

Um, the answer is probably ...'yes.' :-?
Click to expand...
 
guibox said:
I would like to get back to the original post rather than just make this a generalized Sabbath/Sunday debate.

How about it Sunday/no more Sabbath promoters? Are these people and churches completely wrong and complete Judaizers/Old Covenant?

We have Christian people right after the Bible times (and most likely steeped in Paul's writings) still worshipping on Sabbath and main Christian churches all over the known world keeping Sabbath. Don't you think these people so close to the time of John and Paul should know better that apparently the Sabbath has been done away with?

Another interesting note: When guys like Barnabas and Justin Martyr appeal to Sunday over Sabbath, nowhere that I can see do they refer to Paul's writings such as Colossians 2 and Hebrews 4 to support that Sabbath is no longer binding. Rather we see that their main issues was anti-semitism (the Sabbath was a Jewish custom) and that the Lord created the Sun and light on the eight day, thus paralleling the resurrection. And yet we have Iraenius of the same order, at the same exact time promoting Sabbath keeping.

Yet our friends here on this forum seem to use Paul to support the abrogation of Sabbath and that the Bible supports it. History nor scripture shows such a thing. Rather we see the exact OPPOSITE in Christian churches (and the head church in Jerusalem up to the council of Laodicea being Sabbath keepers).

So the question remains. do you follow mans traditions that Christ warned about "in vain they worship me teaching the doctrines of men for the commandments of God"
or do you obey the Lord God and His holy day He created at the beginning of time for all mankind?

Are you a true Sola Scriptura Protestant or are you merely a Catholic sympathizer emphasising early church tradition alongside the scriptures?

The choice is yours.
Click to expand...
There's a third choice for those of us who emphasize the fulness of the Church with the scriptures as part of the unbroken tradition. We know factually that the early Church, including the Church in the Apostolic era worshipped in the Synagogue and the Temple, as well as in the homes. As I have said before, it's not either/or, it's both/and.
We observe Friday as paraskevi (day of preparation), Saturday as Sabbaton (Sabbath), and Sunday as Kyriaki (the Lord's Day).
As we have for roughly 2000 years.

It is truly a "doctrine of man" to suggest that Saturday is the only day one should attend church. That has nothing to do with the dictates of the Sabbath.
 
guibox said:
I would like to get back to the original post rather than just make this a generalized Sabbath/Sunday debate.

You know, not one of the 'Sunday-supporters' to my knowledge has given the words of Jesus in Matthew 24:20 - in regard to continued observance of the Sabbath - any debate time whatever. This scripture has all but been ignored by this group of Christians. And yet, this group continually tells us that, by AD70, the apostles had pretty well established Sunday as the substitute day for the Sabbath ...breaking bread, taking up collections, etc. But the message of Jesus in Matthew 24:20 doesn't suggest this AT ALL ...it does, in fact, suggest the opposite!

How about it Sunday/no more Sabbath promoters? Are these people and churches completely wrong and complete Judaizers/Old Covenant?

We have Christian people right after the Bible times (and most likely steeped in Paul's writings) still worshipping on Sabbath and main Christian churches all over the known world keeping Sabbath. Don't you think these people so close to the time of John and Paul should know better that apparently the Sabbath has been done away with?

Another interesting note: When guys like Barnabas and Justin Martyr appeal to Sunday over Sabbath, nowhere that I can see do they refer to Paul's writings such as Colossians 2 and Hebrews 4 to support that Sabbath is no longer binding. Rather we see that their main issues was anti-semitism (the Sabbath was a Jewish custom) and that the Lord created the Sun and light on the eight day, thus paralleling the resurrection. And yet we have Iraenius of the same order, at the same exact time promoting Sabbath keeping.

Yet our friends here on this forum seem to use Paul to support the abrogation of Sabbath and that the Bible supports it. History nor scripture shows such a thing. Rather we see the exact OPPOSITE in Christian churches (and the head church in Jerusalem up to the council of Laodicea being Sabbath keepers).

I've asked the question many times ...are the scriptures of (mainly) Paul that 'Sabbath obrogators' use to support 'Sunday-worship' a relatively recent argument? It would appear so. This fact alone should perhaps throw up a red flag. This IS a Saturday/Sunday issue whether we like it or not. Oftentimes it doesn't even require a sabbatarian to initiate the discussion. Does this mean something ...something perhaps important? I don't know ...I'm just wondering out loud.

So the question remains. do you follow mans traditions that Christ warned about "in vain they worship me teaching the doctrines of men for the commandments of God"
or do you obey the Lord God and His holy day He created at the beginning of time for all mankind?

Are you a true Sola Scriptura Protestant or are you merely a Catholic sympathizer emphasising early church tradition alongside the scriptures?

The choice is yours.

Sunday has become so deeply rooted by tradition that the majority of mainstream Christians won't even give the matter a thought. And, if and when they might give the matter a thought, there will be enough 'scripture-twisters' with theological credentials to nip their enquiries in the bud and bring them back into line. Then, of course, there are the 'Spirit-filled' Christians who, by virtue of this 'Spirit-infilling' no longer have freedom of choice anyway. The Spirit guides their every move. So, EVERY day will be a 'holy day' to the Lord. Talk about playing it safe!
Click to expand...
 
SputnikBoy said:
As for 'the Lord's Day', however, I would suggest that there is FAR LESS evidence (in fact 'zilch' evidence, let's face it) to suggest that John was making a reference to Sunday in Revelation 1:10 where NO previous scripture supports this assumption. Let us look at it this way ...after reading Revelation 1:10, is anyone SERIOUSLY going to make a 'Sunday doctrine' out of that scripture, run off and build a church and worship God on Sunday simply because that's the day they perceive that 'John was in the Spirit?'

Um, the answer is probably ...'yes.' :-?
Click to expand...
Hey there. There is no other scriptual reference to what "Abraham's bosom" is and look at the controversary surrounding that phrase. ;-) (we have to leave the Bible and go to Jewish tradition to determine that one, so why not tradition on Rev. 1:10?)

So to clarify my position, I'm not suggesting a doctrine is to be established using this vsere, only that a proclamation was made making Sunday a day to comemorate the Resurrection of the Lord. Ignatius wrote about it in 107AD, Martyr in 150AD. (according to internet sources) It's quite feasable that the term was around when John wrote Revelation, if you subscribe to the belief he wrote it in the 90's AD.

I will now step aside and let the topic continue. Sorry for the disruption. :oops:
 
Vic said:
SputnikBoy said:
As for 'the Lord's Day', however, I would suggest that there is FAR LESS evidence (in fact 'zilch' evidence, let's face it) to suggest that John was making a reference to Sunday in Revelation 1:10 where NO previous scripture supports this assumption. Let us look at it this way ...after reading Revelation 1:10, is anyone SERIOUSLY going to make a 'Sunday doctrine' out of that scripture, run off and build a church and worship God on Sunday simply because that's the day they perceive that 'John was in the Spirit?'

Um, the answer is probably ...'yes.' :-?
Click to expand...
Hey there. There is no other scriptual reference to what "Abraham's bosom" is and look at the controversary surrounding that phrase. ;-) (we have to leave the Bible and go to Jewish tradition to determine that one, so why not tradition on Rev. 1:10?)

Yes, I agree ...to my knowledge Abraham's Bosom cannot be explained from the Bible alone.

So to clarify my position, I'm not suggesting a doctrine is to be established using this vsere, only that a proclamation was made making Sunday a day to comemorate the Resurrection of the Lord.

Except that a doctrine HAS been established. And, this verse IS often used to support that doctrine.

Ignatius wrote about it in 107AD, Martyr in 150AD. (according to internet sources) It's quite feasable that the term was around when John wrote Revelation, if you subscribe to the belief he wrote it in the 90's AD.

Could be. But wasn't John being led by the Spirit in Revelation 1:10 and not by some term invented by man? Unlike 'Abraham's Bosom' which Jesus incorporated into a parable directed to an audience of Jews, John's writings were for all future mankind. Jewish terminology and 'current proclamations' would surely have been kept to a minimum.

The Lord's Day=Sunday is all supposition, unfortunately, and is simply not supported by any scripture. For all intents and purposes, Vic, Sunday HAS replaced the Sabbath for the Christian. And, this just MIGHT be an issue to God. I don't know. While I personally don't feel that 'the Lord's Day' is referring to the Sabbath, I also feel quite strongly that it was CERTAINLY NOT referring to the day on which Jesus rose from the dead. In order to come up with this belief is to actually read something into this scripture that it truly does NOT say.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top