Where does the Bible say...

WaterSong said:

I would suggest you consider the passage that tells you God is not found in structures built by man.
Jesus was God, "Emmanuel=God with us". God cannot double talk himself as Jesus. When God is not found in structures built by man/mortals, Jesus would not say to Peter bar Jonah to construct an edifice of stone and wood to house God's word and authority.

The Rock is found all through the old testament. The OT is the foundation of the new. The prophecies in the old are fulfilled in the new. God is the rock.
In Matthew 16 when Jesus spoke of building his church upon the rock, Jesus was saying Peter and the other disciples, would in fulfilling the great commission build the church of Christ, the Ekklesia, the individual holy spirit reborn regenerated faithful, on the Gospel good news of Salvation.

Salvation! Is the rock Peter and the disciples would build the church upon.

By bringing the good news to those who would feel led to believe, repent, be reborn, indwelt by holy spirit God, and saved by the grace of God, the rock. Salvation is of God and is by the grace of God offered to all the world as a covenant of immortal life.

In the time of Christ and also the old testament covenant, covenants, there are many in scripture, were sealed by blood.

Jesus death on the cross was to seal the new covenant of salvation. His resurrection after three days, three representing eternal life, informed his followers of the truth of the Salvation Gospel. Jesus conquered death. Though he died in the flesh he lived. The message Jesus delivered to the people during his ministry was proven true by Jesus' miracles and his death and resurrection. And furthered by his walking the earth after resurrection and for 40 days. Forty in Hebrew numerology represents transition or change; the concept of renewal; a new beginning.
Those who witnessed Jesus continuing his ministry after they witnessed his dying on the cross knew he was the Messiah. Because as he taught them, The Word conquers death.

Ancient Hebrews were persecuted. As a result symbolism and related numbers became part of their language, their communications. And this in order to avail themselves of privacy and safety from those who would seek to persecute them for their beliefs and existence. Everything Jesus did, all that he taught and which was very often a retelling of the old testament parables the people knew about, was to deliver a deeper message than just words. Words, acts, as the number three figured prominently in Jesus ministry, communicated in one way. The meaning behind the timelines, three, forty, twelve, were understood to go deeper in implanting the message into those who knew the language.

Just as in the case of baptism being an integral part of the message. No, baptism does not save, however baptism is a factor in the Gospel truth.
Jesus himself was baptized!
And as the people saw when he arose from the waters the holy spirit of God descended as a dove upon him. And it was then that his ministry began. It was after this that Jesus began to perform his miracles. It was that sign the people witnessed that would reiterate to them Jesus' message, be baptized and receive the holy spirit, the helper, who will lead you into all truth.

The Rock is not the RCC. The Rock is Christ who is The Word that Saves.
Matthew 7:24-27
“Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it.”

Psalm 78:35
They remembered that God was their rock, the Most High God their redeemer.
Psalm 95:1
Oh come, let us sing to the Lord; let us make a joyful noise to the rock of our salvation!

1 Samuel 2:2
“There is none holy like the Lord; there is none besides you; there is no rock like our God.

I don't know what you're referring to there. Verse 22 of Matthew 16 does not say anything like that. Nor does chapter 22 of Matthew.

Click to expand...

Jesus personally renamed Simon as "Rock"
In the first chapter of John’s gospel we read of Jesus’ first meeting with Peter. At that point Peter is called Simon. Jesus says to Peter (vs 42)
"So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Kephas" (which means Peter)
Renaming someone is always significant in the Bible. Kephas (sometimes transliterated as Cephas) is Aramaic for Rock (a big one).

Paul refers to Kephas in 8 places in both his first letter to the Corinthians and in his letter to the Galatians (e.g. 1Cor15:5, Gal 1:18, Gal 2:9).
By giving Peter the name Rock, a name that represents himself, Jesus was indicating that Peter was to be his representative before men.

In Mt 16:18 Jesus made Peter his representative before people, and he gives him authority represented by the keys in Mt 16:19, and the power to bind and loose, also in Mt 16:19.
The Pope, as the successor of Peter, is God’s representative before his people with his authority.

Adoration said:

I will never understand why people choose to debate with people who only seek to talk "at" them.
When someone thinks themselves RIGHT about EVERYTHING.... they are no longer teachable...
or approachable... not to mention not at all Christ-like. The Catholic church is a totally separate
institution to the rest of Christianity... which is fine... but it is truly fruitless and pointless to engage
in any kind of conversation regarding Christianity.... as there will be no agreement or compromise on
ANYTHING.

These debates serve no purpose... and nothing is ever learned... except how arrogant and demeaning certain
people can be. My two cents worth on a Wednesday.

Click to expand...

I'm married to a member of the RCC. His entire family remain RC. His mother held an office in the church, as much as woman may do so. I know of what you speak. For the most part the Roman Catholic has been taught the RCC doctrine/dogma from the time they were infants attending services as the homily filled their ears and began the hard wiring into their tender malleable psyche.

My participation in discussions of this sort, as pertains to RCC doctrine/dogma, isn't with the hope of changing the mind of any RCC member who may participate.
Though I will admit if any one of them does reconsider and start their independent research into the truth of God's church, or those lurking and reading these discussions do feel led to consider what is being revealed as to God's words through Christ , not the RCC, that is a blessing.

My participation is to bring the truth of Christ as I understand it, as we all do who enter into discussions in any BDF, in comparison to what RCC members espouse in contrast and as they've been taught by the church. One thing in particular. That their salvation is able to be made forfeit. Which is false. However, that leads the RCC member to cleave to the church and its edicts in order to "remain saved".
There is also no purgatory in the teachings of Christ. Purgatory makes Christ's death on the cross immaterial.

In short, it is to help anyone who may be a new Christian seeking understanding to find it in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. And in the course of that if it assists those type readers to consider the RCC is not the church of Christ, all's the better. We're speaking of and to souls here! Eternity is a long time to be wrong.

The RCC is the antithesis of the truth of God in Christ. Everything the RCC leads people to hold dear is contrary to what God decreed as righteous.
And to beat someone to it, no I am not anti-Catholic. If I were I'd be single. Rather, I am pro-Gospel truth.

That is not in any way meant to insult any RCC. I've had that discussion and said those very words to my husband and we're still married. (lol)
Rather, what those words mean to impart is the faith of the RCC member is in their church, and then God.

Their Catechism speaks of faith in God the Father however, that faith is to be aligned with faith in the leading of the church to proper understanding of God and His Word.

There are a lot of things wrong with the RCC. Not that they'll admit that. However I believe those who seek the truth of God in Christ are entitled to know that if they happen on a discussion of this sort.

Lastly, this thread was clearly started to instigate a conflict between participating RCC members and whomever accepted the invite to enter in.
Those non-Catholic members who do participate hold to the same thing as myself. Countering the falsity with the truth of Christ. That isn't a rebuttal in kind to the spirit of strife that initiated this conversation. That, as I see it, is an act of love.

Proverbs 10:12
Hatred stirs up strife, but love covers all offenses.

You don't have to enter into this discussion thinking to change a Catholic members mind. Rather, consider entering in to do as Jesus commanded you.
1 Peter 3:15
But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect,

One of these days I'll be a woman of few words.
Today is not that day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

(edited missing sentence)

Mungo said:

You find the word SCRIPTURE.
Your argument is pathertic.

Click to expand...

God Bless you. He blessed me by injecting a typo into what you intended as an insult.
Find peace.

Mungo said:

You are indulging in the logical fallacy of equivocation. You arguments are false.

Click to expand...

No.
You're free to believe as you wish.

Mungo said:

Jesus personally renamed Simon as "Rock"
In the first chapter of John’s gospel we read of Jesus’ first meeting with Peter. At that point Peter is called Simon. Jesus says to Peter (vs 42)
"So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Kephas" (which means Peter)
Renaming someone is always significant in the Bible. Kephas (sometimes transliterated as Cephas) is Aramaic for Rock (a big one).

Paul refers to Kephas in 8 places in both his first letter to the Corinthians and in his letter to the Galatians (e.g. 1Cor15:5, Gal 1:18, Gal 2:9).
By giving Peter the name Rock, a name that represents himself, Jesus was indicating that Peter was to be his representative before men.

In Mt 16:18 Jesus made Peter his representative before people, and he gives him authority represented by the keys in Mt 16:19, and the power to bind and loose, also in Mt 16:19.
The Pope, as the successor of Peter, is God’s representative before his people with his authority.

Click to expand...

If the Papal seat began with Peter, then celibacy is a misnomer among the priesthood. Because Peter was married.

1 Corinthians 3:11 that "no other foundation can be laid other than the one already laid which is Christ Jesus."

Peter. A man whom Jesus rebuked with, get behind me Satan, is not the church. Nor is he the foundation of the church Jesus referred to in his ministry.
Just ask Peter.
1 Peter 2:5-8 'Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. Unto you therefore which believe he is precious?: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.'


Were your argument to be absolute according to God's words it would mean the other 11 Apostles were of no use in building the church if all rested on Peter.
In actuality, God/Jesus/Salvation, is the rock. Peter does not save! 1 Peter 5:1-4 ...'The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.'

Acts 4: 11 This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, that has become the cornerstone. 12 And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among people by which we must be saved.”
13 When they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and discovered that they were uneducated and ordinary men, they were amazed and recognized these men had been with Jesus.

Was Peter the First Pope?

Mungo said:

Matt SLick! I know you didn't. I was pointing out that even an anti-Catholic like Matt Slick is honest enough to understand that when the Catholic Church uses the term anathema it doesn't mean curse.

Click to expand...

Ah, thank you for your clarification.
If that is what Mr.Slick believes, and I've not read him to know, that's fine. My source for the definition of Anathema, which included curse, was from a Catholic Dictionary/Encyclopedia source. And was linked to said source.

Regardless of all that has been said in this thread previously, the whole premise upon which it is based is wrong anyway.
If you're a Christian or even a non Christian, you don't look for "authority" when you read scripture. One can find authority anywhere, and scripture tells us that the authority granted the Antichrist comes from Satan, the dragon. So who cares about Catholic authority? What we should care about is where to go for truth. Truth with a capital T. TRUTH. Thy Word is Truth. I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
KJV John 1:14
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and Truth.
This is the Truth we need to be seeking, and can be found only in the scriptures. That is why the scriptures alone are the source of understanding because they are Truth... Not because they are authoritative. They are authoritative, but that isn't what distinguishes them from every other form of religious writing. The Koran is authoritative as is every other religious book, but the holy Spirit is given to every believer to reveal TRUTH, not authority. Catholicism rejects scripture as authority and then yes scripture to argue their points. Hypocrites. As a previous posterr said, we are discussing apples and oranges. Christians base their faith in scripture. Catholics don't. Two different religions. Two completely different paradigms of faith and practice. One has the Truth, the other has authority. One is Christ's body here in earth, the other Antichrist. One upholds the gospel of grace by faith alone, the other sacramentalism. There really is no comparison. Come out of her My people.

Marymog said:

Hi Backlit,

Constantine, who was a God send for Christianity (you should be thankful for him), did not rule until the 4th century. Since your theory is that "the Catholic Church baptised [sic] a pagan day dedicated to the sun god" then the Catholic Church must have started in the 1st century because WE KNOW, thru Christian historical writings, that Christians started practicing Sunday worship, the Lords Day, in the 1st century:

The Didache
“But every Lord’s day . . . gather yourselves together and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one that is at variance with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned” (Didache 14 [A.D. 70]).

The Letter of Barnabas
“We keep the eighth day [Sunday] with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead” (Letter of Barnabas 15:6–8 [A.D. 74]).

Ignatius of Antioch
“[T]hose who were brought up in the ancient order of things [i.e. Jews] have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord’s day, on which also our life has sprung up again by him and by his death” (Letter to the Magnesians 8 [A.D. 110]).

Justin Martyr
“But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead” (First Apology 67 [A.D. 155]).

The Gospels report of several incidents where Jesus is accused of violating Sabbath law (Jn. 9:16, Jn 7:23, Mk. 3:4).

The Gospels report that in various passages the Lord restates all of the Decalogue except for the Sabbath ritual.

Jesus defends his disciples for not observing the Sabbath, ending his comments by saying: “For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath” (Mt. 12:1–8). “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath” (Mk. 2:27). The fact that Jesus rebukes too severe an interpretation of Sabbath law (Lk. 13:10–16, 14:1–5; Jn. 5:9–18, 7:22) suggests that the he was not pleased with the way that the Sabbath was being observed.

Christ and his Apostles perfectly observed the Sabbath as they did all of the old covenant. They were still under the old covenant when they observed the Sabbath. However, after he enunciated a new covenant at the Last Supper, his emphasis seems to be on Sundays. Sunday was the day he was found to have been resurrected. His first two appearance to the twelve disciples were on the following two Sundays (Jn. 20:19, 20:26). Five weeks later—on Sunday—the Holy Spirit descended on the apostles.

The Council of Jerusalem, which was a decision of The Church guided by the Holy Spirit, set aside the old covenant law of circumcision! What The Church bound on earth was bound in heaven. Your theory is that The Church can't bind you to Sunday worship!

You hold yourself to the old covenant law for the Jews. Us Christians hold ourselves to the new covenant law.

Judge us Christians all you want but we will not let Sabbatarians such as yourself pass judgment on us in regard to a Sabbath day. (Colossians 2:17–19)

Historical and Bible study Mary

Click to expand...

I have no issue with your history, u agree that Christians, for several reasons, began observing Sunday early. But not one of those reasons was based on scripture. Not one. You know as well as every one else here, Protestant and Catholic, that not one of those references that either you or @BreadOfLife quoted, justify a change in the day. Not one of those references removes the holiness of the Sabbath and transfers it to the first day of the week. The Apostles, and the vast majority of the early church continued to observe the Sabbath for many centuries. Despite the proclamations of the Laodicean council and the persecutions against Sabbath keepers from that time going forward.

Backlit said:

I have no issue with your history, u agree that Christians, for several reasons, began observing Sunday early. But not one of those reasons was based on scripture. Not one. You know as well as every one else here, Protestant and Catholic, that not one of those references that either you or @BreadOfLife quoted, justify a change in the day. Not one of those references removes the holiness of the Sabbath and transfers it to the first day of the week. The Apostles, and the vast majority of the early church continued to observe the Sabbath for many centuries. Despite the proclamations of the Laodicean council and the persecutions against Sabbath keepers from that time going forward.

Click to expand...

Nope, actually Scripture says in Acts 20:7, 1 Corinthians 16:2, Colossians 2:16-17, and Revelation 1:10 that, even during New Testament times, the Sabbath is no longer binding and that Christians worshiped on the Lord’s day, Sunday.

Your theory, your interpretation of Scripture and your Christian History is wrong.

Why do you listen to the men who teach you such things?

Marymog said:

Nope, actually Scripture says in Acts 20:7, 1 Corinthians 16:2, Colossians 2:16-17, and Revelation 1:10 that, even during New Testament times, the Sabbath is no longer binding and that Christians worshiped on the Lord’s day, Sunday.

Your theory, your interpretation of Scripture and your Christian History is wrong.

Why do you listen to the men who teach you such things?

Click to expand...

If you're Catholic you listen to men who teach you the Sabbath is no longer applicable. They're wrong. And so too are you.
"The Lords day" in Revelation is referring to Sabbath.
The Apostles honored the Sabbath, Jesus honored the Sabbath, Paul honored the Sabbath.
"If you love me keep my commands."
When a Christian worships on Sunday they're keeping the Sabbath. On the wrong day, but they're keeping the Sabbath.

Backlit said:

I have no issue with your history, u agree that Christians, for several reasons, began observing Sunday early. But not one of those reasons was based on scripture. Not one. You know as well as every one else here, Protestant and Catholic, that not one of those references that either you or @BreadOfLife quoted, justify a change in the day. Not one of those references removes the holiness of the Sabbath and transfers it to the first day of the week. The Apostles, and the vast majority of the early church continued to observe the Sabbath for many centuries. Despite the proclamations of the Laodicean council and the persecutions against Sabbath keepers from that time going forward.

Click to expand...

More of your false SDA rubbish.

Ummmmmm - WHAT did the Apostles tell the Church at Antioch when the Judaizers were polluting their Christian worship?
Acts 15:28-29
For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”

Absolutely NO MENTION of observing the Sabbath or ANY other festival.
Just as Paul wrote to the Colossians:
Col. 2:16-17
Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration OR A SABBATH DAY. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the REALITY, however, is found in CHRIST.

You LOSE this argument because YOU are still looking at the SHADOWS instead of the REALITY, which is Christ . . .

WaterSong said:

If you're Catholic you listen to men who teach you the Sabbath is no longer applicable. They're wrong. And so too are you.
"The Lords day" in Revelation is referring to Sabbath.
The Apostles honored the Sabbath, Jesus honored the Sabbath, Paul honored the Sabbath.
"If you love me keep my commands."
When a Christian worships on Sunday they're keeping the Sabbath. On the wrong day, but they're keeping the Sabbath.

Click to expand...

Can you give me chapter and verse where Jesus said keep my command to honor Saturday sabbath?

Patient Mary

WaterSong said:

If you're Catholic you listen to men who teach you the Sabbath is no longer applicable......

Click to expand...

If your a sabbatarian you listen to men who teach you that the Sabbath is applicable. Why do you follow such men who teach opposite of Scripture?

WaterSong said:

If you're Catholic you listen to men who teach you the Sabbath is no longer applicable. They're wrong. And so too are you.
"The Lords day" in Revelation is referring to Sabbath.
The Apostles honored the Sabbath, Jesus honored the Sabbath, Paul honored the Sabbath.
"If you love me keep my commands."
When a Christian worships on Sunday they're keeping the Sabbath. On the wrong day, but they're keeping the Sabbath.

Click to expand...

WRONG.
You have ZERO New Testament evidence for that claim – NOR do you have any extrabilical evidence.

The following FIRST CENTURY documents show that the “Lord’s Day” was on SUNDAY - and that the Church of the NT had transitioned to that day as the observance of prayer and worship.

The Didache
1. But every LORD’S DAY do ye gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure.
(Didache Chapter XIV.11 —Christian Assembly on the Lord’s Day. 14 [A.D. 60]).

The Letter of Barnabas was considered SCRIPTURE to the Early Church and was read from pulpits for over 200 years before the Canon was defined:
The Letter of Barnabas
Further, He says to them, “Your new moons and your Sabbath I cannot endure.” Ye perceive how He speaks: Your present Sabbaths are not acceptable to Me, but that is which I have made, [namely this,] when, giving rest to all things, I shall make a beginning of the EIGHTH DAY, that is, a beginning of another world. Wherefore, also, we keep the EIGHTH DAY with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead. And when He had manifested Himself, He ascended into the heavens.
(The Epistle of Barnabas Chapter XV.—The false and the true Sabbath. [A.D. 74]).

Ignatius of Antioch
If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, NO LONGER OBSERVING THE SABBATH, but living in the observance of the LORD’S DAY, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death—whom some deny, by which mystery we have obtained faith, and therefore endure, that we may be found the disciples of Jesus Christ, our only Master
(Letter to the Magnesians(shorter) Chapter IX.—Let us live with Christ [A.D. 110]).

During the Sabbath He continued under the earth in the tomb in which Joseph of Arimathæa had laid Him. At the dawning of the Lord’s day He arose from the dead, according to what was spoken by Himself, “As Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly, so shall the Son of man also be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” The day of the preparation, then, comprises the passion; the SABBATH embraces the BURIAL; the LORD’S DAY contains the RESURRECTION
(The Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians Longer Versions. Chapter IX.—Reference to the history of Christ.)

The "Lord's Day" is SUNDAY - not Saturday . . .

Marymog said:

If your a sabbatarian you listen to men who teach you that the Sabbath is applicable. Why do you follow such men who teach opposite of Scripture?

Click to expand...

If I were a Sabbatarian I'd be in keeping with God's edict. Not that of the RCC and that has unfortunately been adopted by the Protestant body.

And you said that the first time. Repeating the statement does not make the actual Sabbath day null and void. Nor does God concede to the presumptive authority espoused by the Pope to abrogate even the scriptures.

Below are all excepts from different sources which are linked in the IBD at the very end of these cited quotes.

"Is not every Christian obliged to sanctify Sunday and to abstain on that day from unnecessary servile work? Is not the observance of this law among the most prominent of our sacred duties? But 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 never sanctify." James Cardinal Gibbons, The Faith of Our Fathers (1917 edition), p. 72-73 (16th Edition, p 111; 88th Edition, p. 89).

"For example, nowhere in the Bible do we find that Christ or the Apostles ordered that the Sabbath be changed from Saturday to Sunday. We have the commandment of God given to Moses to keep holy the Sabbath day, that is the 7th day of the week, Saturday. Today most Christians keep Sunday because it has been revealed to us by the [Roman Catholic] church outside the Bible." Catholic Virginian, October 3, 1947, p. 9, article "To Tell You the Truth."


The decree set forth in the year 1229 A.D. by the Council of Valencia... places Bible on The Index of Forbidden Books. The doctrine withholds "it is forbidden for laymen (common man) to read the Old and New Testaments. - We forbid them most severely to have the above books in the popular vernacular. The lords of the districts shall carefully seek out the heretics in dwellings, hovels, and forests, and even their underground retreats shall be entirely wiped out." (Council Tolosanum, Pope Gregory IX, Anno. Chr. 1229)

"The very nature of the Bible ought to prove to any thinking man the impossibility of its being the one safe method to find out what the Savior taught." (Ibid., p. 67)

"The Scriptures indeed is a divine book but it is a dead letter, which has to be explained, and cannot exercise the action which the preacher can obtain." (Our Priesthood, p. 155)

"The simple fact is that the Bible, like all dead letters, calls for a living interpreter." (The Faith of Millions, p. 155)

"The Bible was not intended to be a textbook of Christian religion." (Catholic Facts, p. 50)

"The belief in the Bible as the sole source of faith is unhistorical, illogical, fatal to the virtue of faith, and destructive of unity." (The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XIII, Protestantism, Section III A - Sola Scriptura ("Bible Alone"), Nihil Obstat, February 1, 1912 by Remy Lafort, D.D., Censor, Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York)

"Sunday is our mark or authority...the church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact." Catholic Record of London, Ontario, September 1,1923.

"The Pope has the power to change times, to abrogate laws, and to dispense with all things, even the precepts of Christ. The Pope has the authority and often exercised it, to dispense with the command of Christ." (Decretal, de Tranlatic Episcop. Cap. (The Pope can modify divine law.) Ferraris' Ecclesiastical Dictionary)

The Pope is not simply the representative of Jesus Christ. On the contrary, he is Jesus Christ Himself, under the veil of the flesh." (Evangelical Christendom, January 1, 1895, pg. 15, published in London by J. S. Phillips)

The Catholic church changed Sabbath day Saturday to Sunday. And in doing so everyone that honors God on Sunday, that alteration of Sabbath day, are accepting the authority of the Pope that decreed a change, a new day of Sabbath, to be that of Sunday.
Christians keep Sunday because it has been revealed to us by the [Roman Catholic] church outside the Bible.” Catholic Virginian, October 3, 1947, p. 9, article “To Tell You the Truth.”.

“Protestants do not realize that by observing Sunday, they accept the authority of the spokesperson of the Church, the Pope” (Our Sunday Visitor, February 5, 1950).

Cardinal Gibbons, in Faith of Our Fathers, 92nd ed., p. 89, freely admits, “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 Catholic Church] never sanctify.”

“The Catholic Church, … by virtue of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday” (The Catholic Mirror, official publication of James Cardinal Gibbons, Sept. 23, 1893).

“Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change [Saturday Sabbath to Sunday] was her act… And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical authority in religious things” (H.F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons).



IBD:
Antichrist Speaks - Quotes from Roman Catholic Church

Vatican admits the change of Sabbath was their act not the Bible

Perhaps our Romish friends, may desire to read James Ussher's reply to a Jesuit (it is rather enlightening), for what arguments Ussher replies I will use so here, if they do not so read, and if they do not so read, they will be all the more at a disadvantage when I reply with the same arguments:

Archbishop Usher's Answer to a Jesuit

Marymog said:

Can you give me chapter and verse where Jesus said keep my command to honor Saturday sabbath?

Patient Mary

Click to expand...

Show me the scripture where Jesus himself stated the Sabbath is no longer applicable to man for whom it was made. As to your question? I can show you where your church altered Saturday Sabbath by its own authority! “The Catholic Church, … by virtue of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday” (The Catholic Mirror, official publication of James Cardinal Gibbons, Sept. 23, 1893).

We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church, in the Council of Laodicea (A.D. 364), transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday." Peter Geiermann, C.S.S.R., The Convert's Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 50, 3rd edition, 1957.

"Is Saturday the seventh day according to the Bible and the Ten Commandments? I answer yes. Is Sunday the first day of the week and did the Church change the seventh day - Saturday - for Sunday, the first day? I answer yes. Did Christ change the day'? I answer no!"
"Faithfully yours, J. Card. Gibbons." James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, Md. (1877-1921), in a signed letter.

John 14:15
"If you love Me, you will keep My commands."
John 14:21
"Whoever has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me. The one who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and reveal Myself to him."

Mark 2:28
"So the Son of Man is lord even of the Sabbath.”
Colossians 2:16-17
Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.

Mark 2:27
And he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath."


"The Pope is of so great dignity, and so exalted that he is not a mere man, but as it were God and the vicar of God." (Ferraris Ecclesiastical dictionary)
Matthew 24:1-51
Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age?” And Jesus answered them, “See that no one leads you astray. For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray.




Show me where Jesus said his mother was his co-redemptrix.

BreadOfLife said:

The Didache
1. But every LORD’S DAY do ye gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure.
(Didache Chapter XIV.11 —Christian Assembly on the Lord’s Day. 14 [A.D. 60]).

Click to expand...

Your translation is in egregious error:

Sunday Fraud: Church "Fathers" on the Lord's Day

Two points can be made:

1. The Greek word for "day" does not even appear in the passage. It has been added by the translators.
2. Even if the addition of the word "day" is correct, the passage does not specifically say which day is meant by the Lord's day. It could just as well refer to the Sabbath, since that is the only day the Bible says belongs to the Lord.

Another thing I have found, is that people attempt to define "the Lord's day", not by scripture, as is proper, by the so-called "ECF" (easily confused fellows; of the 1-4th century AD, etc), instead of going back to the real "fathers"; the Patriarchs and Prophets of Scripture themselves, like John, James and Peter and Paul, and even further back unto Abraham, Moses, David, and those like them, and have those "fathers" tell us, as mouthpieces for God. I find them in the inspired and preserved words of God, and I do not find people like spurious Ignatius, imaginary Didache, self-refuting pseudo Barnabas, etc.

They would place those persons in afteryears above the definition that Jesus gave.

Spurious and Imaginary?

Yes, Spurious, Imaginary, etc:

The writings so often cited to try to define "the Lord's day" outside of scripture, and long after John passed from the scene, are often forged (like Ignatius) and also abused, of which any may see that here - Sunday Fraud: Church "Fathers" on the Lord's Day

The Bible says:

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

God even warned all that they would "think" to "change times and laws" (of which the 4th Commandment, the 7th day the Sabbath of the LORD is both time and law) of the Most High God:

Dan 7:25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

Notice some of the fraud:

Here is the long form of the citation, since there are several conflicting:


Let's examine the longer form first, with which the reader will immediately notice a severe problem. The very quote that is supposed to prove that "Christians . . . never [worshipped] on the Sabbath" actually commands "every" Christian to "keep the Sabbath"! Moreover, since the quote also forbids Judaizing, it follows that the writer of the long form of this epistle believed that Sabbath keeping transcended Judiaism. In other words, a Christian could tell people that they needed to keep the Sabbath without being guilty of Judaizing!

The words "and after the observance of the Sabbath" were intentionally deleted from the quote. Another example of fraud?

Now to the other shorter form. The epistles of Ignatius are spurious or forgeries - Link or Link.

Amazing, having to rely upon spurious writings, pseudo-works, which are forgeries.

The original Greek (Didache 14:1) does not have the word for "day" anywhere in that sentence and secondly, neither is the word "Sunday" present.


Where is the word for "day" (hemera)? Where is the word for "Sunday"? Where is the word "first"?

It literally reads, "κυριακὴν δὲ κυρίου" (Lord of Lord).

The translation that most propose to prove Sunday sacredness or that it is the 'Lord's day' is imaginary.

So far, we have spurious and imaginary.

Then they attempt Pseudo Barnabas:

According to pseudo-Barnabas (ought we to really trust a letter that claims to be from another, didn't Paul warn about such letters being circulated? 2 Thessalonians 2:2), we are too wicked (Christians are too wicked???) at present to keep the 7th day the Sabbath of the LORD, and will not be able to keep it until we are sanctified when Christ returns (so we are going to keep Sabbath again in the New Heavens and New Earth, that doesn't sound like people use this quote for). Because we are too wicked to keep the Sabbath now, we must keep Sunday instead. What good does this reasoning do for the cause of Sunday sacredness or holiness if we are too wicked?

Pseudo Barnabas also teaches the earth ends in the 7,000th year from creation. Do they accept this also?, No, as they believe in the false philosophy of evolutionism and long-agism.

Any may also see the forgery of Justin Martyr here - Doctrine - Sabbath - William H Shea - The Justin Martyr Forgery About Sabbath And Sunday The First Day Of The Week : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

BreadOfLife said:

WRONG.
You have ZERO New Testament evidence for that claim – NOR do you have any extrabilical evidence....

The "Lord's Day" is SUNDAY - not Saturday . . .

Click to expand...

Challenge accepted:

Who was the Sabbath made for according to scripture?

Yes, there is an Adam at Genesis, but it is really the greater Adam:


Did you see who the Sabbath was made for?

The "Lord's day" according to scripture, is the 7th day, the sabbath day of the Lord.

BreadOfLife said:

WRONG.
You have ZERO New Testament evidence for that claim – NOR do you have any extrabilical evidence....

The "Lord's Day" is SUNDAY - not Saturday . . .

Click to expand...

Challenge accepted:
Revelation 1:10:


The word "κυριακη" (translit. "kuriake") is an Adjective - Dative - Singular - Feminine. This means it is being used as a 'possessive' ("of", see 1 Corinthians 11:20, "the Lord's supper"), which means the "day" in context belongs to "the Lord". It is literally "the Lord's (belonging to) day". This means, that the "day" in context is uniquely "the Lord's" out of all the 7 days of the week, for the day under consideration is that which exists within the week, as a day which repeats weekly. This is extremely important, as those who incorrectly assume it to mean "the first [day] of the week" in lieu of Jesus' resurrection, cannot get a weekly occurrence out of a one-time event, in fulfilment of typology of the Firstfruit/Wavesheaf in Leviticus 23:9-14, as made known in 1 Corinthians 15:20,23..

This is not as the phrase "day of the Lord" (ἡμέρα κυρίου) which is written in the genitive masculine case (see 2 Peter 3:10, etc, and also so called septuaginta uses).

In Latin, we see it similarly used in Exodus 20 (Latin is without the definite article, as Latin does not use definite articles):


Which is akin to Genesis' "God's day":

Whereas the differing apocalyptic day, "the day of the Lord" in Latin is "dies Domini" as in Zephaniah 1:14:


In Isaiah 58:13, we read of a "day" that "the Lord" specifically calls "my day":

In many translations of Isaiah 58:13 we read that the 7th day, the sabbath of the Lord, is said to be "the Lord's holy day", with the word holy being another adjective, while the "Lord's" is possessive. - /Isaiah 58:13 - Bible Gateway

Thus when reading Isaiah 58:13 with simple pronoun substitution, it would read "... the ... [Lord's] day ...", just as it does in Exodus 20:8-11.

In Genesis we see why this day is uniquely "Gods'", or "the Lord's" day, for in it God rested. This is the reason Jesus could say:


For in that He created in Genesis, and rested, Colossians 1:16.

Further, we can see some honest persons, among the many commentators that like to simply assume their apriori into the text, or to place future definition back into the text, from non-scriptural materials.

Peter Pett's commentary makes this accurate note:


Dr. Thomas Constable likewise states the same truth:


Richard Chenevix Trench has stated on record, and accurately that:

Likewise, Foy E Wallace states: