Is Sabbath, Saturday or Sunday.

[Hobie]

If the Sabbath was abolished, there would be many verses and much text to show it, yet there is none. The apostles would have had many discussions and the councils at Jerusalem would have written at least one with a determination of it being abolished and yet there is nothing. Paul exhorts in Corinthians that Circumcision is nothing in comparison to the Ten Commandments.“Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the Commandments of God.” 1 Corinthians 7:19. Since there are more than forty verses and up to ten verses at a time clearly stating that Circumcision of the flesh is a yoke of bondage and abolished, how many scriptures would you expect stating the Sabbath was abolished or changed to Sunday? Yet there is not even one verse that says,“ The Sabbath is abolished or is now Sunday.” Here are articles from a interesting source with first a overview:

"Most Christians assume that Sunday is the biblically approved day of worship. The Roman Catholic Church protests that it transferred Christian worship from the biblical Sabbath (Saturday) to Sunday, and that to try to argue that the change was made in the Bible is both dishonest and a denial of Catholic authority. If Protestantism wants to base its teachings only on the Bible, it should worship on Saturday
Over one hundred years ago the Catholic Mirror ran a series of articles discussing the right of the Protestant churches to worship on Sunday. The articles stressed that unless one was willing to accept the authority of the Catholic Church to designate the day of worship, the Christian should observe Saturday.


Why Do Protestants Keep Sunday?

FEBRUARY 24, 1893, the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists adopted certain resolutions appealing to the government and people of the United States from the decision of the Supreme Court declaring this to be a Christian nation, and from the action of Congress in legislating upon the subject of religion, and remonstrating against the principle and all the consequences of the same. In March 1893, the International Religious Liberty Association printed these resolutions in a tract entitled Appeal and Remonstrance. On receipt of one of these, the editor of the Catholic Mirror of Baltimore, Maryland, published a series of four editorials, which appeared in that paper September, 2, 9, 16, and 23, 1893. The Catholic Mirror was the official organ of Cardinal Gibbons and the Vatican in the United States. These articles, therefore, although not written by the Cardinal's own hand, appeared under his official sanction, and as the expression of the Church to Protestantism, and the demand of the Church that Protestants shall render to the Church an account of why they keep Sunday and also of how they keep it.

The following material (except where noted) is a verbatim reprint of these editorials.

THE CHRISTIAN SABBATH

THE GENUINE OFFSPRING OF THE UNION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HIS SPOUSE. THE CLAIMS OF PROTESTANTISM TO ANY PART THEREIN PROVED TO BE GROUNDLESS, SELF-CONTRADICTORY, AND SUICIDAL

[From the Catholic Mirror of Sept. 2, 1893]

Our attention has been called to the above subject in the past week by the receipt of a brochure of twenty-one pages, published by the International Religious Liberty Association, entitled, "Appeal and Remonstrance," embodying resolutions adopted the General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventists (Feb. 24, 1893). The resolutions criticize and censure, with much acerbity, the action of the United States Congress, and of the Supreme Court, for the invading the rights of the people by closing the World's Fair on Sunday.

The Adventists are the only body of Christians with the Bible as their teacher, who can find no warrant in its pages for the change of the day from the seventh to the first. Hence their appellation, "Seventh-day Adventists." Their cardinal principle consists in setting apart Saturday for the exclusive worship of God, in conformity with the positive command of God himself, repeatedly reiterated in the sacred books of the Old and New Testaments, literally obeyed by the children of Israel for thousands of years to this day, and endorsed by the teaching and practice of the Son of God whilst on earth.

Per contra, the Protestants of the world, the Adventists excepted, with the same Bible as their cherished and sole infallible teacher, by their practice, since their appearance in the sixteenth century, with the time-honored practice of the Jewish people before their eyes, have rejected the day named for His worship by God, and assumed, in apparent contradiction of His command, a day for His worship never once referred to for that purpose, in the pages of that Sacred Volume.

What Protestant pulpit does not ring almost every Sunday with loud and impassioned invectives against Sabbath violation? Who can forget the fanatical clamor of the Protestant ministers throughout the length and breadth of the land against opening the gates of the World's Fair on Sunday? the thousands of petitions, signed by millions, to save the Lord's Day from desecration? Surely, such general and widespread excitement and noisy remonstrance could not have existed without the strongest grounds for such animated protests.

And when quarters were assigned at the World's Fair to the various sects of Protestantism for the exhibition of articles, who can forget the emphatic expressions of virtuous and conscientious indignation exhibited by our Presbyterian brethren, as soon as they learned of the decision of the Supreme Court not to interfere in the Sunday opening? The newspapers informed us that they flatly refused to utilize the space accorded them, or open their boxes, demanding the right to withdraw the articles, in rigid adherence to their principles, and thus decline all contact with the sacrilegious and Sabbath-breaking Exhibition.

Doubtless, our Calvinistic brethren deserved and shared the sympathy of all the other sects, who, however, lost the opportunity of posing as martyrs in vindication of the Sabbath observance.

They thus became a "spectacle to the world, to angels, and to men," although their Protestant brethren, who failed to share the monopoly, were uncharitably and enviously disposed to attribute their steadfast adherence to religious principle, to Pharisaical pride and dogged obstinacy....

 

[Hobie]

...Our purpose in throwing off this article, is to shed such light on this all-important question (for were the Sabbath question to be removed from the Protestant pulpit, the sects would feel lost, and the preachers be deprived of their "Cheshire cheese") that our readers may be able to comprehend the question in all its bearings, and thus reach a clear conviction.

The Christian world is, morally speaking, united on the question and practice of worshiping God on the first day of the week.

The Israelites, scattered all over the earth, keep the last day of the week sacred to the worship of the Deity. In this particular, the Seventh-day Adventists (a sect of Christians numerically few) have also selected the same day.

Israelites and Adventists both appeal to the Bible for the divine command, persistently obliging the strict observance of Saturday. The Israelite respects the authority of the Old Testament only, but the Adventist, who is a Christian, accepts the New Testament on the same ground as the Old: viz., an inspired record also. He finds that the Bible, his teacher, is consistent in both parts, that the Redeemer, during His mortal life, never kept any other day than Saturday. The Gospels plainly evince to him this fact; whilst, in the pages of the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles, and the Apocalypse, not the vestige of an act canceling the Saturday arrangement can be found.

The Adventists, therefore, in common with Israelites, derive their belief from the Old Testament, which position is confirmed by the New Testament, endorsing fully by the life and practice of the Redeemer and His apostles the teaching of the Sacred Word for nearly a century of the Christian era.

Numerically considered, the Seventh-day Adventists form an insignificant portion of the Protestants population of the earth, but, as the question is not one of numbers, but of truth, and right, a strict sense of justice forbids the condemnation of this little sect without a calm and unbiased investigation; this is none of our funeral.

The Protestant world has been, from its infancy, in the sixteenth century, in thorough accord with the Catholic Church, in keeping "holy," not Saturday, but Sunday. The discussion of the grounds that led to this unanimity of sentiment and practice of over 300 years, must help toward placing Protestantism on a solid basis in this particular, should the arguments in favor of its position overcome those furnished by the Israelites and Adventists, the Bible, the sole recognized teacher of both litigants, being the umpire and witness. If however, on the other hand, the latter furnish arguments, incontrovertible by the great mass of Protestants, both cases of litigants, appealing to their common teacher, the Bible, the great body of Protestants, so far from clamoring, as they do with vigorous pertinacity for the strict keeping of Sunday, have no other [recourse] left than the admission that they have been teaching and practicing what is Scripturally false for over three centuries, by adopting the teaching and practice of what they have always pretended to believe an apostate church, contrary to every warrant and teaching of sacred Scripture. To add to the intensity of this Scriptural and unpardonable blunder, it involves one of the most positive and emphatic commands of God to His servant, man: "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy."

No Protestant living today has ever yet obeyed that command, preferring to follow the "apostate church" referred to than his teacher the Bible, which, from Genesis to Revelation, teaches no other doctrine, should the Israelites and Seventh-day Adventists be correct. Both sides appeal to the Bible as their "infallible" teacher. Let the Bible decide whether Saturday or Sunday be the day enjoined by God. One of the two bodies must be wrong, and, whereas a false position on this all-important question involves terrible penalties, threatened by God Himself, against the transgressor of this "perpetual covenant," we shall enter on the discussion of the merits of the arguments wielded by both sides. Neither is the discussion of this paramount subject above the capacity of ordinary minds, nor does it involve extraordinary study. It resolves itself into a few plain questions easy of solution:

• 1st. Which day of the week does the Bible enjoin to be kept holy?
• 2nd. Has the New Testament modified by precept or practice the original command?
• 3rd. Have Protestants, since the sixteenth century, obeyed the command of God by keeping "holy" the day enjoined by their infallible guide and teacher, the Bible? and if not, why not?

To the above three questions we pledge ourselves to furnish as many intelligent answers, which cannot fail to vindicate the truth and uphold the deformity of error."...Rome's Challenge (Part 1)

 

[Hobie]

....Rome's Challenge (Part 2)

Most Christians assume that Sunday is the biblically approved day of worship. The Roman Catholic Church protests that it transferred Christian worship from the biblical Sabbath (Saturday) to Sunday, and that to try to argue that the change was made in the Bible is both dishonest and a denial of Catholic authority. If Protestantism wants to base its teachings only on the Bible, it should worship on Saturday.

Over one hundred years ago the Catholic Mirror ran a series of articles discussing the right of the Protestant churches to worship on Sunday. The articles stressed that unless one was willing to accept the authority of the Catholic Church to designate the day of worship, the Christian should observe Saturday. Those articles are presented here in their entirety.

[From the Catholic Mirror of Sept. 9, 1893]

"But faith, fanatic faith, one wedded fast; To some dear falsehood, hugs it to the last." —Moore.

Conformably to our promise in our last issue, we proceed to unmask one of the most flagrant errors and most unpardonable inconsistencies of the Sola Scriptura rule of faith. Lest, however, we be misunderstood, we deem it necessary to premise that Protestantism recognizes no rule of faith, no teacher, save the "infallible Bible." As the Catholic yields his judgment in spiritual matters implicitly, and with the unreserved confidence, to the voice of his church, so, too, the Protestant recognizes no teacher but the Bible. All his spirituality is derived from its teachings. It is to him the voice of God addressing him through his sole inspired teacher. It embodies his religion, his faith, and his practice. The language of Chillingworth, "The Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible, is the religion of Protestants," is only one form of the same idea multifariously convertible into other forms, such as "the Book of God," "the Charter of Our Salvation," "the Oracle of Our Christian Faith," "God's Text-Book to the race of Mankind," etc., etc. It is, then, an incontrovertible fact that the Bible alone is the teacher of Protestant Christianity. Assuming this fact, we will now proceed to discuss the merits of the question involved in our last issue.

Recognizing what is undeniable, the fact of a direct contradiction between the teaching and practice of Protestant Christianity—the Seventh-day Adventists excepted—on the one hand, and that of the Jewish people on the other, both observing different days of the week for the worship of God, we will proceed to take the testimony of the teacher common to both claimants, the Bible. The first expression with which we come in contact in the Sacred Word, is found in Genesis 2:2 "And on the seventh day He [God] rested from all His work which He had made." The next reference to this matter is to be found in Exodus 20, where God commanded the seventh day to be kept, because He had himself rested from the work of creation on that day; and the sacred text informs us that for that reason He desired it kept, in the following words; "wherefore, the Lord blessed the seventh day and sanctified it." Again we read in chapter 31, verse 15: "Six days you shall do work; in the seventh day is the Sabbath, the rest holy to the Lord;" sixteenth verse: "it is an everlasting covenant," "and a perpetual sign," "for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and in the seventh He ceased from work."

In the Old Testament, reference is made one hundred and twenty-six times to the Sabbath, and all these texts conspire harmoniously in voicing the will of God commanding the seventh day to be kept, because God Himself first kept it, making it obligatory on all as "a perpetual covenant." Nor can we imagine any one foolhardy enough to question the identity of Saturday with the Sabbath or seventh day, seeing that the people of Israel have been keeping the Saturday from the giving of the law, A.M. 2514 to AD 1893, a period of 3383 years. With the example of the Israelites before our eyes today, there is no historical fact better established than that referred to; viz., that the chosen people of God, the guardians of the Old Testament, the living representatives of the only divine religion hitherto, had for a period of 1490 years anterior to Christianity, preserved the weekly practice the living tradition of the correct interpretation of the special day of the week, Saturday, to be kept "holy to the Lord," which tradition they have extended by their own practice to an additional period of 1893 years more, thus covering the full extent of the Christian dispensation. We deem it necessary to be perfectly clear on this point, for reasons that will appear more fully hereafter. The Bible—the Old Testament—confirmed by the living tradition of a weekly practice for 3383 years by the chosen people of God, teaches, then, with absolute certainty, that God had, Himself, named the day to be "kept holy to Him"—that the day was Saturday, and that any violation of that command was punishable with death. "Keep you My Sabbath, for it is holy unto you; he that shall profane it shall be put to death; he that shall do any work in it, his soul shall perish in the midst of his people." Exodus 31:14.

It is impossible to realize a more severe penalty than that so solemnly uttered by God Himself in the above text, on all who violate a command referred to no less than one hundred and twenty-six times in the old law. The ten commandments of the Old Testament are formally impressed on the memory of the child of the Biblical Christian as soon as possible, but there is not one of the ten made more emphatically familiar, both in Sunday School and pulpit, than that of keeping "holy" the Sabbath day.

Having secured the absolute certainty the will of God as regards the day to be kept holy, from His Sacred Word, because He rested on that day, which day is confirmed to us by the practice of His chosen people for thousands of years, we are naturally induced to inquire when and where God changed the day for His worship; for it is patent to the world that a change of day has taken place, and inasmuch as no indication of such change can be found within the pages of the Old Testament, nor in the practice of the Jewish people who continue for nearly nineteen centuries of Christianity obeying the written command, we must look to the exponent of the Christian dispensation; viz., the New Testament, for the command of God canceling the old Sabbath, Saturday.

We now approach a period covering little short of nineteen centuries, and proceed to investigate whether the supplemental divine teacher—the New Testament—contains a decree canceling the mandate of the old law, and, at the same time, substituting a day for the divinely instituted Sabbath of the old law, viz., Saturday; for, inasmuch as Saturday was the day kept and ordered to be kept by God, divine authority alone, under the form of a canceling decree, could abolish the Saturday covenant, and another divine mandate, appointing by name another day to be kept "holy," other than Saturday, is equally necessary to satisfy the conscience of the Christian believer. The Bible being the only teacher recognized by the Biblical Christian, the Old Testament failing to point out a change of day, and yet another day than Saturday being kept "holy" by the Biblical world, it is surely incumbent on the reformed Christian to point out in the pages of the New Testament the new divine decree repealing that of Saturday and substituting that of Sunday, kept by the Biblicals since the dawn of the Reformation. Examining the New Testament from cover to cover, critically, we find the Sabbath referred to sixty-one times. We find, too, that the Saviour invariably selected the Sabbath (Saturday) to teach in the synagogues and work miracles. The four Gospels refer to the Sabbath (Saturday) fifty-one times.

In one instance the Redeemer refers to Himself as "the Lord of the Sabbath," as mentioned by Matthew and Luke, but during the whole record of His life, whilst invariably keeping and utilizing the day (Saturday), He never once hinted at a desire to change it. His apostles and personal friends afford to us a striking instance of their scrupulous observance of it after His death, and, whilst His body was yet in tomb, Luke 23:56 informs us: "And they returned and prepared spices and ointments, and rested on the sabbath day according to the commandment." "But on the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came, bringing the spices they had prepared." The "spices" and "ointments" had been prepared Good Friday evening, because "the Sabbath drew near." Verse 54. This action on the part of the personal friends of the Saviour, proves beyond contradiction that after His death they kept "holy" the Saturday, and regarded the Sunday as any other day of the week. Can anything, therefore, be more conclusive than the apostles and the holy women never knew any Sabbath but Saturday, up to the day of Christ's death?"...

 

[Hobie]

...We now approach the investigation of this interesting question for the next thirty years, as narrated by the evangelist, St. Luke, in his Acts of the Apostles. Surely some vestige of the canceling act can be discovered in the practice of the Apostles during that protracted period.

But, alas! we are once more doomed to disappointment. [Eight] times do we find the Sabbath referred to in the Acts, but it is the Saturday (the old Sabbath). Should our readers desire the proof, we refer them to chapter and verse in each instance. Acts 13:14, 27, 42, 44. Once more, Acts 15:21; again, Acts 16:13; 17:2; 18:4. "And he [Paul] reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and Greeks." thus the Sabbath (Saturday) from Genesis to Revelation!!! Thus, it is impossible to find in the New Testament the slightest interference by the Saviour or his Apostles with the original Sabbath, but on the contrary, an entire acquiescence in the original arrangement; nay a plenary endorsement by Him, whilst living; and an unvaried, active participation in the keeping of that day and not other by the apostles, for thirty years after His death, as the Acts of the Apostles has abundantly testified to us.

Hence the conclusion is inevitable; viz., that of those who follow the Bible as their guide, the Israelites and Seventh-day Adventists have exclusive weight of evidence on their side, whilst the Biblical Protestant has not a word in self-defense for his substitution of Sunday for Saturday."....Rome's Challenge (Part 2)

 

[Hobie]

It goes to a third part which you can check on the links but has this interesting part...
"Having also called attention to the texts of the Acts bearing on the exclusive use of the Sabbath by the Jews and Christians for thirty years after the death of the Saviour as the only day of the week observed by Christ and His apostles, which period exhausts the inspired record, we now proceed to supplement our proofs that the Sabbath (Saturday) enjoyed this exclusive privilege, by calling attention to every instance wherein the sacred record refers to the first day of the week.

The first reference to Sunday after the resurrection of Christ is to be found in St. Luke's Gospel, chapter 24, verses 33-40, and St. John 20:19.

The above texts themselves refer to the sole motive of this gathering of the part of the apostles. It took place on the day of the resurrection (Easter Sunday), not for the purpose of inaugurating "the new departure" from the old Sabbath (Saturday) by keeping "holy" the new day, for there is not a hint given of prayer, exhortation, or the reading of the Scriptures, but it indicates the utter demoralization of the apostles by informing mankind that they were huddled together in that room in Jerusalem "for fear of the Jews," as St. John, quoted above, plainly informs us.

The second reference to Sunday is to be found in St. John's Gospel, 20th chapter, 26th to 29th verses: "And after eight days, the disciples were again within, and Thomas with them." The resurrected Redeemer availed Himself of this meeting of all the apostles to confound the incredulity of Thomas, who had been absent from the gathering on Easter Sunday evening. This would have furnished a golden opportunity to the Redeemer to change the day in the presence of all His apostles, but we state the simple fact that, on this occasion, as on Easter day, not a word is said of prayer, praise, or reading of the Scriptures.

The third instance on record, wherein the apostles were assembled on Sunday, is to be found in Acts 2:1: "The apostles were all of one accord in one place." (Feast of Pentecost—Sunday.) Now, will this text afford to our Biblical Christian brethren a vestige of hope that Sunday substitutes, at length, Saturday? For when we inform them that the Jews had been keeping this Sunday for 1500 years, and have been keeping it for eighteen centuries after the establishment of Christianity, at the same time keeping the weekly Sabbath, there is not to be found either consolation or comfort in this text. Pentecost is the fiftieth day after the Passover, (4) which was called the Sabbath of weeks, consisting of seven times seven days; and the day after the completion of the seventh weekly Sabbath day, was the chief day of the entire festival, necessarily Sunday. What Israelite would not pity the cause that would seek to discover the origin of the keeping of the first day of the week in his festival of Pentecost, that has been kept by him yearly for over 3,000 years? Who but the Biblical Christian, driven to the wall for a pretext to excuse his sacrilegious desecration of the Sabbath, always kept by Christ and His apostles, would have resorted to the Jewish festival of Pentecost for his act of rebellion against his God and his teacher, the Bible?

Once more, the Biblical apologists for the change of day call our attention to the Acts, chapter 20, verses 6 and 7: "and upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread," etc. To all appearances, the above text should furnish some consolation to our disgruntled Biblical friends, but being Marplot, we cannot allow them even this crumb of comfort. We reply by the axiom: "Quod probat nimis, probat nihil"—"What proves too much, proves nothing." Let us call attention to the same Acts 2:46: "And they, continuing daily in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house," etc. Who does not see at a glance that the text produced to prove the exclusive prerogative of Sunday, vanishes into thin air—an ignis fatuus—when placed in juxtaposition with the 46th verse of the same chapter? What Biblical Christian claims by this text for Sunday alone the same authority, St. Luke, informs us was common to every day of the week:

"And they continued daily in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house."

One text more presents itself, apparently leaning toward a substitution of Sunday for Saturday. It is taken from St. Paul, I Corinthians 16:1-2: "Now concerning the collection for the saints," "On the first day of the week, let every one of you lay by him in store," etc. Presuming that the request of St. Paul had been strictly attended to, let us call attention to what had been done each Saturday during the Saviour's life and continued for thirty years after, as the book of Acts informs us.

The followers of the Master met "every Sabbath" to hear the word of God; the Scriptures were read "every Sabbath day." "And Paul, as his manner was to reason in the synagogue every Sabbath, interposing the same of the Lord Jesus Christ," etc. Acts 18:4. What more absurd conclusion that to infer that reading of the Scriptures, prayer, exhortation, and preaching, which formed the routine duties of every Saturday, as had been abundantly proved, were overslaughed by a request to take up a collection on another day of the week?

In order to appreciate fully the value of this text now under consideration, it is only needful to recall the action of the apostles and holy women on Good Friday before sundown. They brought spices and ointments after He was taken down from the cross; they suspended all action until the Sabbath "holy to the Lord" had passed, and then took steps on Sunday morning to complete the process of embalming the sacred body of Jesus.

Why, may we ask, did they not proceed to complete the work of embalming on Saturday?—Because they knew well that the embalming of the sacred body of their Master would interfere with the strict observance of the Sabbath, the keeping of which was paramount; and until it can be shown that the Sabbath day immediately preceding the Sunday of our text had not been kept (which would be false, inasmuch as every Sabbath had been kept), the request of St. Paul to make the collection on Sunday remains to be classified with the work of the embalming of Christ's body, which could not be effected on the Sabbath, and was consequently deferred to the next convenient day; viz., Sunday, or the first day of the week.

Having disposed of every text to be found in the New Testament referring to the Sabbath (Saturday), and to the first day of the week (Sunday); and having shown conclusively from these texts, that, so far, not a shadow of pretext can be found in the Sacred Volume for the Biblical substitution of Sunday for Saturday; it only remains for us to investigate the meaning of the expressions "Lord's Day," and "day of the Lord," to be found in the New Testament, which we propose to do in our next article, and conclude with apposite remarks on the incongruities of a system of religion which we shall have proved to be indefensible, self-contradictory, and suicidal."....Rome's Challenge (Part 3)

 

[Hobie]

It goes on and you can read it all from the links in the site, but the conclusion at the end is very challenging to say the least...
"CONCLUSION

We have in this series of articles, taken much pains for the instruction of our readers to prepare them by presenting a number of undeniable facts found in the word of God to arrive at a conclusion absolutely irrefragable. When the Biblical system put in an appearance in the sixteenth century, it not only seized on the temporal possessions of the Church, but in its vandalic crusade stripped Christianity, as far as it could, of all the sacraments instituted by its Founder, of the holy sacrifice, etc., etc., retaining nothing but the Bible, which its exponents pronounced their sole teacher in Christian doctrine and morals.

Chief amongst their articles of belief was, and is today, the permanent necessity of keeping the Sabbath holy. In fact, it has been for the past 300 years the only article of the Christian belief in which there has been a plenary consensus of Biblical representatives. The keeping of the Sabbath constitutes the sum and substance of the Biblical theory. The pulpits resound weekly with incessant tirades against the lax manner of keeping the Sabbath in Catholic countries, as contrasted with the proper, Christian, self-satisfied mode of keeping the day in Biblical countries. Who can ever forget the virtuous indignation manifested by the Biblical preachers throughout the length and breadth of our country, from every Protestant pulpit, as long as yet undecided; and who does not know today, that one sect, to mark its holy indignation at the decision, has never yet opened the boxes that contained its articles at the World's Fair?

These superlatively good and unctuous Christians, by conning over their Bible carefully, can find their counterpart in a certain class of unco-good people in the days of the Redeemer, who haunted Him night and day, distressed beyond measure, and scandalized beyond forbearance, because He did not keep the Sabbath in as straight-laced manner as themselves.

They hated Him for using common sense in reference to the day, and He found no epithets expressive enough of His supreme contempt for their Pharisaical pride. And it is very probably that the divine mind has not modified its views today anent the blatant outcry of their followers and sympathizers at the close of this nineteenth century. But when we add to all this the fact that whilst the Pharisees of old kept the true Sabbath, our modern Pharisees, counting on the credulity and simplicity of their dupes, have never once in their lives kept the true Sabbath which their divine Master kept to His dying day, and which His apostles kept, after His example, for thirty years steward, according to the Sacred Record, the most glaring contradiction, involving a deliberate sacrilegious rejection of a most positive precept, is presented to us today in the action of the Biblical Christian world. The Bible and the Sabbath constitute the watchword of Protestantism; but we have demonstrated that it is the Bible against their Sabbath. We have shown that no greater contradiction ever existed than their theory and practice. We have proved that neither the Biblical ancestors nor themselves have ever kept one Sabbath day in their lives.

The Israelites and Seventh-day Adventists are witnesses of their weekly desecration of the day named by God so repeatedly, and whilst [Protestant Bible Christians] have ignored and condemned their teacher, the Bible, they have adopted a day kept by the Catholic Church. What Protestant can, after perusing these articles, with a clear conscience, continue to disobey the command of God, enjoining Saturday to be kept, which command his teacher, the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, records as the will of God?

The history of the world cannot present a more stupid, self-stultifying specimen of dereliction of principle than this. The teacher demands emphatically in every page that the law of the Sabbath be observed every week, by all recognizing it as "the only infallible teacher," whilst the disciples of that teacher have not once for over three hundred years observed the divine precept! That immense concourse of Biblical Christians, the Methodists, have declared that the Sabbath has never been abrogated, whilst the followers of the Church of England, together with her daughter, the Episcopal Church of the United States, are committed by the twentieth article of religion, already quoted, to the ordinance that the Church cannot lawfully ordain anything "contrary to God's written word." God's written word enjoins His worship to be observed on Saturday absolutely, repeatedly, and most emphatically, with a most positive threat of death to him who disobeys. All the Biblical sects occupy the same self-stultifying position which no explanation can modify, much less justify.

How truly do the words of the Holy Spirit apply to this deplorable situation! "Iniquitas mentita est sibi"—"Iniquity hath lied to itself." Proposing to follow the Bible only as teacher, yet before the world, the sole teacher is ignominiously thrust aside, and the teaching and practice of the Catholic Church—"the mother of abomination," when it suits their purpose so to designate her—adopted, despite the most terrible threats pronounced by God Himself against those who disobey the command, "Remember to keep holy the Sabbath."

Before closing this series of articles, we beg to call the attention of our readers once more to our caption, introductory of each; viz., 1. The Christian Sabbath, the genuine offspring of the union of the Holy Spirit with the Catholic Church His spouse. 2. The claim of Protestantism to any part therein proved to be groundless, self-contradictory, and suicidal.

The first proposition needs little proof. The Catholic Church for over one thousand years before the existence of a Protestant, by virtue of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday. We say by virtue of her divine mission, because He who called Himself the "Lord of the Sabbath," endowed her with His own power to teach, "he that heareth you, heareth Me;" commanded all who believe in Him to hear her, under penalty of being placed with "heathen and publican;" and promised to be with her to the end of the world. She holds her charter as teacher from Him—a charter as infallible as perpetual. The Protestant world at its birth found the Christian Sabbath too strongly entrenched to run counter to its existence; it was therefore placed under the necessity of acquiescing in the arrangement, thus implying the Church's right to change the day, for over three hundred years. The Christian Sabbath is therefore to this day, the acknowledged offspring of the Catholic Church as spouse of the Holy Ghost, without a word of remonstrance from the Protestant world.

Let us now, however, take a glance at our second proposition, with the Bible alone as the teacher and guide in faith and morals. This teacher most emphatically forbids any change in the day for paramount reasons. The command calls for a "perpetual covenant." The day commanded to be kept by the teacher has never once been kept, thereby developing an apostasy from an assumedly fixed principle, as self-contradictory, self-stultifying, and consequently as suicidal as it is within the power of language to express.

Nor are the limits of demoralization yet reached. Far from it. Their pretense for leaving the bosom of the Catholic Church was for apostasy from the truth as taught in the written word. They adopted the written word as their sole teacher, which they had no sooner done than they abandoned it promptly, as these articles have abundantly proved; and by a perversity as willful as erroneous, they accept the teaching of the Catholic Church in direct opposition to the plain, unvaried, and constant teaching of their sole teacher in the most essential doctrine of their religion, thereby emphasizing the situation in what may be aptly designated "a mockery, a delusion, and a snare."....Rome's Challenge (Part 4)

 

[Hobie]

This site has even more, here is a section with the Adventist editors response..."It was upon this very point that the Reformation was condemned by the Council of Trent. The Reformers had constantly charged, as here stated, that the Catholic Church had "apostatized from the truth as contained in the written word. "The written word," "The Bible and the Bible only," "Thus saith the Lord," these were their constant watchwords; and "the Scripture, as in the written word, the sole standard of appeal," this was the proclaimed platform of the Reformation and of Protestantism. "The Scripture and tradition." The Bible as interpreted by the Church and according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers," this was the position and claim of the Catholic Church. This was the main issue in the Council of Trent, which was called especially to consider the questions that had been raised and forced upon the attention of Europe by the Reformers. The very first question concerning faith that was considered by the council was the question involved in this issue. There was a strong party even of the Catholics within the council who were in favor of abandoning tradition and adopting the Scriptures only, as the standard of authority. This view was so decidedly held in the debates in the council that the pope's legates actually wrote to him that there was "a strong tendency to set aside tradition altogether and to make Scripture the sole standard of appeal." But to do this would manifestly be to go a long way toward justifying the claims of the Protestants. By this crisis there was developed upon the ultra-Catholic portion of the council the task of convincing the others that "Scripture and tradition" were the only sure ground to stand upon. If this could be done, the council could be carried to issue a decree condemning the Reformation, otherwise not. The question was debated day after day, until the council was fairly brought to a standstill. Finally, after a long and intensive mental strain, the Archbishop of Reggio came into the council with substantially the following argument to the party who held for Scripture alone:
"The Protestants claim to stand upon the written word only. They profess to hold the Scripture alone as the standard of faith. They justify their revolt by the plea that the Church has apostatized from the written word and follows tradition. Now the Protestants claim, that they stand upon the written word only, is not true. Their profession of holding the Scripture alone as the standard of faith, is false. PROOF: The written word explicitly enjoins the observance of the seventh day as the Sabbath. They do not observe the seventh day, but reject it. If they do truly hold the scripture alone as their standard, they would be observing the seventh day as is enjoined in the Scripture throughout. Yet they not only reject the observance of the Sabbath enjoined in the written word, but they have adopted and do practice the observance of Sunday, for which they have only the tradition of the Church. Consequently the claim of 'Scripture alone as the standard,' fails; and the doctrine of 'Scripture and tradition' as essential, is fully established, the Protestants themselves being judges."

[The Archbishop of Reggio (Gaspar [Ricciulli] de Fosso) made his speech at the last opening session of Trent, (17th Session) reconvened under a new pope (Pius IV), on the 18th of January, 1562 after having been suspended in 1552. — J. H. Holtzman, Canon and Tradition, published in Ludwigsburg, Germany, in 1859, page 263, and Archbishop of Reggio's address in the 17th session of the Council of Trent, Jan. 18, 1562, in Mansi SC, Vol. 33, cols. 529, 530. Latin.]

There was no getting around this, for the Protestants' own statement of faith — the Augsburg Confession, 1530 — had clearly admitted that "the observation of the Lord's day" had been appointed by "the Church" only.

[Article XXVIII: Of Ecclesiastical Power. 33. They refer to the Sabbath-day as having been changed into the Lord's Day, contrary to the Decalog, as it seems. Neither is there any example whereof they make more than concerning the changing of the Sabbath-day. Great, say they, is the power of the Church, since it has dispensed with one of the Ten Commandments! ]

The argument was hailed in the council as of Inspiration only; the party for "Scripture alone," surrendered; and the council at once unanimously condemned Protestantism and the whole Reformation as only an unwarranted revolt from the communion and authority of the Catholic Church; and proceeded, April 8, 1546, "to the promulgation of two decrees, the first of which, enacts under anathema, that Scripture and tradition are to be received and venerated equally, and that the deutero-canonical [the apocryphal] books are part of the canon of Scripture. The second decree declares the Vulgate to be the sole authentic and standard Latin version, and gives it such authority as to supersede the original texts; forbids the interpretation of Scripture contrary to the sense received by the Church, 'or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers,'" etc. (7)
This was the inconsistency of the Protestant practice with the Protestant profession that gave to the Catholic Church her long-sought and anxiously desired ground upon which to condemn Protestantism and the whole Reformation movement as only a selfishly ambitious rebellion against the Church authority. And in this vital controversy the key, the chiefest and culminative expression, of the Protestant inconsistency was in the rejection of the Sabbath of the Lord, the seventh day, enjoined in the Scriptures, and the adoption and observance of the Sunday as enjoined by the Catholic Church.
And this is today the position of the respective parties to this controversy. Today, as this document shows, this is the vital issue upon which the Catholic Church arraigns Protestantism, and upon which she condemns the course of popular Protestantism as being "indefensible", self-contradictory, and suicidal." What will these Protestants, what will this Protestantism, do?]

"Trent, Council of." — The original Editor's note was apparently written by G. E. Fifield, as an article of his titled The Sabbath, the Fathers, and the Reformation, presenting the same information, appeared later in Signs of the Times, Vol. 25, No. 47, Nov. 22, 1899, pgs. 6-7.

"ROME'S CHALLENGE - WHY DO PROTESTANTS KEEP SUNDAY?

 

[101G]

first thanks for the topic,
sunday, and saturday, are pagan name for days, God number them and if any has entered into his rest then every day is the Sabbath, (that's if one has entered into his rest).

so for me and I can only speak for me, "today" is the Sabbath for me, no matter what name you give the day.

now as for fellowship, the same goes. are we not fellowshipping right now?

PICJAG.

 

[Pearl]

I don't think it matters. God did not name the days of the week. They are named for other gods. The important thing is that we set aside one in seven to be our sabbath and for most non Jewish people it is Sunday.

 

[Hobie]

first thanks for the topic,
sunday, and saturday, are pagan name for days, God number them and if any has entered into his rest then every day is the Sabbath, (that's if one has entered into his rest).

so for me and I can only speak for me, "today" is the Sabbath for me, no matter what name you give the day.

now as for fellowship, the same goes. are we not fellowshipping right now?

PICJAG.

Not for God, He set up the weekly cycle of seven days from Creation...
Genesis 2:1-3 King James Version (KJV)
1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

 

[101G]

Not for God, He set up the weekly cycle of seven days from Creation...
Genesis 2:1-3 King James Version (KJV)
1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

Correct, the 6 days are for us, the 7th is his, and we must enter into his rest.

PICJAG

 

[Renniks]

If the Sabbath was abolished, there would be many verses and much text to show it, yet there is none. The apostles would have had many discussions and the councils at Jerusalem would have written at least one with a determination of it being abolished and yet there is nothing. Paul exhorts in Corinthians that Circumcision is nothing in comparison to the Ten Commandments.“Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the Commandments of God.” 1 Corinthians 7:19. Since there are more than forty verses and up to ten verses at a time clearly stating that Circumcision of the flesh is a yoke of bondage and abolished, how many scriptures would you expect stating the Sabbath was abolished or changed to Sunday? Yet there is not even one verse that says,“ The Sabbath is abolished or is now Sunday.” Here are articles from a interesting source with first a overview:

"Most Christians assume that Sunday is the biblically approved day of worship. The Roman Catholic Church protests that it transferred Christian worship from the biblical Sabbath (Saturday) to Sunday, and that to try to argue that the change was made in the Bible is both dishonest and a denial of Catholic authority. If Protestantism wants to base its teachings only on the Bible, it should worship on Saturday
Over one hundred years ago the Catholic Mirror ran a series of articles discussing the right of the Protestant churches to worship on Sunday. The articles stressed that unless one was willing to accept the authority of the Catholic Church to designate the day of worship, the Christian should observe Saturday.


Why Do Protestants Keep Sunday?

FEBRUARY 24, 1893, the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists adopted certain resolutions appealing to the government and people of the United States from the decision of the Supreme Court declaring this to be a Christian nation, and from the action of Congress in legislating upon the subject of religion, and remonstrating against the principle and all the consequences of the same. In March 1893, the International Religious Liberty Association printed these resolutions in a tract entitled Appeal and Remonstrance. On receipt of one of these, the editor of the Catholic Mirror of Baltimore, Maryland, published a series of four editorials, which appeared in that paper September, 2, 9, 16, and 23, 1893. The Catholic Mirror was the official organ of Cardinal Gibbons and the Vatican in the United States. These articles, therefore, although not written by the Cardinal's own hand, appeared under his official sanction, and as the expression of the Church to Protestantism, and the demand of the Church that Protestants shall render to the Church an account of why they keep Sunday and also of how they keep it.

The following material (except where noted) is a verbatim reprint of these editorials.

THE CHRISTIAN SABBATH

THE GENUINE OFFSPRING OF THE UNION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HIS SPOUSE. THE CLAIMS OF PROTESTANTISM TO ANY PART THEREIN PROVED TO BE GROUNDLESS, SELF-CONTRADICTORY, AND SUICIDAL

[From the Catholic Mirror of Sept. 2, 1893]

Our attention has been called to the above subject in the past week by the receipt of a brochure of twenty-one pages, published by the International Religious Liberty Association, entitled, "Appeal and Remonstrance," embodying resolutions adopted the General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventists (Feb. 24, 1893). The resolutions criticize and censure, with much acerbity, the action of the United States Congress, and of the Supreme Court, for the invading the rights of the people by closing the World's Fair on Sunday.

The Adventists are the only body of Christians with the Bible as their teacher, who can find no warrant in its pages for the change of the day from the seventh to the first. Hence their appellation, "Seventh-day Adventists." Their cardinal principle consists in setting apart Saturday for the exclusive worship of God, in conformity with the positive command of God himself, repeatedly reiterated in the sacred books of the Old and New Testaments, literally obeyed by the children of Israel for thousands of years to this day, and endorsed by the teaching and practice of the Son of God whilst on earth.

Per contra, the Protestants of the world, the Adventists excepted, with the same Bible as their cherished and sole infallible teacher, by their practice, since their appearance in the sixteenth century, with the time-honored practice of the Jewish people before their eyes, have rejected the day named for His worship by God, and assumed, in apparent contradiction of His command, a day for His worship never once referred to for that purpose, in the pages of that Sacred Volume.

What Protestant pulpit does not ring almost every Sunday with loud and impassioned invectives against Sabbath violation? Who can forget the fanatical clamor of the Protestant ministers throughout the length and breadth of the land against opening the gates of the World's Fair on Sunday? the thousands of petitions, signed by millions, to save the Lord's Day from desecration? Surely, such general and widespread excitement and noisy remonstrance could not have existed without the strongest grounds for such animated protests.

And when quarters were assigned at the World's Fair to the various sects of Protestantism for the exhibition of articles, who can forget the emphatic expressions of virtuous and conscientious indignation exhibited by our Presbyterian brethren, as soon as they learned of the decision of the Supreme Court not to interfere in the Sunday opening? The newspapers informed us that they flatly refused to utilize the space accorded them, or open their boxes, demanding the right to withdraw the articles, in rigid adherence to their principles, and thus decline all contact with the sacrilegious and Sabbath-breaking Exhibition.

Doubtless, our Calvinistic brethren deserved and shared the sympathy of all the other sects, who, however, lost the opportunity of posing as martyrs in vindication of the Sabbath observance.

They thus became a "spectacle to the world, to angels, and to men," although their Protestant brethren, who failed to share the monopoly, were uncharitably and enviously disposed to attribute their steadfast adherence to religious principle, to Pharisaical pride and dogged obstinacy....

Sunday is not the Sabbath.. there is no Sabbath as such. Do you keep the Sabbath the same way the Jews of that time did? There is still a Sabbath rest In Christ, but it's not about a certain day of the week... Although traditionally most of us pick Sunday, as a day to set aside to worship. that doesn't make it the same as the Sabbath was.

 

[mailmandan]

Sunday is not the Sabbath.. there is no Sabbath as such. Do you keep the Sabbath the same way the Jews of that time did?

Good question. Sabbath keeping (with all it's rules and regulations) was part of a covenant with Israel (Exodus 16:23, 29; 31:12-18; 35:1-3; Leviticus 19:30; 23:2-3, 32; Numbers 15:32-36; 28:1-10; 29:39-40; I Chronicles. 23:30-31; II Chronicles 31:2-4; Isaiah 1:13; Amos 8:5; Nehemiah 10:31) that is not binding on Christians under the new covenant.

*Colossians 2:16 - Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day 17 things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.

Keeping the Sabbath day (as it was required in the Old Testament under the old covenant) involved compliance with specific regulations (Exodus 16:23; 35:3; Leviticus 23:32; Jeremiah 17:21) that were strictly enforced. If Sabbath day observances are still required, so would the burnt offerings which went along with them (Leviticus 19:30; 23:2-3; Numbers 28:1-10; 29:39-40; I Chronicles. 23:30-31; II Chronicles 31:2-4; Isaiah 1:13). So no kindling a fire in any of your dwellings on the sabbath (Exodus 35:3). Every man must remain in his place on the sabbath (Exodus 16:29). No trading (Amos 8:5). No marketing (Nehemiah 10:31; 13:15,19). *This was commanded by God to Israel (Exodus 35:1).

If the seventh day Sabbath is still in affect, then why don't Sabbatarians seek to obey ALL that the LORD commanded in regards to keeping the Sabbath day? How can someone keep a certain law when he keeps only part of it? If the Sabbath day laws were still in effect today, then according to Exodus 31:12-18; 35:1-3; and Numbers 15:32-36, anyone who profaned the Sabbath was put to death and any person who does any work on it, that person shall be cut off from his people. Now who is going to enforce that today? The Jewish synagogue or the Seventh day Adventist church or maybe the Government? Since we do not live under a theocratic state as ancient Israel did under the old covenant, no Sabbatarian today can live consistently under these regulations under the law of Moses.

There is still a Sabbath rest In Christ, but it's not about a certain day of the week... Although traditionally most of us pick Sunday, as a day to set aside to worship. that doesn't make it the same as the Sabbath was.

Amen! Hebrews 4:9 - So there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God. (NASB) Notice that the Greek word "sabbatismos" here is used no where else in the Bible!

W. E. Vine, Greek Dictionary points out:

Sabbath rest (4520) (sabbatismos from sabbatízo = keep the Sabbath) literally means a keeping of a sabbath or a keeping of days of rest. It is used in this passage not in the literal sense (meaning to keep a specific day, the "Sabbath" day) but to describe a period of rest for God’s people which is modeled after and is a fulfillment of the traditional Sabbath.

SABBATISMOS a Sabbath-keeping, is used in Heb. 4:9, R.V., "a Sabbath rest," A.V. marg., "a keeping of a Sabbath" (akin to sabbatizoµ, to keep the Sabbath, used, e.g., in Ex. 16:30, not in the N.T.); here the Sabbath-keeping is the perpetual Sabbath rest to be enjoyed uninterruptedly by believers in their fellowship with the Father and the Son, in contrast to the weekly Sabbath under the Law. Because this Sabbath rest is the rest of God Himself, its full fruition is yet future, though believers now enter into it. In whatever way they enter into divine “rest,” that which they enjoy is involved in an indissoluble relation with God. (Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words)

Sabbath rest (4520) sabbatismos - Sermon Index

 

[Hobie]

Good question. Sabbath keeping (with all it's rules and regulations) was part of a covenant with Israel (Exodus 16:23, 29; 31:12-18; 35:1-3; Leviticus 19:30; 23:2-3, 32; Numbers 15:32-36; 28:1-10; 29:39-40; I Chronicles. 23:30-31; II Chronicles 31:2-4; Isaiah 1:13; Amos 8:5; Nehemiah 10:31) that is not binding on Christians under the new covenant.

*Colossians 2:16 - Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day 17 things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.

Keeping the Sabbath day (as it was required in the Old Testament under the old covenant) involved compliance with specific regulations (Exodus 16:23; 35:3; Leviticus 23:32; Jeremiah 17:21) that were strictly enforced. If Sabbath day observances are still required, so would the burnt offerings which went along with them (Leviticus 19:30; 23:2-3; Numbers 28:1-10; 29:39-40; I Chronicles. 23:30-31; II Chronicles 31:2-4; Isaiah 1:13). So no kindling a fire in any of your dwellings on the sabbath (Exodus 35:3). Every man must remain in his place on the sabbath (Exodus 16:29). No trading (Amos 8:5). No marketing (Nehemiah 10:31; 13:15,19). *This was commanded by God to Israel (Exodus 35:1).

If the seventh day Sabbath is still in affect, then why don't Sabbatarians seek to obey ALL that the LORD commanded in regards to keeping the Sabbath day? How can someone keep a certain law when he keeps only part of it? If the Sabbath day laws were still in effect today, then according to Exodus 31:12-18; 35:1-3; and Numbers 15:32-36, anyone who profaned the Sabbath was put to death and any person who does any work on it, that person shall be cut off from his people. Now who is going to enforce that today? The Jewish synagogue or the Seventh day Adventist church or maybe the Government? Since we do not live under a theocratic state as ancient Israel did under the old covenant, no Sabbatarian today can live consistently under these regulations under the law of Moses.

Amen! Hebrews 4:9 - So there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God. (NASB) Notice that the Greek word "sabbatismos" here is used no where else in the Bible!

W. E. Vine, Greek Dictionary points out:

Sabbath rest (4520) (sabbatismos from sabbatízo = keep the Sabbath) literally means a keeping of a sabbath or a keeping of days of rest. It is used in this passage not in the literal sense (meaning to keep a specific day, the "Sabbath" day) but to describe a period of rest for God’s people which is modeled after and is a fulfillment of the traditional Sabbath.

SABBATISMOS a Sabbath-keeping, is used in Heb. 4:9, R.V., "a Sabbath rest," A.V. marg., "a keeping of a Sabbath" (akin to sabbatizoµ, to keep the Sabbath, used, e.g., in Ex. 16:30, not in the N.T.); here the Sabbath-keeping is the perpetual Sabbath rest to be enjoyed uninterruptedly by believers in their fellowship with the Father and the Son, in contrast to the weekly Sabbath under the Law. Because this Sabbath rest is the rest of God Himself, its full fruition is yet future, though believers now enter into it. In whatever way they enter into divine “rest,” that which they enjoy is involved in an indissoluble relation with God. (Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words)

Sabbath rest (4520) sabbatismos - Sermon Index

So you are saying the Ten Commandments are done away with, so are we free to steal, murder and commit adultery, I see a problem with that way of thinking.

Matthew 19:16-17 King James Version (KJV)
16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

 

[mailmandan]

So you are saying the Ten Commandments are done away with, so are we free to steal, murder and commit adultery, I see a problem with that way of thinking.

Typical straw man argument. Since the old covenant has been made obsolete (Hebrews 8:13), does this leave us with no moral direction? Absolutely not. God made obsolete the old covenant to legally put into place the new covenant (2 Corinthians 3:6-9; Hebrews 8:6-13). The life of discipleship flows out of the new command to love one another as He loved us (John 13:34), which Paul refers to as the "law of Christ" (Galatians 6:2). Love fulfills the law (Romans 13:8-10). Out of this single command comes other commands, including references for the moral principles of 9 of the 10 commandments, which are reiterated under the new covenant, yet the command to keep the Sabbath day is not binding on Christians under the new covenant.

1. You shall have no other gods before Me. - Acts 14:15
2. You shall make no idols. - 1 John 5:21
3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain. - James 2:7; 5:12; 1 Timothy 6:1
4. Keep the Sabbath day holy. - Not binding on the Church - Colossians 2:16-17
5. Honor your father and your mother. - Ephesians 6:1-2
6. You shall not murder. - Romans 13:9-10; 1 John 3:15
7. You shall not commit adultery. - Romans 13:9-10; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10
8. You shall not steal. - Romans 13:9-10; Ephesians 4:28
9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. - Romans 13:9-10; Colossians 3:9-10
10. You shall not covet. - Romans 13:9-10; Ephesians 5:3

2 Corinthians 3:6-9: "He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant — not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills...the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone...the ministry that condemns." But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious? For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory.

The law on our heart and mind is the love of the Spirit, not the law of the letter. This is why Paul tells us that the new covenant is a covenant of the Spirit.

Matthew 19:16-17 King James Version (KJV)
16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Do you believe that you will receive eternal life based on the merits of obeying the 10 commandments? Good luck! (Ecclesiastes 7:20; Romans 3:10-12; 23) In Matthew 19:17, Jesus showed the rich young ruler how short he falls of keeping even the first commandment (Exodus 20:3) which is the first of the two great commandments (Deuteronomy 6:5; Matthew 22:37). Yet the rich young ruler confidently and (self righteously) declared that he has kept the commandments from his youth up and qualified for heaven under those terms. Yet Jesus knew the wealth of the rich young ruler had become his idolatrous god, which kept him from believing in Jesus unto salvation.

The rich young ruler missed the point that Jesus was making, failed to place his faith in Jesus for salvation, and continued instead to trust in his riches (vs. 21-23). He went away sad because he could not part from his great wealth, not even in exchange for eternal life. If keeping the commandments is the basis or means by which we receive eternal life, then why isn't this the pattern for all discussions concerning eternal life? Paul would have said to the jailer who asked, "what must I do to be saved?" by replying in Acts 16:31 - "Keep the commandments and you will be saved," yet instead, Paul said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved."

Jesus knows the hearts of all men and may respond to each individual differently because He knows where their personal need is. Jesus did not respond to the rich young ruler or the woman at the well or to Nicodemus in the exact same way, yet the consistent pattern in scripture is salvation by grace through faith, not works (Ephesians 2:8,9). We are not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. (Galatians 2:16; Philippians 3:9)

 

[CharismaticLady]

Not for God, He set up the weekly cycle of seven days from Creation...
Genesis 2:1-3 King James Version (KJV)
1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

To understand the naming of the Sabbath, we must ask WHY did God hallow the 7th day. He couldn't have been tired, so physical rest is not the reason. What did it really represent? When you understand why, you will know what the reality is and what (or Who) it points to.

 

[Windmillcharge]

I worship God on he day that Jesus rose from the dead.
Paul writes about Christians meeting on the first day of the week.
This is confirmed by early apologists who also confirm that Christians met early on in he first day of he week to worship Jesus.

Paul also wrote that it doesn't matter when we meet for worship, so long as we do meet.

 

[101G]

To understand the naming of the Sabbath, we must ask WHY did God hallow the 7th day. He couldn't have been tired, so physical rest is not the reason. What did it really represent? When you understand why, you will know what the reality is and what (or Who) it points to.

on point, Matthew 11:28.

PICJAG.

 

[Hobie]

To understand the naming of the Sabbath, we must ask WHY did God hallow the 7th day. He couldn't have been tired, so physical rest is not the reason. What did it really represent? When you understand why, you will know what the reality is and what (or Who) it points to.

Yes, and the fact that God went through all the trouble of creating a day for no other reason, but for us to rest from our work and be drawn closer to Him tells you something.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Yes, and the fact that God went through all the trouble of creating a day for no other reason, but for us to rest from our work and be drawn closer to Him tells you something.

It points to the Creator, without Him nothing was made that was made. Jesus was hidden in the weekly Sabbath that pointed towards the true rest found in Him, just as He was found in all the holy convocations of Leviticus 23, starting with the first one. That is the true meaning in Hebrews 4.