Why its important to keep the Sabbath

[GerhardEbersoehn]

My point was that the word has the connotation of "dawning" -- which may or may not mean, in an idiomatic sense, "beginning" or "approaching." But the idiom is English, not Greek.

My point is that the word has the connotation of "dawning" -- which, NOT <may or may not> BUT definitely and definitively means, in an idiomatic sense as well as physical empirical evidential application, means, "beginning" OF an "approaching" time or event, e.g., the 'dawn of the 21st century' was the late or latter years or months at least of the 20th century. And yes <the idiom is English>, so don't try make the GREEK literal words, ἐπέφωσκεν, ἐπιφωσκούσῃ, idioms and that English idiom.

 

[RedFan]

My point is that the word has the connotation of "dawning" -- which, NOT <may or may not> BUT definitely and definitively means, in an idiomatic sense as well as physical atmospheric application, means, "beginning" OF an "approaching" time or event, e.g., the 'dawn of the 21st century' was the late or latter years or months at least of the 20th century. And yes <the idiom is English>, so don't try make the GREEK literal words, ἐπέφωσκεν, ἐπιφωσκούσῃ, idioms and that English idiom.

I thought I was doing the opposite! English translations of Luke 23:54 have adopted the English idiomatic sense when translating. I was suggesting Matt 28:1 as an example of the non-idiomatic sense.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Why does Passover have to be on Friday? BTW, the feast of unleavened bread started on the 15th with the 14th being the preparation day. The Last Supper was at the beginning of Passover the evening of the 13th which in Jewish time was the beginning of the 14th. These days don't land of the same day of the week each year.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

I thought I was doing the opposite! English translations of Luke 23:54 have adopted the English idiomatic sense when translating. I was suggesting Matt 28:1 as an example of the non-idiomatic sense.

Luke 23:54 has not <adopted the English idiomatic sense> unless the original Luke 23:54 was written before the original Greek and was written in English first before it was written. This means just that what you are saying or are trying to say makes no sense.
However, the KJV English as well as the RSV, at least, do not adopt the English idiomatic sense... of any Text. And <translations> generally, even Dynamic Equivalence 'translation' SO-CALLED, do not think to transmit the Greek meaning as idiomatic, but on the contrary think out or adopt or fancy or fabricate unambiguous literal word meanings, specifically for these and other relevant Texts of the Gospels, specifically to CREATE a Sunday-Resurrection scenario. PURE DISGUSTING FRAUD!

 

[RedFan]

Luke 23:54 has not <adopted the English idiomatic sense> unless the original Luke 23:54 was written before the original Greek and was written in English first before it was written. This means just that what you are saying or are trying to say makes no sense.

I said ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS of Luke 23:54, not that Luke meant it that way. I don't think he did.

 

[Phoneman777]

How could there be three days and three nights before Sunday morning.

"Inclusive Reckoning". If an event extended over a portion of a day that portion was counted as a whole day.

Because, unlike in Germany where "ze party will begin precisely at ze appointed time, yah?" - in Africa and the East, schedules take a back seat to relationships, which is why in Africa "the party begins when we are all here" and after waiting an entire day or perhaps two for everyone to arrive, no one is ever in any hurry to leave.

I think this is a perfect example of why we must factor in Eastern mindset before attempting to interpret Scripture, especially the prophetic passages.

Saw your bunny trail. What did Jesus turn water into at the wedding? Grape juice?

I just can't see how God the Son would tell Solomon to tell us to not even look at booze, and then manifest Himself in the flesh and contradict His own directive.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

"Inclusive Reckoning". If an event extended over a portion of a day that portion was counted as a whole day.

Because, unlike in Germany where "ze party will begin precisely at ze appointed time, yah?" - in Africa and the East, schedules take a back seat to relationships, which is why in Africa "the party begins when we are all here" and after waiting an entire day or perhaps two for everyone to arrive, no one is ever in any hurry to leave.

I think this is a perfect example of why we must factor in Eastern mindset before attempting to interpret Scripture, especially the prophetic passages.

I just can't see how God the Son would tell Solomon to tell us to not even look at booze, and then manifest Himself in the flesh and contradict His own directive.

Paul told Timothy to take a little wine for his stomach. That wasn't grape juice either. Some things that are fermented are good for us. Like Sauerkraut.

 

[Phoneman777]

Paul told Timothy to take a little wine for his stomach. That wasn't grape juice either. Some things that are fermented are good for us. Like Sauerkraut.

It couldn't have been booze. God knew then what we know now: the same medicinal properties in alcoholic wine are found in grape juice with none of the harmful fermentation products.

Nothing fermented is good for us - it poisons the system.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Aunty, (and I mean that tenderly as in the islands), the thing is, the Holy Spirit is what guides us into all truth, and I've always held that nothing anyone says will be of any effect, only the Holy Spirit (and much prayer) can change a heart. You must pray and ask the Lord on this issue, as even some 'Bible versions' can hide or translate to their predisposed ideas, so we must turn to God on some these truths and allow the Holy Spirit to unveil what is 'clear truth' as you say as this one is like marriage, given from Creation.

And it is an assumption on your part that I have not done this….what about your own stance which, according to the scriptural evidence that has been presented without refutation, fails to directly teach what your church and others assume. Suggestions are all you have offered. I do not base my faith on suggestions, but on solid scriptural statements. There are no such statements made to Christians concerning the observance of the Sabbath…..so where does that leave us?….at an impasse.
Jesus will have to sort fact from fiction here.

SAD’s want to enforce an old law on Gentiles that does not apply to them, just like the Jews did with the first Gentile brothers….wanting them to circumcise their males in accord with God’s law….the apostles deemed it unnecessary as the old law was now obsolete, taken away by the sacrifice of Christ.

Do you enforce circumcision as well? Is it a lesser law than Sabbath observance was?

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

SAD’s want to enforce an old law on Gentiles that does not apply to them, just like the Jews did with the first Gentile brothers….wanting them to circumcise their males in accord with God’s law….the apostles deemed it unnecessary as the old law was now obsolete, taken away by the sacrifice of Christ.

To which - for one, I, wholeheartedly consent. But I bet Aunty Jane understands what I say and mean, just as bad as any SDA will. Because you ALL apply and enforce an old obsolete version of the Law of GOD - man, of GOD - understand man! The Fourth Commandment and the Ten Commandments NEVER belonged to 'the Jews' and never were 'GIVEN to the Jews'. For all its existence it was GOD'S holy and just and good, DIVINE, Law.= - all the Bible, man, that's what I'm talking about!
Then for no reason whatsoever OTHER than that the Sabbath Commandment et al used to be and still are and ever will be GOD'S Law, IT NO LONGER APPLIES BECAUSE NOW IT APPLIES AS GOD'S LAW THROUGH JESUS CHRIST AND BECAUSE OF HIM AND, HIS, <APPLICATION>.
So that as the result of Christ's virtuous fulfilment all bloody or sacrificial Laws OF GOD no longer apply; and, as the result of Christ's virtuous fulfilment all non-bloody and non-sacrificial Laws--viz., spiritual, ethical and moral Laws, OF GOD, are become DIVINE more than ever, and more PERFECT than ever, BECAUSE PERFECTLY AND SINLESSLY FULFILLED, AND THEREBY - BY JESUS CHRIST - INSTITUTED, CONSTITUTED, CONFIRMED AND GLORIFIED LIKE NEVER BEFORE OR EVER AFTER IT WILL AGAIN.
In the last analysis without hesitation let it be made clear once for all, that the Seventh Day Sabbath OF THE LORD GOD Commandment specifically and especially, like no other Commandment OF GOD, received honour by the RESURRECTION OF CHRIST, not only generically like all other Commandments and Laws OF GOD, but AS SUCH EXCEPTIONALLY AND DIRECTLY, BY, THROUGH AND BECAUSE OF the fact and truth and DEED OF GOD OF THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST "ON THE SABBATH DAY".

 

[Aunty Jane]

To which - for one, I, wholeheartedly consent. But I bet Aunty Jane understands what I say and mean, just as bad as any SDA will. Because you ALL apply and enforce an old obsolete version of the Law of GOD - man, of GOD - understand man! The Fourth Commandment and the Ten Commandments NEVER belonged to 'the Jews' and never were 'GIVEN to the Jews'. For all its existence it was GOD'S holy and just and good, DIVINE, Law.= - all the Bible, man, that's what I'm talking about!
Then for no reason whatsoever OTHER than that the Sabbath Commandment et al used to be and still are and ever will be GOD'S Law, IT NO LONGER APPLIES BECAUSE NOW IT APPLIES AS GOD'S LAW THROUGH JESUS CHRIST AND BECAUSE OF HIM AND, HIS, <APPLICATION>.
So that as the result of Christ's virtuous fulfilment all bloody or sacrificial Laws OF GOD no longer apply; and, as the result of Christ's virtuous fulfilment all non-bloody and non-sacrificial Laws--viz., spiritual, ethical and moral Laws, OF GOD, are become DIVINE more than ever, and more PERFECT than ever, BECAUSE PERFECTLY AND SINLESSLY FULFILLED, AND THEREBY - BY JESUS CHRIST - INSTITUTED, CONSTITUTED, CONFIRMED AND GLORIFIED LIKE NEVER BEFORE OR EVER AFTER IT WILL AGAIN.
In the last analysis without hesitation let it be made clear once for all, that the Seventh Day Sabbath OF THE LORD GOD Commandment specifically and especially, like no other Commandment OF GOD, received honour by the RESURRECTION OF CHRIST, not only generically like all other Commandments and Laws OF GOD, but AS SUCH EXCEPTIONALLY AND DIRECTLY, BY, THROUGH AND BECAUSE OF the fact and truth and DEED OF GOD OF THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST "ON THE SABBATH DAY".

If you say so.....I will just go by what scripture says about the Sabbath.....and it’s not what you believe.....

Show us please the scripture that tells Christians to observe the Sabbath and I will believe you......no suggestions of inference to the likelihood.....just plain English will do.

I had to read what you wrote here several time before any of it made a lick of sense......use your words in a way that is easy to understand, other wise you will fulfill what Paul said we should not do....(1 Cor 14:8-9)

 

[Aunty Jane]

I just can't see how God the Son would tell Solomon to tell us to not even look at booze, and then manifest Himself in the flesh and contradict His own directive.

Since the Bible speaks about new wine in old wineskins, it is apparent that the wine is fermented. Unfermented grape juice will not burst old wineskins. New wine is put into new wineskins. (Luke 5:37-38)
There was no prohibition on drinking wine, only in drinking too much and becoming drunk. It is in a disinhibited state that many drunks make a complete fool of themselves, but a little wine with a meal actually aids digestion.

Apparently the original Passover meal described by Moses did not mention wine at all. Scholars believe that the wine was added later, (around 2 BCE) but since Jesus did not object to it or reject the wine, but used it to symbolise his blood, red wine suited his purpose. It was not unfermented grape juice for the simple reason that wine is a naturally fermenting liquid with no additives required to make it ferment and become alcoholic. The time of the grape harvest was well before the Passover and so any grape juice would have naturally fermented by that time.

Unlike bread to which a raising agent must be added, wine naturally ferments.

 

[Hobie]

And it is an assumption on your part that I have not done this….what about your own stance which, according to the scriptural evidence that has been presented without refutation, fails to directly teach what your church and others assume. Suggestions are all you have offered. I do not base my faith on suggestions, but on solid scriptural statements. There are no such statements made to Christians concerning the observance of the Sabbath…..so where does that leave us?….at an impasse.
Jesus will have to sort fact from fiction here.

SAD’s want to enforce an old law on Gentiles that does not apply to them, just like the Jews did with the first Gentile brothers….wanting them to circumcise their males in accord with God’s law….the apostles deemed it unnecessary as the old law was now obsolete, taken away by the sacrifice of Christ.

Do you enforce circumcision as well? Is it a lesser law than Sabbath observance was?

Well, I try not to assume, (my wife wont let me), but Creation is where the Sabbath was made for man, Christ gives us that and we know that a substitute was brought in (for whatever reason, pick one) and now is being claimed as the day of worship, so you can see that something clearly happened in between. It was not the Law but a gift from the Creator, and God winks when we do things from ignorance, but this change was clearly done by the church at Rome. We need to look carefully when history, scripture, and logic all say, something doesnt add up and see what the facts tell us.

(Oh, and you should visit my island sometime..)

 

[Aunty Jane]

Creation is where the Sabbath was made for man, Christ gives us that and we know that a substitute was brought in (for whatever reason, pick one) and now is being claimed as the day of worship, so you can see that something clearly happened in between. It was not the Law but a gift from the Creator, and God winks when we do things from ignorance, but this change was clearly done by the church at Rome. We need to look carefully when history, scripture, and logic all say, something doesnt add up and see what the facts tell us.

Ezekiel 20:10-14 gives us some insight as to what God said to his people Israel....

“So I brought them out of the land of Egypt and led them into the wilderness.

11 “I then gave them my statutes and made my judicial decisions known to them, so that the man who follows them may have life by them. 12 I also gave my sabbaths to them as a sign between me and them, so that they would know that I, Jehovah, am the one sanctifying them.

13 “But the house of Israel rebelled against me in the wilderness. They did not walk in my statutes, and they rejected my judicial decisions, which if a man follows them, he will have life by them. They utterly profaned my sabbaths. So I promised to pour out my fury on them in the wilderness to exterminate them. 14 I acted for the sake of my own name so that it would not be profaned before the nations, in whose sight I brought them out.”

Do you see reference here, to not a Sabbath but to Sabbaths.
Israel had a few Sabbaths that they were to observe as you will notice in verse 12, Jehovah says....”I also gave my sabbaths to them as a sign between me and them”...so the Sabbaths were between God and Israel.

When Jesus said....
“The Sabbath came into existence for the sake of man, and not man for the sake of the Sabbath. 28 So the Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”....what was this in reference to?

The Jews had just accused Jesus and his disciples of breaking the Sabbath by snatching a few grains of wheat on their way through a wheat field.....

“So the Pharisees said to him: “Look here! Why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?” 25 But he said to them: “Have you never read what David did when he was in need and he and the men with him were hungry? 26 How, in the account about A·biʹa·thar the chief priest, he entered into the house of God and ate the loaves of presentation, which it is not lawful for anybody to eat except the priests, and he also gave some to the men who were with him?”

This is what precipitated Jesus’ response.....you do realize that Jesus and all of his first disciples were all Jewish and under Law?......so his observance of the Sabbath was mandated, but once he had offered his life, the law was no longer binding because Christ had fulfilled it by becoming the ultimate, once and for all time, sacrifice for the sins on the whole world......provided that they accepted him as their savior and lived in harmony with God’s requirements of those under the new covenant.

Gal 3:13-14...
“Christ purchased us, releasing us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse instead of us, because it is written: “Accursed is every man hung upon a stake.” 14 This was so that the blessing of Abraham would come to the nations by means of Christ Jesus, so that we might receive the promised spirit through our faith.”

Romans 10:4...
“For Christ is the end of the Law, so that everyone exercising faith may have righteousness.”

Again, clearly stated.....the Law was abolished, along with the Sabbaths that were binding only on Israel.

Scripture is clear to me.....why is it not clear to you? This is a puzzle to me....

As for the whole “Sunday” thing.....it was definitely the RCC who decided that they would hold a Sabbath in order to honor their sun god.....why the Protestants held to this is also beyond me......’nuff said.

There were no “holy days” mandated for Christians at all except to memorialise the death of Christ, which replaced the Jewish Passover.

(Oh, and you should visit my island sometime..)

My island is bigger than your island.... LOL

Maybe you need to come and visit mine....?

 

[Aunty Jane]

No, I don't believe that. Clever straw man. KJV Genesis 1:1-2
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Jesus began creating with the earth already there. How long? Who knows? And maybe the material earth had been as science declares... Millions of years, or maybe not. But creation as described in Genesis, yep you said it. 6000 years, and yep, I believe that. No coincidence that the 7th millennium will be a Sabbath rest for the planet.

Now wait a minute.....you can’t have it both ways....either “God created the heavens and the earth” or he didn’t. Genesis opens with that statement......where does it say that Jesus then took over the creation of what is on the earth? Do you see that you are suggesting things again.....?

If only you actually believed that, and sourced your doctrines from the Bible only.

Funnily enough I seem to be the only one bringing scripture to this table.....where is your scripture proving that the Patriarchs observed a Sabbath before Moses? Where is the scripture that tells us that Christians were told to observe a Sabbath? Still missing.....

Some things you have right. Like the state of the dead. But the nature of Jesus and Who He is? You have that very wrong, and that tells me you don't know Him.

Well, you seem to have a very different view of who Jesus is to what the churches believe......I too have a different belief to both of you.....I reject that belief outright in fact. Jesus is who he said he was.....”the son of God”.
The son never sought equality with his Father, nor did he ever once say that he was God incarnate.

Phil 2:5-6....
“Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped “. (ESV)

“Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped.” (NASB)

“Though he was in the form of God, he did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped.” (NCB)
This last quote is from a Catholic Bible....which seems to be contradicting the ones who formulated the doctrine in the first place.

What “form” does God have? John 4:24 tells us that “God is a spirit”.....so Jesus in his prehuman existence was also a spirit.....all who inhabit the spiritual realm are naturally, invisible spirits.

So let us see who has the correct view.....I’m sure Jesus will tell us all who is, and always has been....his Father’s faithful “servant”. (Acts 4:27, 30)

And worse, He doesn't know you, yet. I think you need to meet up.

I met him about 50 odd years ago.....and I was introduced to his Father as well....and I came to love them both very much....the third bloke seems to be missing a lot of the time so again, we’ll see who got it right.

I’m sure Jesus will set us all straight in the very near future.....

 

[RedFan]

As for the whole “Sunday” thing.....it was definitely the RCC who decided that they would hold a Sabbath in order to honor their sun god

Let's pause a second before we pin this on the Roman Catholic Church. Observance of Sunday rather than Saturday as "the Lord's Day" became the practice of the "Catholic" Church -- the consensus Christian church throughout the Mediterranean world that referred to itself as "universal" in the second and third centuries -- years before the "Roman" Catholic Church extended its sphere of influence throughout the majority of Christendom. It is mentioned around C.E. 110 by Ignatius of Antioch's Letter to the Magnesians chapter 9 -- and apparently earlier than that in the Epistle of Barnabas 15:8-9. It had become the practice in Alexandria and Antioch back when those Sees were still independent of Rome's hegemony -- which we know lasted well into the Fourth Century (see Canon 6 of the First Council of Nicaea). As late as mid-fourth century it was decreed in Asia Minor by edicts not emanating from Rome (see, for example, Canon 29 of the Synod of Laodicea).

Certainly the Roman Church also observed Sunday rather than Saturday from early times. But it wasn't Rome's invention. It was the practice, developed by consensus, elsewhere in Christendom without direction from Rome (I suspect largely as an anti-Semitic measure) back when Christians in Rome were still hiding out in the Catacombs.

The Vatican loves to refer to itself as successor of St. Peter and paint itself as the "original" Church. But the "original" Church took root and developed all over the Mediterranean world through the leadership of many bishops who deemed themselves co-equals. The Papacy ascended to prominence centuries later. The history of how it managed to pull that off is fascinating -- a feat which, contrary to popular opinion, wasn't due to Constantine at all.

 

[Hobie]

Let's pause a second before we pin this on the Roman Catholic Church. Observance of Sunday rather than Saturday as "the Lord's Day" became the practice of the "Catholic" Church -- the consensus Christian church throughout the Mediterranean world that referred to itself as "universal" in the second and third centuries -- years before the "Roman" Catholic Church extended its sphere of influence throughout the majority of Christendom. It is mentioned around C.E. 110 by Ignatius of Antioch's Letter to the Magnesians chapter 9 -- and apparently earlier than that in the Epistle of Barnabas 15:8-9. It had become the practice in Alexandria and Antioch back when those Sees were still independent of Rome's hegemony -- which we know lasted well into the Fourth Century (see Canon 6 of the First Council of Nicaea). As late as mid-fourth century it was decreed in Asia Minor by edicts not emanating from Rome (see, for example, Canon 29 of the Synod of Laodicea).

Certainly the Roman Church also observed Sunday rather than Saturday from early times. But it wasn't Rome's invention. It was the practice, developed by consensus, elsewhere in Christendom without direction from Rome (I suspect largely as an anti-Semitic measure) back when Christians in Rome were still hiding out in the Catacombs.

The Vatican loves to refer to itself as successor of St. Peter and paint itself as the "original" Church. But the "original" Church took root and developed all over the Mediterranean world through the leadership of many bishops who deemed themselves co-equals. The Papacy ascended to prominence centuries later. The history of how it managed to pull that off is fascinating -- a feat which, contrary to popular opinion, wasn't due to Constantine at all.

Oh My, you cant really mean to deny what the ' Roman Catholic Church' did as they bask in it and there are lots of quotes from the Catholic Church claiming they changed the Sabbath and not by biblical authority and even admit for protestants who claim scripture only, but still keep Sunday instead of the Sabbath is following a commandment of the Catholic Church (not the commandment of God). The change in God’s Sabbath was predicted in scripture and not on the authority of God. Daniel 7:25

It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who observe the day observe a commandment of the Catholic Church.
—Priest Brady, in an address, reported in the Elizabeth, NJ ‘News’ on March 18, 1903.

Q. Have you any other proofs that they(Protestants) are not guided by the Scripture?
A. Yes; so many, that we cannot admit more than a mere specimen into this small work. They reject much that is clearly contained in Scripture, and profess more that is nowhere discoverable in that Divine Book.
Q. Give some examples of both?
A. They should, if the Scripture were their only rule, wash the feet of one another, according to the command of Christ, in the 13th chap. of St. John; —they should keep, not the Sunday, but the Saturday, according to the commandment, "Remember thou keep holy the SABBATH-day;" for this commandment has not, in Scripture, been changed or abrogated;...
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 101 Imprimatuer


Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
A. Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; —she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority.
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174


This is what God said about adding or subtracting from His commandments:

Deuteronomy 4:2 You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

 

[Hobie]

Now it wasnt just the day and the church governance that was changed but the form with the rites and rituals of the old Roman religion brought in, and idols renamed or 'Christianized" so the masses could continue with what they were familiar with. Here is a excellent explanation better than anything I can say....

"THE EARLIEST Roman religion of which we have any record was a system of pandemonism. There was a
spirit a demon it was often called in every object, every act, every process and sometimes in every stage of a process....

But the evidence of this particularistic character of Roman religion is not confined to these lists of obscure spirits. The gods of the
Roman pantheon in general even the greatest of them showed, in their origin at least, a high degree of specialization. In some cases
the original function of the divinity expanded in different directions but in others the early specialization maintained its old limits. Janus
was the god of the door, Vesta of the hearth, Faunus of the forest, Pales of pasture land, Fons of springs, Volturnus of running streams,
Saturn of sowing, Ceres of growth, Flora of blossom, Pomona of fruit, and Consus of harvest. Even the great god Jupiter, manifold
as his powers subsequently became, was at first only the spirit of the bright sky....

It pervaded the whole religious system. Its persistence, either with or without modification, in the case of the well-known
gods of Rome is too familiar a fact to require comment....
So much for the pandemonism of the ancient Romans. Enough has been said to show how deeply rooted in their minds this attitude
toward supernatural powers was. It was one of the most important phases of their religious consciousness and was to such an extent of the very essence of their faith that it was bound to survive. And survive it did. For though there is a notable difference in the character of the supernatural beings that in the fourth century succeeded to the multitudinous functions of the old departmental spirits, there is little or no change In the attitude of mind....

AND it is in the doctrine of the veneration of Saints that the polytheism of the old depart- mental deities survives. It may be that the
founders of Christianity found that the belief of the people especially the Illiterate class in these specialized spirits of minor grade was one
of their greatest problems. They recognized the people's predilection for spirits that would help in specific situations, and they realized
also that the masses felt more at home with beings who, while of divine nature or associations, were not too far removed from the human
level. They were keenly interested in winning the pagans to the faith and they succeeded. But undoubtedly one element in their success
was the inclusion in their system of the doctrine of the veneration of Saints. They seem to have felt that in order to make any headway
at all, it was necessary for them to match the swarms of spirits available for the pagans with a multitude of wonder-working saints and martyrs. How far they were prepared to go is indicated by their favorable attitude toward the pagan veneration of Virgil that amounted al-
most to deification. Apparently most of the churchmen of the period of the conflict of religions proclaimed the greatness of Virgil and
placed him almost on a level with the biblical prophets. They sought evidence of the truth of Christianity in pagan literature and insisted
that Virgil had prophesied the coming of Christ. Everyone is familiar with the mass of literature that has grown up around the so-
called Messianic Eclogue. Not only Virgil was glorified but also the pagan Sibyls who were thought to have inspired his words. The Sibyls
too were given a place beside the Old Testament prophets. ..

There have been many discussions of the relation of the doctrine of the veneration of Saints to various phases of Roman religion,
ranging from the notably temperate treatment of Lucius 5 to the more positive statements of Renan 6 and Harnack 7 and the uncompro-
mising assertions of Trede, 8 " P. Saintyves " 9 and Salomon Reinach. 10 Renan for example says that any peasant who prays to a particu-
lar saint for a cure for his horse or ox or drops a coin into the box of a miraculous chapel is in that act pagan. He is responding to the
prompting of a religious feeling that is older than Christianity and so deep-set that Christianity has not been able to root it out. Har-
nack sees in the veneration of Saints nothing but a recrudescence of pagan polytheism.

The term " veneration of Saints " has been used advisedly. For in any fair discussion of this subject it should be remembered that the
Church has never taught the worship of Saints. Every enlightened churchman knows this, but whether the peasants of southern Italy and
other parts of Europe distinguish with any degree of precision between veneration and worship is another question.....
A good example of the closeness of the resemblance of the specialization of function of different Saints to that of pagan spirits is found
in the published lists of Saints used by Spanish peasants. The very publication of the list emphasizes the similarity of the situation to that
which existed in ancient Roman times, when the people, overwhelmed by the number and multiplicity of names of the departmental
deities, used to appeal to the official list kept by the pontiffs.

Here are some of the examples furnished by the Spanish index: San Serapio should be appealed to in case of stomache-ache;
Santa Polonia for toothache; San Jose, San Juan Bautista and Santa Catalina for headache;
San Bernardo and San Cirilo for indigestion; San Luis for cholera; San Francisco for colic;
San Ignacio and Santa Lutgarda for childbirth; Santa Balsania for scrofula; SanFelix for ulcers;
Santa Agueda for nursing mothers; San Babilas for burns; San Gorge for an infected cut; Santa Quiteria for dog's bite;

San Ciriaco for diseases of the ear; Santa Lucia for the eyes; Santa Bibiana for epilepsy; San Gregorio for frost-bite;
San Pantaleon for haemorrhoids; San Roque for the plague; Santa Dorothea for rheumatism; SanPedro for fever;
and Santa Rita for the impossible !

There is a similar list for southern Italy, the Saints and their functions sometimes coinciding with the Spanish classification but in other
cases showing variations. San Roque for example is associated with cases of plague in Italian legends 1X just as in Spain. To the
Italians also the intercession of Santa Lucia is efficacious for sore eyes. San Giuseppe, however, to south Italians seems to be connected
with the interpretation of dreams. Giuseppe had interpreted dreams to Pharaoh during his life time, and it was believed that he retained
his interest in them after death. "......
SURVIVALS OF ROMAN RELIGION BY GORDON J. LAING
Professor of Latin The University of Chicago

 

[Hobie]

So while the Catholic Church can 'categorically deny' that it ever gave the 'Saints' to the people to worship or pray to and say it was 'veneration', the pagan masses were drawn in by their use, and what they had always done. So the 'spirits' became the 'Saints' to watch over them and to give their prayers directly to them. They could go on believing in the power of the dead of the ancient beliefs now set up as 'Saints' in the church, to help them in their troubles as they had done before. Some of the early Christians protested against the this 'veneration' of the Saints which was essentially the continuation of the old Roman religion, but their attempts were swept by the influx of the pagan masses.

Now looking at the 'veneration' and the festivals which came in, there are some specific festivals that go back directly to pagan customs connected with the dead. All Saints' Day, was observed on the the Roman festival of the dead, the Lemuria. In the modern festival the faithful visit the tombs of the Saints, venerate their relics, and pray for their blessing. The next day also, the second of November, All Souls' Day, unquestionably reproduces some of the features of the Parentalia.

"Parentalia, Roman religious festival held in honour of the dead. The festival, which began at noon on February 13 and culminated on February 21, was essentially a private celebration of the rites of deceased family members. It was gradually extended, however, to incorporate the dead in general. During the days of the festival, all temples were closed and no weddings could be performed. On the last day a public ceremony, the Feralia, was held, during which offerings and gifts were placed at the graves and the anniversary of the funeral feast was celebrated." ... Parentalia | Roman religious festival

So we see how this nine day festival held to honor the dead ancestors with visits to tombs and sacred offerings, got into the church, and 'Christians' then went to the cemeteries and decked the graves of the members of their family with flowers and candles. So it was not long that there were ceremonies which took the place of the ancient 'veneration', for the 'souls of the departed'.

We find even more on All Saints Day...
Catholic scholars themselves admit that the day they call "All Saints' Day" was not observed by early Christians, but was a later addition:

ALL SAINTS. As early as the fourth century, the Greeks kept on the first Sunday after Pentecost the feast of all martyrs and saints, and we still possess a sermon of St. Chrysostom de-livered on that day.

In the West, the feast was introduced by Pope Boniface the Fourth after he had dedicated, as the Church of the Blessed Virgin and the Martyrs, the Pantheon, which had been made over to him by the Emperor Phocas. The feast of the dedication was kept on the thirteenth of May. About 731 Gregory III. consecrated a chapel in St. Peter's Church in honour of all the saints, from which time All Saints' Day has been kept in Rome, as now, on the first of November. From about the middle of the ninth century, the feast came into general observance throughout the West. (Addis W, Arnold T. Catholic Dictionary, 6th ed. The Catholic Publication Society Co, 1887. Nihil Obstat. EDUARDUS S. KEOGH, CONG. ORAT., Censor Deputatu Imprimatur. HENRICUS EDUARDUS, CARD. ARCHIEP. WESTMONAST. Die 18 Dec., 1883. Imprimatur. John Card. McCloskey, Archbishop of New York. Feb. 14, 1884. Copyright, Lawrence Kehoe, 1884/1887. p20).

All Saints' Day

In the fourth century, neighbouring dioceses began to interchange feasts, to transfer relics, to divide them, and to join in a common feast; as is shown by the invitation of St. Basil of Caesarea (397) to the bishops of the province of Pontus. Frequently groups of martyrs suffered on the same day, which naturally led to a joint commemoration. In the persecution of Diocletian the number of martyrs became so great that a separate day could not be assigned to each. But the Church, feeling that every martyr should be venerated, appointed a common day for all. The first trace of this we find in Antioch on the Sunday after Pentecost. We also find mention of a common day in a sermon of St. Ephrem the Syrian (373), and in the 74th homily of St. John Chrysostom (407). (Mershman, Francis. "All Saints' Day." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 1. Nihil Obstat. March 1, 1907. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1907. 11 Aug. 2013 <CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: All Saints' Day>)...

Here is information on when and how people keep All Saints Day:

All Saints' Day

All Saints' Day is a celebration of all Christian saints, particularly those who have no special feast days of their own, in many Roman Catholic, Anglican and Protestant churches. In many western churches it is annually held November 1 and in many eastern churches it is celebrated on the first Sunday after Pentecost. It is also known as All Hallows Tide, All-Hallomas, or All Hallows' Day.

What Do People Do?

All Saints' Day is observed by Christians in many countries around the world. In countries such as Spain, Portugal and Mexico, offerings are made on this day. In countries such as Belgium, Hungary and Italy people bring flowers to the graves of dead relatives. In other parts of Europe, such as Austria, Croatia, Poland, and Romania, it is customary to light candles on top of visiting graves of deceased relatives. It is also observed in parts of Asia, such as the Philippines, where people visit graves of deceased relatives and clean or repair them. They also lay flowers on the graves and light candles. All Saints' Day accessed 10/01/19

Prayers for to the dead saints are often given then....

 

[Hobie]

Catholic scholars also reported:

All Saints' Day is a solemn holy day of the Catholic Church celebrated annually on November 1. The day is dedicated to the saints of the Church, that is, all those who have attained heaven. It should not be confused with All Souls' Day, which is observed on November 2, and is dedicated to those who have died and not yet reached heaven.

Although millions, or even billions of people may already be saints, All Saints' Day observances tend to focus on known saints --that is those recognized in the canon of the saints by the Catholic Church.

All Saints' Day is also commemorated by members of the Eastern Orthodox Church as well as some protestant churches, such as Anglican, Lutheran and Anglican churches.

Generally, All Saints' Day is a Catholic Holy Day of Obligation, meaning all Catholics are required to attend Mass on that day, unless they have an excellent excuse, such as serious illness.

Today, All Saints' Day is still a holy day of obligation, but only when it falls on a Sunday. Other countries have different rules according to their national bishop's conferences. The bishops of each conference have the authority to amend the rules surrounding the obligation of the day. (All Saints' Day. CatholicOnline. All Saints' Day - Saints & Angels - Catholic Online accessed 10/23/15)

It is considered a day of obligation by the Church of Rome, but it is not a biblical holy day.

The Pantheon was originally a pagan shrine for multiple gods and was turned into a Catholic shrine for multiple "saints."

Pantheon of Rome: A Symbol of Unity Among Confusion

How All Saints' Day actually became a universal holiday shows another type of pagan connection:

All Saints' Day ... It was first celebrated on May 13, A.D. 610, as the Feast of All Holy Martyrs, when the Emperor Phocas gave the ancient Pantheon to Pope Boniface IV as a church (All Saints' Day. World Book, vol 1. Chicago, 1966: 354).

The Romans built the Pantheon as a temple in honor of all their gods. The name means of all the gods ... Agrippa first built the famous Pantheon in Rome in 27 B.C. (Pantheon. World Book, vol 15. Chicago, 1966: 111).

Druid ... priests worshiped some gods similar to those of the Greeks and Romans, but under different names (Druid. World Book, vol 5. Chicago, 1966: 289).

Of course, some feel that although the Druids worshiped the pagan deities under different names that is wrong, yet they accepted the change of the names of the "gods" in the Pantheon to the "Catholic saints" as perfectly acceptable.

Here is a bit more on how and why the Pantheon became acceptable to the Roman Catholics:

In 607 A.D. the Roman Emperor Phocus defeated the Barbarians who were in control of Rome. The Pantheon in Rome, a pagan edifice which had been wrested from the barbarians, was given to pope Boniface IV. Originally ... the Pantheon -- ... dedicated it to the pagan goddess Cybele and to the other Roman deities. This temple became the central place in Rome where the pagans honored and commemorated their gods. With this splendid edifice now falling into the hands of professing Christians, the question was, What should be done with it?

The pagans had dedicated it to Cybele and all their gods. But the Roman bishop now CONSECRATED IT TO THE VIRGIN MARY AND ALL THE SAINTS of both sexes (see "The Mysteries of All Nations", Grant, p. 120). Thus this pagan building became "holy." No more did the pagan Romans use this edifice to pray for their dead. It was now the professing Christians who employed the Pantheon in praying for their dead.

This re-dedication of the pagan temple to Mary and others occurred in 610 A.D. Now converted into a Christian shrine, an annual festival was instituted to commemorate the event. The day chosen was May 13.

This May 13 commemoration of the dead saints was known by the name of "All Saints Day." It continued to be held in May for over two centuries -- until 834 A.D. In that year the NAME and the DATE WERE CHANGED.

Notice! "The time of celebration was altered to the FIRST OF NOVEMBER, and it was then called ALL HALLOW" -- from where we get the name Hallowe'en, ALL HALLOW merely meaning ALL HOLY, and the "een" is a contraction of evening ("Folklore", James Napier, p. 177).