10 Commandments

[icedragon101]

Recently I read a book that challanged my belief about the 10 commandments.

I am an Seventh-day Adventist. The SDA Church teaches that the Catholic claims to have changed the 10 commandments. The Catholics have indeed claimed this. The SDA church says this is a fullfillment of Daniel 7 where the 4th beast "thinks to change times and laws". Well there is a PROBLEM. Despite What the Catholic Claim they did not actually Change the commandments, they REORDERED and REGROUPED them. they are all still there just arranged differently.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_commandments#Division_of_the_commandments

This is a big blow to the SDA theology and their interpation of the passage and destroys one of the central pillars of SDA evengalism.

I would like to here peoples views on this.
a. Did the catholics actually change the commandment?

b. What do SDA's do if the claim of the Catholic chruch to change the commandment is proven false?

[NightEternal]

Here are the supposed changes that were made:

http://truth.5u.com/commandments.html (http://truth.5u.com/commandments.html)

Refutation by Catholic sources:

http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/bobs10c.html (http://www.theotokos.co.za/adventism/bobs10c.html)

http://www.fisheaters.com/10commandments.html

More interesting links:

http://www.biblicalheritage.org/Bible%20Studies/10%20Commandments.htm

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/tencomma.htm

The statement 'times and laws' is usually used in specific reference to the change of the Sabbath commandment to Sunday:

http://www.ellengwhite.info/who-changed-the-sabbath-a.htm

[Pennelope]

The Ten Commandments are drawn from 16 verses of Exodus 20. The way the Commandments are generally written is to some degree a paraphrase of the actual verses -- for instance, the commandment to keep holy the Sabbath day is a distillation of 4 separate verses of Exodus.

The Catholic rendering of the commandments similarly groups v. 3 with verses 4, 5 and 6 in the overall commandment to love God and put no gods before him, since the following verses talk about examples of creating other gods and putting them before him. Protestant and SDA renderings take verse 3 by itself and distill verses 4, 5 and 6 into the commandment against graven images.

But I think the thing worth remembering is that it's the Scripture that is inspired rather than the shorthand distillations. In the sense that the graven images were objects of worship and created to be false gods, the Catholic belief is right there with you. No created thing is to be worshiped -- only the creator. (If you're curious about statues, pictures, and the like that use images to call our minds back to the works of God, that's another question for another topic.)

I hope this is helpful.

[Cribstyl]

Recently I read a book that challanged my belief about the 10 commandments.

I am an Seventh-day Adventist. The SDA Church teaches that the Catholic claims to have changed the 10 commandments. The Catholics have indeed claimed this. The SDA church says this is a fullfillment of Daniel 7 where the 4th beast "thinks to change times and laws". Well there is a PROBLEM. Despite What the Catholic Claim they did not actually Change the commandments, they REORDERED and REGROUPED them. they are all still there just arranged differently.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_commandments#Division_of_the_commandments





Obviously your beliefs about the 10.com are not what is challenged.




This is a big blow to the SDA theology and their interpation of the passage and destroys one of the central pillars of SDA evengalism.


I see how interpretation of prophecies can cause "great disappointment." The Gospel preached by the apostles should be the foundation and pillars of every christain church.



I would like to here peoples views on this.
a. Did the catholics actually change the commandment?



Truthfully the bible is the only source to find the 10 commandments. Those of us who believe that the law was fulfilled in Jesus Christ, we donot subject ourselve to the Law. To us the argument is a scam.


b. What do SDA's do if the claim of the Catholic chruch to change the commandment is proven false?



You've proven that SDA teach certain socalled truth in substitution of the gospel of Jesus Christ to draw people into a relationship to God.

The Catholic Church are a historically Christians by beliefs in the doctrines of salvation and faith in Jesus Christ.
All their doctrines are not necessarily taken from God's word. SDA Church only recognizes their authority in cases of disputable judgments.



CRIB

[icedragon101]

Obviously your beliefs about the 10.com are not what is challenged.




I see how interpretation of prophecies can cause "great disappointment." The Gospel preached by the apostles should be the foundation and pillars of every christain church.



Truthfully the bible is the only source to find the 10 commandments. Those of us who believe that the law was fulfilled in Jesus Christ, we donot subject ourselve to the Law. To us the argument is a scam.






You've proven that SDA teach certain socalled truth in substitution of the gospel of Jesus Christ to draw people into a relationship to God.

The Catholic Church are a historically Christians by beliefs in the doctrines of salvation and faith in Jesus Christ.
All their doctrines are not necessarily taken from God's word. SDA Church only recognizes their authority in cases of disputable judgments.



CRIBi don't know what to say, Thanks???

[Cribstyl]

i don't know what to say, Thanks???
You're graceful:thumbsup:

God bless you.

A fact that you can research is what the bible teaches christians about how to look at other believers in Jesus Christ.

Rom 14: 1 Accept Christians who are weak in faith, and don't argue with them about what they think is right or wrong.
2 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) For instance, one person believes it is all right to eat anything. But another believer who has a sensitive conscience will eat only vegetables.
3 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) Those who think it is all right to eat anything must not look down on those who won't. And those who won't eat certain foods must not condemn those who do, for God has accepted them.
4 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) Who are you to condemn God's servants? They are responsible to the Lord, so let him tell them whether they are right or wrong. The Lord's power will help them do as they should.

5 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#)In the same way, some think one day is more holy than another day, while others think every day is alike. Each person should have a personal conviction about this matter.
6 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) Those who have a special day for worshiping the Lord are trying to honor him. Those who eat all kinds of food do so to honor the Lord, since they give thanks to God before eating. And those who won't eat everything also want to please the Lord and give thanks to God.
7 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) For we are not our own masters when we live or when we die.
8 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) While we live, we live to please the Lord. And when we die, we go to be with the Lord. So in life and in death, we belong to the Lord.
9 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) Christ died and rose again for this very purpose, so that he might be Lord of those who are alive and of those who have died.

10 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#)So why do you condemn another Christian [fn1] (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#_fnt_1) ? Why do you look down on another Christian? Remember, each of us will stand personally before the judgment seat of God.
11 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) For the Scriptures say,


" `As surely as I live,' says the Lord,
`every knee will bow to me
and every tongue will confess allegiance to God.' " [fn2] (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#_fnt_2)


12 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#)Yes, each of us will have to give a personal account to God.
13 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) So don't condemn each other anymore. Decide instead to live in such a way that you will not put an obstacle in another Christian's path.

14 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#)I know and am perfectly sure on the authority of the Lord Jesus that no food, in and of itself, is wrong to eat. But if someone believes it is wrong, then for that person it is wrong.
15 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) And if another Christian is distressed by what you eat, you are not acting in love if you eat it. Don't let your eating ruin someone for whom Christ died.
16 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) Then you will not be condemned for doing something you know is all right.
17 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#)For the Kingdom of God is not a matter of what we eat or drink, but of living a life of goodness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.
18 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) If you serve Christ with this attitude, you will please God. And other people will approve of you, too.
19 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) So then, let us aim for harmony in the church and try to build each other up.
20 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#)Don't tear apart the work of God over what you eat. Remember, there is nothing wrong with these things in themselves. But it is wrong to eat anything if it makes another person stumble.
21 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) Don't eat meat or drink wine or do anything else if it might cause another Christian to stumble.
22 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) You may have the faith to believe that there is nothing wrong with what you are doing, but keep it between yourself and God. Blessed are those who do not condemn themselves by doing something they know is all right.
23 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Rom&chapter=14&translation=nltp&x=9&y=10#) But if people have doubts about whether they should eat something, they shouldn't eat it. They would be condemned for not acting in faith before God. If you do anything you believe is not right, you are sinning.


CRIB

[sentipente]

He shall THINK to change times and laws != He SHALL change times and laws.

[MrPolo]

The SDA Church teaches that the Catholic claims to have changed the 10 commandments. The Catholics have indeed claimed this.

How about providing a summary of why the SDA's make this claim. Because Catholics do not claim to have "changed the 10 commandments".

b. What do SDA's do if the claim of the Catholic chruch to change the commandment is proven false?

Apologize? Convert to Catholic?

[icedragon101]

The SDA teaching has changed over the years. As best as I remember. it goes something like this.

As christianity spread from it Jewish home and was planted among the pagan roman empire, it became corrupted. It was influenced by pagan practices. The SDA church points to Icons and statues in the Church as proof of this change. Pagan cult figures were "christianized" in order to appeal to the masses and renamed after the "saints" old testament heroes. Mary is seen as the ultimate Cult figure, according to SDA history she was "Diana" and renamed Mary.

this is all part of the corruption. They say the Catholic church changed the commandments to do away with the "thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image" command. and then changed the 7th day sabbath of the 10 commandments to the pagan day of worship of "Sunday".

The problem is that neither one of these claims are true and can be backed up by history.

catholic church never changed the commandments. They regrouped them. there are 4 different groupings,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments#Division_of_the_commandments


They never replaced a pagan day of worship for the 7thday sabbath. there was NO DAY OF WORSHIP ON A WEEKLY BASIS IN WHICH A PAGAN DEITY WAS WORSHIPED. NONE.

The change of the weekly day of worship came as a result of Christian trying to make a distinction between Jews and Christians. Constantine later commanded that pagans to rest from there labors, but never commanded them to worship. He did so because of a desire to let pagan slaves go to church and the only way to do that was to enforce a civil day of rest so the master would let the christians go to church, this was not a religious day but a civil on that allowed people time off. This was also the introduction of the 7 day week cycle into Roman Society, be fore that they had an 8 day and a 10 day week. The Catholic Church 300 years after Constantine would finally "offically" adopted the change of Sabbath and make it part of cannon law.

this claim is fundamental to the existence of the SDA church because there teaching is that Sabbath is the "seal of God" and that Sunday is evil and the "mark of the beast"

[sentipente]

The question still remains, "Has the RC catechism ever taught something different about the Ten Commandments than is taught in the Douay-Rheims version of the Bible?"

[icedragon101]

the Large one : NO

the small one: it contains an abbreviated version, but no alterations.

[Dedication]

Thinks to change times and laws, isn't the same as changes times and laws.

Adventists see the fourth commandment as God asking people to remember the 7th day Sabbath to keep it holy. Not just A 7th day but THE 7th day as in Gen. 2:2-3.
The Catholic church moved the 7th day to the 1st day of the week.

Even if they didn't change the wording of the text, they changed the meaning, and the Apostolic letter of the late Pope John Paul II attempts to link the Sabbath commandment with Sunday worship.

Same with the statues -- even if the words are still in the Bible, the many statues seem to indicate a change in thought and practice.

That's what Adventists base this on.

[.:KERI:.]

http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x182/kerijordan/Welcome2.gif

[Cribstyl]

Thinks to change times and laws, isn't the same as changes times and laws.

Adventists see the fourth commandment as God asking people to remember the 7th day Sabbath to keep it holy. Not just A 7th day but THE 7th day as in Gen. 2:2-3.
The Catholic church moved the 7th day to the 1st day of the week.

Even if they didn't change the wording of the text, they changed the meaning, and the Apostolic letter of the late Pope John Paul II attempts to link the Sabbath commandment with Sunday worship.

Same with the statues -- even if the words are still in the Bible, the many statues seem to indicate a change in thought and practice.

That's what Adventists base this on.

"God's rest" and sabbath rest are two seperate events.
The bible teaches that God rested on the seventh day only.
The bible does not teach that God rests on every seventh or sabbath days.

Adventist ignor the true doctrines written in scriptures in order to create a restored sabbath commandment as given to EGW "in vision." The error begins by twisting Gen 2:1-3 to say by commentary that Adam entered God's rest. Bible text prove that those to whom it was first preached entered not because of unbelief.
Hbr 4:4 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Hbr&chapter=4&translation=kjv&x=8&y=12#) For he spake in a certain place of the seventh [day] on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works.
Hbr 4:5 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Hbr&chapter=4&translation=kjv&x=8&y=12#) And in this [place] again, If they shall enter into my rest.
Hbr 4:6 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Hbr&chapter=4&translation=kjv&x=8&y=12#) Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:
Hbr 4:7 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Hbr&chapter=4&translation=kjv&x=8&y=12#) Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts.
Hbr 4:8 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Hbr&chapter=4&translation=kjv&x=8&y=12#) For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.
Hbr 4:9 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Hbr&chapter=4&translation=kjv&x=8&y=12#) There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.
Hbr 4:10 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Hbr&chapter=4&translation=kjv&x=8&y=12#) For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God [did] from his.
Hbr 4:11 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Hbr&chapter=4&translation=kjv&x=8&y=12#) Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.


God's rest is not a weekly rest (sabbath) because God's rest was from His finished work as taught by all 3 verses.
Gen 2:1 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Gen&chapter=2&translation=kjv&x=13&y=10#)Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
Gen 2:2 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Gen&chapter=2&translation=kjv&x=13&y=10#)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.
Gen 2:3 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Gen&chapter=2&translation=kjv&x=13&y=10#)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.

Did Adam end all his work? was Adam finished?
Many question about Adam does not fit into this context. We should accept what God's prophets reveal about creation and not add what may contradict God's word.


God first gave the COI the sabbath to prove that they worshipped the one true God who created the world in six days and rested on the seven. The sabbath is a sign.

After God's outstretched hand set the COI free fro Egypt they continued to worshipped the Gods' of Egypt.
The sabbath was given as a sign to prove which God they served.

Exd 16:2 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Exd&chapter=16&translation=kjv&x=6&y=11#)And the whole congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses and Aaron in the wilderness:

Exd 16:3 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Exd&chapter=16&translation=kjv&x=6&y=11#)And the children of Israel said unto them, Would to God we had died by the hand of the LORD in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the flesh pots, [and] when we did eat bread to the full; for ye have brought us forth into this wilderness, to kill this whole assembly with hunger.

Exd 16:4 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Exd&chapter=16&translation=kjv&x=6&y=11#)Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no.

Here is where God said the sabbath is a sign whenHe gave it to them the Law. Nowehere is it hinted as a restoration that was first given to Adam

Exd 31:13 (http://cf.blb.org/search/getBible.cfm?b=Exd&c=31&v=13&version=KJV#13)Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it [is] a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that [ye] may know that I [am] the LORD that doth sanctify you.


Here is God in Ezekel's day talking about when He gave the sabbath....Eze 20:12 (http://cf.blb.org/search/getBible.cfm?b=Eze&c=20&v=12&version=KJV#12)Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I [am] the LORD that sanctify them.

We're to preach the word of God rather than manmade doctrines.

How can they continue to reject Paul's understanding and teaching about when the law was added and when it was fulfilled?


The bible is the source of all truth.

In love
CRIB

[icedragon101]

The SDA teaching has changed over the years. As best as I remember. it goes something like this.

As christianity spread from it Jewish home and was planted among the pagan roman empire, it became corrupted. It was influenced by pagan practices. The SDA church points to Icons and statues in the Church as proof of this change. Pagan cult figures were "christianized" in order to appeal to the masses and renamed after the "saints" old testament heroes. Mary is seen as the ultimate Cult figure, according to SDA history she was "Diana" and renamed Mary.

this is all part of the corruption. They say the Catholic church changed the commandments to do away with the "thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image" command. and then changed the 7th day sabbath of the 10 commandments to the pagan day of worship of "Sunday".

The problem is that neither one of these claims are true and can be backed up by history.

catholic church never changed the commandments. They regrouped them. there are 4 different groupings,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments#Division_of_the_commandments


They never replaced a pagan day of worship for the 7thday sabbath. there was NO DAY OF WORSHIP ON A WEEKLY BASIS IN WHICH A PAGAN DEITY WAS WORSHIPED. NONE.

The change of the weekly day of worship came as a result of Christian trying to make a distinction between Jews and Christians. Constantine later commanded that pagans to rest from there labors, but never commanded them to worship. He did so because of a desire to let pagan slaves go to church and the only way to do that was to enforce a civil day of rest so the master would let the christians go to church, this was not a religious day but a civil on that allowed people time off. This was also the introduction of the 7 day week cycle into Roman Society, be fore that they had an 8 day and a 10 day week. The Catholic Church 300 years after Constantine would finally "offically" adopted the change of Sabbath and make it part of cannon law.

this claim is fundamental to the existence of the SDA church because there teaching is that Sabbath is the "seal of God" and that Sunday is evil and the "mark of the beast"

Thinks to change times and laws, isn't the same as changes times and laws.

Adventists see the fourth commandment as God asking people to remember the 7th day Sabbath to keep it holy. Not just A 7th day but THE 7th day as in Gen. 2:2-3.
The Catholic church moved the 7th day to the 1st day of the week.
what is this based on ? this is not true, the early christians changed the sabbath as a distinction, between jews and Christians. the premise of my argument that SDA postion is based on a false premise. the Sabbath may still be a valid options, but the things we say about "sunday" worship are not true. It was not of Pagan roots and not imposed by the Catholic chruch.
The claim to Sunday being a pagan Day of worship is just not based in fact. There was no pagan day of worship where the pagan went to the temple on a weekly basis. they had no God that they worshiped on Sunday on a weekly basis. in fact they did not have a 7 day weekly cycle until constantine inacted one, they had an 8 day week cycle from about the 100 bc to 331 ad and prior to that it was a 10 week cycle


Even if they didn't change the wording of the text, they changed the meaning, and the Apostolic letter of the late Pope John Paul II attempts to link the Sabbath commandment with Sunday worship.

Same with the statues -- even if the words are still in the Bible, the many statues seem to indicate a change in thought and practice.

That's what Adventists base this on.the sda postion is not true.

[Dedication]

Welcome

Thank-you!

[Dedication]

This is what greatly puzzles me about other Christians. I read about Christians lobbying to have the ten commandments put up in public schools, in court rooms and other public places. I read about them having 10 commandment day. Yet when it comes to the Sabbath suddenly the ten commandments are finished?

And I read things like:



We're to preach the word of God rather than manmade doctrines.

How can they continue to reject Paul's understanding and teaching about when the law was added and when it was fulfilled?

CRIB

Yes, I believe that God BLESSED and SANCTIFIED the seventh DAY. To sanctify something means to make it holy and set it apart for a holy purpose.

Gen 2:2 And on the seventh dayGod ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
Gen 2:3 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.

Ex, 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: ...
20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. (made it holy)


That's what we believe -- God sanctified that day setting it apart for holy purpose and hallowed it (made it holy)

That's why the commandment asks people to
Remember the Sabbath day to KEEP it holy.
Not make it holy, God already did that, but by spending the time with Christ and putting aside our daily work we enter into holy time with our Lord.

[Dedication]

"The Catholic church moved the 7th day to the 1st day of the week."
Icedragon wrote:
what is this based on ? this is not true, the early christians changed the sabbath as a distinction, between jews and Christians.
--------------

You just agreed with me.
Yes, early in Christianity, the church changed the day -- there were several issues, not just one and it was a gradual change spread over centuries--
I have a lot more documentation if anyone is interested--

But Sabbath is drawing near and I have other things now.

Happy Sabbath to all who enjoy this day with Christ!

[icedragon101]

You are asking the Wrong question. The question you should be asking is When and Where the Sabbath was changed and by Whom.

The SDA premise is the problem, they say it comes from Pagan origins and was Codifed by the Catholics as part of the "Great Apostasy" of the church as it became corrupt .

this is simply untrue

[icedragon101]

"The Catholic church moved the 7th day to the 1st day of the week."
Icedragon wrote:
what is this based on ? this is not true, the early christians changed the sabbath as a distinction, between jews and Christians.
--------------

You just agreed with me. No i did not , early in Christianity, the church changed the day it was changed during the time of the apostles by the apostles, That is why it shows up early in the Church.

-- there were several issues, No there was just one. prove you statement

not just one and it was a gradual change spread over centuries-- prove this
I have a lot more documentation if anyone is interested-- please show me, but you have to read some of my documentation. fair is fair.

But Sabbath is drawing near and I have other things now.

Happy Sabbath to all who enjoy this day with Christ! see above

[Dedication]

see above

Please tell me from scripture WHERE an apostle says: Now the First day of the week is Blessed and Sanctified by the Lord our God.

Without such a blessing and sanctification even an apostle has no right to change the day which God blessed and sanctified.

I cannot believe the apostles changed the day -- there would have been such an uproar it would have been plainly spelled out in scripture ... but it is not.

Also I have plenty of documentation that it was not that early and yes, it took centuries.

For me only a command from God in scripture will suffice.

[icedragon101]

No one ever said it was a holy day. just that it was a public day of worship.

Paul say "let no one judge you concerning festivals(yearly), new moons(monthly) and Sabbath(weekly)" Colossians.

Acts says "that they assembled on the first day for the breaking of bread(communion) and to give themselves to the Apostles teaching(sermon)"

The basis for the sunday is the
Ressurection - victory over sin and death (on sunday)
Pentecost - the beginning of the Regin of Christ and the foundation of the chruch. (sunday)

Holy days commerated events.
1. Sabbath -creation
2. Day of Atonement - forgiveness and end of sin
3. Passover- Exodus
4. festival of lights - rededication of temple


There is a history of commeration of events as holy days or days. it is reasonable to conclude that they would have marked the ressurection of Christ and the out pouring of Holy Spirit at founding of the Chruch with some kind of memorial.


There is the text in Rev. "I was in the Spirit on the Lords day"

the SDA chruch says that this is the Sabbath, but only a few years after this term was written it is being applied to Sunday.

Where is the documentation that shows that the term "The Lords Day should be applied to any other day then Sunday.

where did the change of terms take place. it would have been with in 15 years of Revelation being written. no later.

the earlist was 107 AD by Philiy. that is not long after John died, Philiy was alive during the live of the Apostles and would have had direct contact with them.

As Far as the Up roar. Once the Church moved to Antioich, Which was a Greek and Roman town the change would not have been that much of a problem, becaue the jews were not the dominate force, the romans and the Greeks would not care. No longer was it which DAY, but which LORD. that is not to say Sabbath is not valid, just Not the issue the SDA make out to be.

The Linch pin of the SDA postion is that Sunday came from PAGANS, if this can be proven false then the SDA theory is no long valid and sunday is not the Mark of the beast. .

[icedragon101]

Could you please tell me which Pagan god was worshiped on Sunday?

Could you tell me where did you get you information as to the rituals of the pagan god, that say they had a weekly cycle?

Could you tell me, If Rome had an 8 day weekly cycle how could the day of worship have been on the same day as sunday in the the 7 day weekly cycle?

jewish calander compred to the Roman calander

week 1: you get 2 sundays day 1 and day 8
jewish: day 1-7
roman day1-8

Week 2: you get 1 sunday day 14 which is 2 day before the end of the week
jewish day: 8-14
roman day:9-16

Week 3 - you get 1sunday which is 3 days before the week end.
jewish day: 15-21
roman day: 17-24

do you see the problem. the day of worship always changes when you compare it to the jewish calander. Which make no sense what so ever.

[Dedication]

But you have given me no Biblical reason to reject the 4th commandment.

God BLESSED and SANCTIFIED the seventh DAY. To sanctify something means to make it holy and set it apart for a holy purpose.

Gen 2:2 And on the seventh dayGod ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
Gen 2:3 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.

Ex, 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: ...
20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. (made it holy)

God sanctified that day setting it apart for holy purpose and hallowed it (made it holy) from creation.


You wrote --
Acts says "that they assembled on the first day for the breaking of bread(communion) and to give themselves to the Apostles teaching(sermon)"

Where does it say that?
No, it doesn't say that at all -- there is a passage in Acts 20 where they met together on what we call "Saturday evening" after dark, "there were many lights in the room" the Jews reckoning time from evening to evening would call an all night meeting by the day following the night. It was a farewell supper for Paul, and He preached ALL NIGHT till day break Sunday morning. It was hardly a regular type of worship service.

"Breaking bread" was a common Biblical term for sharing a meal, or eating together, and not necessarily refering to "communion". They went from house to house EVERY DAY "breaking bread". (See Acts 2:46)

We have far more evidence from scripture that the apostles worshipped upon the Sabbath 7th day day.

Acts 13:14 Acts 17:2 and 18:4


Then there's Acts 13:42 "And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.
13:43 Now when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas: who, speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God.
13:44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.

Interesting -- the Gentiles wanted Paul to preach to them the NEXT SABBATH. These were Gentiles, but Paul did not say -- "I'll preach to you tomorrow for it's the new worship day" no -- he had them wait a whole week and then preached (not in the synagogue) the next Sabbath (the whole city would not fit into a synagogue) He preached to them in the city square on the NEXT SABBATH.

Acts 16:13
Paul is in a city where there is NO synagogue. So he asks around and finds out some people worship by the river every Sabbath.
"16:13 And on the sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made; and we sat down, and spake unto the women which resorted

[Dedication]

ID101 wrote: The Linch pin of the SDA postion is that Sunday came from PAGANS, if this can be proven false then the SDA theory is no long valid and sunday is not the Mark of the beast.
-----------

I really don't understand your reasoning here.
As far as I understand this "mark of the beast" --
This mark -- is the mark or sign of authority to command worship.

God asks for worship because He IS our Creator, He is the One Who made us.
We are to come to Him in worship upon the day He sanctified (set apart for Holy purposes) and hallowed, (made holy).
Rev. 14 -- "Worship Him Who made heaven and earth and the sea...."

In this way we acknowledge ourselves to be His creatures, under His authority, as well as acknowledging that He is the One Who "sanctifies" us (sets us apart for holy purposes) and delivers us.

Any other day is merely a man made day.
If I were to start disregarding the Sabbath and replace it by worshipping on Friday I'd be accepting the authority of Mohammed over the authority of God.

If I disregard the 7th day Sabbath and replace it with Sunday, I'm accepting the authority of Catholic Church over the authority of God.

"BEAST" is church using polictical power to enforce worship.
.

[Dedication]

Actually this thread is called
"Ten commandments"

It is not called "historical change of the Sabbath"
So most of the question would be "off topic" for this thread.

According to the ten commandments
the Sabbath of the Lord our God is the Seventh Day which He blessed and sanctified at creation.

[icedragon101]

[QUOTE]But you have given me no Biblical reason to reject the 4th commandment. i did not say reject the Sabbath. I said that the claim that the SDA church that Sunday is the "Mark of the Beast" is not valid. YOu are laboring under the false assumption that I think Sabbath keeping is Wrong. I do not. i just don't think that the "Lord"s Day" is wrong like the SDA church says it is.

Paul state clearly in colossians that you are not to judge another person concerning these things

"festivals, new moons and sabbaths"
There you have it biblical evidence that sabbath is not the important issue you make it out to be.

clear
what more do you need.

[icedragon101]

Actually this thread is called
"Ten commandments"

[QUOTE] It is not called "historical change of the Sabbath"
So most of the question would be "off topic" for this thread.dont talk to me about the topic I started this thread I will talk about what I want. I started it with the intention of talking about this subject.

According to the ten commandments
the Sabbath of the Lord our God is the Seventh Day which He blessed and sanctified at creation. Nice way to avoid the argument. You have yet to answer my question.

[icedragon101]

-----------

I really don't understand your reasoning here. you really then don't understand SDA theology and should stop trying to defend it until you do

As far as I understand this "mark of the beast" --
This mark -- is the mark or sign of authority to command worship.yes, and that sign is Sunday worhsip according to SDA's, because it came from pagans and the Roman Catholics and that the Catholic chruch will one day enforce a "false pagan" day of whoship sunday on people. But this is just not true. Since there was no weekly pagan day of worship the enforcement of sunday cannot be the mark of the beast

God asks for worship because He IS our Creator, He is the One Who made us.
We are to come to Him in worship upon the day He sanctified (set apart for Holy purposes) and hallowed, (made holy).
Rev. 14 -- "Worship Him Who made heaven and earth and the sea...."
I don't need a lecture as why we should worship
In this way we acknowledge ourselves to be His creatures, under His authority, as well as acknowledging that He is the One Who "sanctifies" us (sets us apart for holy purposes) and delivers us.mumbo jumbo

Any other day is merely a man made day.
If I were to start disregarding the Sabbath and replace it by worshipping on Friday I'd be accepting the authority of Mohammed over the authority of God.

II I disregard the 7th day Sabbath and replace it with Sunday, I'm accepting the authority of Catholic Church over the authority of God. no this is not true, since the catholic did not change the day. that is what i have been trying to get at. SDA claim that the Roman Catholics have changed the day and they did not. it was changed long before the Roman Catholic church existed.

"BEAST" is church using polictical power to enforce worship. traditional SDA rethoric. you ar avoiding the question. Please don't babble

[icedragon101]

The Sabbath and Sunday

Common Misunderstandings:

1. "We have been told that the Sabbath is the Seal of God."
The Seal of God is NOT the Sabbath! The Bible tells us clearly that the Seal of God is the Holy Spirit indwelling believers the moment they are saved.Ephesians 1:13 (NIV) says,
And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in Him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession-to the praise of His glory.
See Also:
Ephesians 4:30
2 Corinthians 1:21-22
This establishes that sabbath is not the SEAL of GOD


2. "We have been told that the true church in the last days, the Remnant church will be a commandment keeping church. Isn't that what Revelation 12:17 says?" Revelation 12:17 says:
And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and went off to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus.
In the new Covenant, what are the "commandments" of God? Does this mean the Ten Commandments? NO! The Greek word used for the Ten Commandments is "NOMOS". That word is not used here. The word used here is "ENTELE" and means " teaching"
The Apostle John clarifies this and actually tells us what the "Commandments" are that we are to keep:
See I John 5:1-3

I used to use these verses to teach people that they must keep the Ten Commandments, especially the Sabbath. But look at what I John 3:21-24 has to say! 3. "The Roman Catholic Church changed the day of worship from Sabbath (Saturday) to Sunday." "Isn't it paying homage to the Roman church to worship on Sunday, because didn't the Roman Emperor Constantine change the day of worship?"
Costantine's Edict , AD 321

It is claimed that Constantine's edict of March 7, 321 changed the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday. Consantine's edict reads:On the venerable Day of the Sun [venerablili dei Solis] let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed. In the country, however, persons engaged in agriculture may freely and lawfully continue their pursuits.Codex Justinaianus, book 3 title 12,3 trans. In Schaff, History of the Christian Church 5th ed. (New York: Charles Scribner, 1902), vol. 3, P. 380, note1.
Pliny's Letter , AD 107 worhsip and bread were together


Pliny was governor of Bithynia, in Asia Minor, from AD 106-108. He wrote in AD 107 to Trajan, the emperor, concerning the Christians. This is what he said:They were want to meet together on a stated day before it was light, and sign among themselves alternately a hymn to Christ as God....When these things were performed, it was their custom to separate and then to come together again to a meal which they ate in common without any disorder.
We know the day the early church broke bread was on a Sunday.Upon the first day of the week when the disciple came together to break bread. Acts 20:7 this establishes that they were meeting on the first day for communion and a sermon
The Epistle of Barnabas, AD 120 establishes an early record of the 8th day as a joyful dayIn chapter 2 the Epistle of Barnabas says:
"Incense is a vain abomination unto me, and your new moons and Sabbaths I cannot endure. He has, therefore, abolished these things."
When he speaks of the first day of the week, Barnabas says:
"Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day, also, on which Jesus rose again from the dead." Chapter 25
Statements By the Church Fathers:

Justin Martyr, AD 140 - establishes change short time after

Note: Justin's "Apology" was written at Rome about the year AD 140, only 44 years after the Apostle John recieved the vision of the Revelation at Patmos.
The Schalff-herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge states this about Justin's works: "In these works Justin professes to present the system of doctrine held by all Christians and seeks to be orthodox on all points. The only difference he knows of as existing between Christians concerned the millennium. Thus Justin is an incontrovertible witness for the unity of faith in the Church of his day and that fact that the Gentile type of Christianity prevailed." Quoted by Canright in the Complete Testimony of the Early Fathers, Fleming H. Revell, 1916, pp. 24-25.
Note: At this early date , AD 140, the only difference among Christians was about the millennium. At that time , they had no disagreement in keeping Sunday, and as you will see, Justin says that was the day on which all Christians worshiped.
In chapter 67 of his first Apology, entitled, "Weekly Worship of the Christian" writing to the pagan emperor, Justin states:"...we bless the Maker of all through His Son, Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost. And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the Apostles or writings of the prophets are read as long as time permits;then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructed, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and , as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought...But Sunday is the day on which God, having wrought the change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead."The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol 1, pp. 185-186 (Emphasis Added)
Clement of Alexandria, in Egypt, AD 194 Clement, writing around AD 194 says:
"He, in fulfillment of the precept, keeps the Lord's Day when he abandons an evil disposition, and assumes that the Gnostic, glorifying the Lord's resurrection in himself." Book 7, Chapter 12 (emphasis added)
Ignatius of Antioch, the third bishop of Antioch, who died in AD 108, wrote: the Lord's day reference Same as Revelation:a mere 12 years after John recieved Revelation. Sda's say that the Lord's day in Revelation is a reference to Sabbath, fine, but how and when did the change of the term become associated with the Ressurection a Mere 12 years after John wrote the Revelation? Where is the documentation that proves the Change? if you cannot prove the change then we must conclude that the "Lords day" in Revelation was Sunday for they would be refering to same thing.
"If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord's Day, on which also our life has sprung up again in Him....Let us therefore no longer keep the Sabbath after the Jewish manner, and rejoice in days of idleness; for "he that does not work, let him not eat"....let every friend of Christ keep the Lord's day as a festival, the resurrection day, the queen and chief of all days [of the week]" Epistle of Ignatius to Magnesians, "The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol, 1, pp. 62-63 (emphasis added).
Tertullian of Africa, wrote around AD 200:In his Apology, Chapter 16 Tertullian says:
"We solemnize the day after Saturday in contradistinction to those who call this day their Sabbath, and devote it to ease and eating, deviating from the old Jewish customs, which they are not very ignorant of."
"Others, with greater regard to good manners, it must be confessed , suppose that the sun is the god of the Christians, because it is a well-known fact that we pray towards the east, or because we make Sunday a day of festivity " Ancient Syriac Documents, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3, P. 123
Note: The early church explained why they prayed toward the east. It was because, "...as the lightning which lighteneth from the east and is seen even to the west, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be; that by this we might know and understand that He will appear from the East suddenly" Ancient Syriac Documents, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 8, P 668
Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth in Greece, AD 170

Dionysius was Bishop of Corinth, the Church which Paul raised up and to which he gave the command about Sunday collections, in I Cor. 16:1-2. He says:"We passed this holy Lord's Day, in which we read your letter, from the constant reading of which we shall be able to draw admonition" Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, BK. 3, Chapter 23 (Emphasis Added)

[Dedication]

I wasn't giving you "a lecture".

Nor was I "telling you what you should write".

Nor do I claim to be speaking for the church as a whole, I'm just giving my understanding as member of the church.

Why are you so defensive? So demanding? So harsh?

I've only been a member here for about three days, I read the rules and wanted to abide by them.


I didn't join to get into a bitter fight.
I have a feeling even if I spent hours digging up all the information to show it, it would still just be a "fight".

The only reason I even came to this thread was because you offered me an invitation for friendship, but I don't see much friendship here, so I may just move on.

Thank-you.

[icedragon101]

[quote]I wasn't giving you "a lecture".
yes you were, it is a sub concious thing SDA's Do. I don't think you did it on purpose but you were scolding.

Nor was I "telling you what you should write".

Nor do I claim to be speaking for the church as a whole, I'm just giving my understanding as member of the church.
Why are you so defensive? So demanding? So harsh?I don't think i am being defensive, In fact that is what I think you are being.

I've only been a member here for about three days, I read the rules and wanted to abide by them.
Welcome to CF

I didn't join to get into a bitter fight.
I have a feeling even if I spent hours digging up all the information to show it, it would still just be a "fight".I don't want a bitter fight either, so it will end here.

The only reason I even came to this thread was because you offered me an invitation for friendship, but I don't see much friendship here, so I may just move on.I am sorry you think so. I feel like you are playing with me an I don't like it.

this is a serious discussion for me, because I may be leaving the SDA church and I would like some real answers before I leave. If I come across a bit serious I am sorry, but this is really important.

[icedragon101]

I posted some questioned and you side stepped, that is very frustrating.

[icedragon101]

what you sensed was not me being defensive but frustration

[Dedication]

The Sabbath and Sunday

Common Misunderstandings:

1. "We have been told that the Sabbath is the Seal of God."
The Seal of God is NOT the Sabbath! The Bible tells us clearly that the Seal of God is the Holy Spirit indwelling believers the moment they are saved.
Ephesians 1:13 (NIV) says,
And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in Him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession-to the praise of His glory.


The KJV simply says
"ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise".
The tense or concept of the verb is considered without
regard for past, present, or future time.

In other words THE HOLY SPIRIT is the agency by which a person is sealed. He is the ONE doing the sealing.


See Also:
Ephesians 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.


Again we see that it is the Holy Spirit by which we are sealed. He is doing the sealing, and if we grieve Him away, we do this by refusing to follow His leading in our lives.
The Holy Spirit's work according to John 16:13, is to guide us into all truth, He also reproves of sin, and for righteousness and judgment (John 16:8) It is by the Holy Spirit that we "put to death the deeds of the carnal flesh" (Romans 8:13)


This establishes that sabbath is not the SEAL of GOD

No, it only established HOW we are sealed. It is the work of the Holy Spirit to do the sealing work in us, but it does not say what the seal itself is.

Rev. 7:2 And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God:.... Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.

So here in Rev. 7 an angel has the seal of God .... he's not doing the sealing, but is apparently marking those who have been sealed... 144,000. And notice it is the servants (those who serve God) that receive the seal.

Let's follow this idea further.

Rev. 14:1,4 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads......These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth.

Now we realize it's having God's name written upon the forehead. It includes following the Lamb everywhere.
But what does that mean?

This sealing of people in the New Testament denotes identification of those who are God’s faithful people—His servants.

At the end of time Revelation makes it clear that this sealing takes on more significance. Ezekiel 9 will again be repeated, for only those who have a special seal prior to destruction will escape that destruction. In Revelation God’s faithful people are sealed (14:1; 22:4) and those who are opposed to God and the gospel are described as being marked with the name of the beast – his servants. (13:16-17, 14:9; 16:2 19:20.

The mind signifies the thinking processes of a person. The forehead is where choices of right and wrong and the capacity for worship is located. The sealing thus signifies the choice of each person. Whether they have chosen to be servants of God and belong to Him, or whether they have chosen to be the servants of sin, and belong to “the man of sin” in 2 Thess. 2.

Thus the MARK or identifying outward sign that sealing has taken place, is revealed in ---

Well, let the Bible explain it for right in the midst of the discussion of the mark and seal we find:

“Here is the patience of the saints, here are they that keep the commandments of God and have the faith of Jesus.” Rev. 14:12.

Earlier the call went forth:
“Worship Him Who made heaven and earth, the sea…”
Rev. 14:7

Which commandment deals with acknowledging God as the one who made heaven and earth and the sea…?

True we are to follow by faith Christ in EVERY command, a mere outward compliance to any one aspect is not enough, the whole heart and life must be yielded to Christ, but there is only ONE commandment that is the point of truth especially controverted, and if and when that point becomes a matter of legislation the testing time will be here.

[Dedication]

2. "We have been told that the true church in the last days, the Remnant church will be a commandment keeping church. Isn't that what Revelation 12:17 says?"
Revelation 12:17 says:
And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and went off to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus.
In the new Covenant, what are the "commandments" of God? Does this mean the Ten Commandments? NO! The Greek word used for the Ten Commandments is "NOMOS". That word is not used here. The word used here is "ENTELE" and means " teaching"
The Apostle John clarifies this and actually tells us what the "Commandments" are that we are to keep:
See I John 5:1-3

I used to use these verses to teach people that they must keep the Ten Commandments, especially the Sabbath. But look at what I John 3:21-24 has to say!

The idea here is that LOVE abolishes the definitions of love, which is very false deductive reasoning.

It is very true that an obedience without love for God or man is a useless and senseless thing, Paul makes that perfectly clear in 1 Cor. 13. Without love everything else falls far short, and is nothing more then tinkling brass.

LOVE is the very attribute underlying all goodness, righteousness and holiness. God is LOVE.

Yet, the supposition that LOVE somehow exists outside of God’s law and operates in disregard to that law is a totally wrong concept.

All through John's writings you will see a tension between the way the Jews interpreted God’s laws and the foundation upon which God’s laws are based which is love. So John says in 1 John 2:7 – a new command commandment I give you, but it’s not a new commandment, it’s an old commandment…..
That commandment was already in effect in Deut. (see Duet. 6:5, 10:12; 10:19; Lev. 19:18)

Deut. 11:22 For if ye shall diligently keep all these commandments which I command you, to do them, to love the LORD your God, to walk in all his ways, and to cleave unto him; Lev. 19:18 thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I [am] the LORD.

It's been said that the Greek word "nomos" refers to the Ten Commandments, while "entole" refers to Christ's new law of love.
Now to be fair I think we should look to see how the word "entole" is used in the entire New Testament before we make any conclusions. As we do, we come up with some interesting insights.

Jesus uses the word “entole” to refer to the 10 commandments
(See Matt. 15:3-6; 19:17-19, Mark 7:9-10, 12:29-30 and Luke refers to the Sabbath commandment as “entole” in Luke 23:56)

Paul uses the word “entole”
Romans 7:8-13 he uses both "nomos"(law) and "entole" (commandment) as if they were synonyms, in his definition of sin as being the breaking of the law and commandments. The tenth commandment, "you shall not covet" is used as an example, clearly demonstrating that sin is the breaking of the ten commandments.
In this next verse Paul not only links the word "entole" with the ten commandments, he also links the ten commandments with the so called new commandment to love ones neighbour.

Romans 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, (entole) it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Ephesians 6.2 Honour thy father and mother; which is the first commandment (entole) with promise;

[Dedication]

3. "The Roman Catholic Church changed the day of worship from Sabbath (Saturday) to Sunday." "Isn't it paying homage to the Roman church to worship on Sunday, because didn't the Roman Emperor Constantine change the day of worship?"
Costantine's Edict , AD 321

It is claimed that Constantine's edict of March 7, 321 changed the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday. Consantine's edict reads:
On the venerable Day of the Sun [venerablili dei Solis] let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed. In the country, however, persons engaged in agriculture may freely and lawfully continue their pursuits.Codex Justinaianus, book 3 title 12,3 trans. In Schaff, History of the Christian Church 5th ed. (New York: Charles Scribner, 1902), vol. 3, P. 380, note1.

Yes, we know the edit, and it’s very revealing what Constantine called the 1st day of the week.
The venerable Day of the Sun.
His edict marks the first step taken to legislate “rest” on the venerable day of the sun.

Pope Sylvester I was contemporary with Constantine.

Quoting:

Pope Sylvester first among the Romans ordered that the names of the days [of the week], which they previously called after the name of their gods, that is, [the day] of the Sun, [the day] of the Moon, [the day] of Mars, [the day] of Mercury, [the day] of Jupiter, [the day] of Venus, [the day] of Saturn, they should call feriae thereafter, that is the first feria, the second feria, the third feria, the fourth feria, the fifth feria, the sixth feria, because that in the beginning of Genesis it is written that God said concerning each day: on the first, "Let there be light:; on the second, "Let there be a firmament"; on the third, "Let the earth bring forth verdure"; etc. But he [Sylvester] ordered [them] to call the Sabbath by the ancient term of the law, [to call] the first feria the "Lord's day," because on it the Lord rose [from the dead], Moreover, the same pope decreed that the rest of the Sabbath should be transferred rather to the Lord's day [Sunday], in order that on that day we should rest from worldly works for the praise of God.7 (De Clericorum Institutione (Concerning the Instruction of the Clergymen), Book II, Chap. XLVI, as translated by the writer from the Latin text in Migne's Patrologia Latina, Vol. CVII, col. 361)
“Note particularly, he says that "the same pope [Sylvester I] decreed that the rest of the Sabbath should be transferred rather to the Lord's day [Sunday]."8 According to this statement, he was the first bishop to introduce the idea that the divinely appointed rest of the Sabbath day should be transferred to the first day of the week. This is significant, especially in view of the fact that it was during Sylvester's pontificate that the emperor of Rome [Constantine] issued the first civil laws compelling men to rest from secular labor on Sunday, and that Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, was the first theologian on record to present arguments, allegedly from the Scriptures, that Christ did transfer the rest of the Sabbath day to Sunday.”
(Sabbath and Sunday in Early Christianity, by Robert L. Odom, © 1977 by the Review and Herald Publishing Association (An Adventist publishing house), pages 248.

[Dedication]

Pliny's Letter , AD 107 worship and bread were together


Pliny was governor of Bithynia, in Asia Minor, from AD 106-108. He wrote in AD 107 to Trajan, the emperor, concerning the Christians. This is what he said:
They were want to meet together on a stated day before it was light, and sign among themselves alternately a hymn to Christ as God....When these things were performed, it was their custom to separate and then to come together again to a meal which they ate in common without any disorder.


Taking for granted the very point that should be proved, is no new feature for Sunday vindication in this digging for truth in history, the fact is there is NOTHING in Pliny’s letter to prove these Christian’s were meeting on Sunday. To say there is, is pure supposition with no support what-so-ever from the letter itself.







We know the day the early church broke bread was on a Sunday.
Upon the first day of the week when the disciple came together to break bread. Acts 20:7this establishes that they were meeting on the first day for communion and a sermon
No, my friend, I already showed you that Acts 20 is a Saturday night meeting, a lot of preaching took place BEFORE midnight, and yes, it continued till daybreak when Paul (not resting at all) started on a long journey.
Besides, they broke BREAD EVERYDAY. Acts 2:46
And I already pointed out that there are far more texts of worship upon the 7th day in Acts (including Gentiles) .

This text in Acts 20 far more supports the concept that Paul spent the Sabbath day with the believers, and that evening they came together to share a meal and listened to him once more before he left. Sunday was given to traveling.

[Dedication]

The Epistle of Barnabas, AD 120 establishes an early record of the 8th day as a joyful day
In chapter 2 the Epistle of Barnabas says:
"Incense is a vain abomination unto me, and your new moons and Sabbaths I cannot endure. He has, therefore, abolished these things."
When he speaks of the first day of the week, Barnabas says:
"Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day, also, on which Jesus rose again from the dead." Chapter 25


The so called epistle of Barnabas is spurious, put out by some anonymous Gnostic writer sometime in the second century, in all probability at Alexandria. Its deceptive apostolic flag, allowed it to gain access into the Christian church.

The “eighth day” concept comes from Gnosticism which even in Paul’s day was already starting to cause problems and perverting truth.


This Gnostic method of interpreting scripture furnishes us the very key, not to a higher knowledge of Bible truths as it claims, but it assaulted the church early and began to unlock the mystery of lawlessness.

However, even this "barnabas" does not really support the idea that the apostles transferred from Saturday to Sunday.

He wrote:
""Thou shalt sanctify it with pure hands and a pure heart." If, therefore, any one can now sanctify the day which God hath sanctified, except he is pure in heart in all things, we are deceived. Behold, therefore: certainly then one properly resting sanctifies it, when we ourselves, having received the promise, wickedness no longer existing, and all things having been made new by the Lord, shall be able to work righteousness. Then we shall be able to sanctify it, having been first sanctified ourselves. ... he meaneth. The sabbaths, that now are, are not acceptable unto me,. . . Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfullness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead."

In other words, He agrees that the 7th day is the day God sanctified and made holy. His gnostic reasoning is that people are too sinful to worship on God's holy day so they worship on the "eighth" day instead.

Notice he gives no Biblical grounds whatsoever. It's purely gnostic reasoning -- gnostic reasoning that has gained powerful admission into the Christian church. It is NOT BIBLICAL.

[Dedication]

Justin Martyr, AD 140 - establishes change short time after

Note: Justin's "Apology" was written at Rome about the year AD 140, only 44 years after the Apostle John received the vision of the Revelation at Patmos.
In chapter 67 of his first Apology, entitled, "Weekly Worship of the Christian" writing to the pagan emperor, Justin states:
"...we bless the Maker of all through His Son, Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost. And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the Apostles or writings of the prophets are read as long as time permits;then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructed, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and , as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought...But Sunday is the day on which God, having wrought the change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead."The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol 1, pp. 185-186 (Emphasis Added)

Justin throughout his works usesthe heathen designations for the seventh and the first days of the week” which is worthy of note. Even at this time, the 1st day was called “the day of the Sun” in the pagan world.

Justinian was raised a pagan, in a city that was planted in Palestine by the Emperor after the destruction of Jerusalem.
You may recall that in 135 A.D. (in the impressionable years of Justin) the Emperor Hadrian put down an insurrection of the Jews, forbad Jews to live in Israel, and made a decree AGAINST Sabbath worship. Christian churches which hither to had bishops with Jewish blood, now were replaced by Gentiles.

Justinian was a philosopher; he converted to Christianity and became a Christian philosopher. His apology according to most sources was written about 147-156 A.D. while he was living in Rome. Justin believed that the Mosaic law was added to Scripture as an afterthought because of the sinfulness of the Jews and for no other reason. It appears he was influenced by the same growing Gnostic beliefs as false Barnabbas. He was writing to an Emperor trying to place Christianity in a good light according to what an emperor would approve.

Were there Christians meeting on the first day due to all the pressure? I’m sure there was. Does it mean the apostles changed the day for worship? No it does not.

[icedragon101]

T[quote]he so called epistle of Barnabas is spurious, put out by some anonymous Gnostic writer sometime in the second century, in all probability at Alexandria. Its deceptive apostolic flag, allowed it to gain access into the Christian church. there is debate on this. some put in at 70 AD some as late as 130AD. this is historical evidence not biblical.

The “eighth day” concept comes from Gnosticism which even in Paul’s day was already starting to cause problems and perverting truth.
the eight day comes form the roman calender which had 8 day in the week


The goal is not to show from the bible that there was a change.That is not my objective.

But
The to show that the conclunsion about sunday being the mark of the beast is not true.

The claim of the sda chruch is that sunday is the mark of the beast, but how is this substantiated?

Where does this come from?

The fact that the day of worship changed from sabbath to sunday is not an indication that Sunday came from paganism and part of the apostasy of the Roman Catholic church . prove this.

I it can be shown that sunday did not originate with the pagans or from the Apostasy then it must have come from some where. The only other explination would be from the Apostles themselves.

[Dedication]

Ignatius of Antioch, the third bishop of Antioch, who died in AD 108, wrote: the Lord's day reference Same as Revelation:a mere 12 years after John recieved Revelation.Sda's say that the Lord's day in Revelation is a reference to Sabbath, fine, but how and when did the change of the term become associated with the Ressurection a Mere 12 years after John wrote the Revelation? Where is the documentation that proves the Change? if you cannot prove the change then we must conclude that the "Lords day" in Revelation was Sunday for they would be refering to same thing.

"If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord's Day, on which also our life has sprung up again in Him....Let us therefore no longer keep the Sabbath after the Jewish manner, and rejoice in days of idleness; for "he that does not work, let him not eat"....let every friend of Christ keep the Lord's day as a festival, the resurrection day, the queen and chief of all days [of the week]" Epistle of Ignatius to Magnesians, "The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol, 1, pp. 62-63 (emphasis added)

First thing we must consider is that Ignatius’ writings have had exceeding tampering done to them. Eusebius and Jerome enumerate seven Ignatian epistles. But in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries this number was swelled to fifteen, among them two letters to the apostle John and one to the Virgin Mary. Although these epistles “swarm with offences against history and chronology,” yet the Catholics at first accepted them all as genuine. Calvin condemned the whole lot as “abominable trash”. Now people including Catholics “think” they have weeded out the spurious from the original and agreed on seven once again, but even yet there are conflicts as to whether a longer edition or shorter edition is the authentic writing of this early bishop. It is obvious these writings have suffered much interpolating.


The passage often used to vindicate an early Sunday keeping and an early usage of the term “Lord’s Day” comes from the epistle to the Magnesians, chapters 8 and 9: J.A. Hessey translated it thus: “Be not deceived with heterodox opinions, nor old, unprofitable fables. For if we still live according to Judaism, we confess that we have not received grace. For even the most holy prophets lived according to Jesus Christ…..

If they then who were concerned in old things, arrived at a newness of hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living according to the Lord’s life, by which our life sprang up by him and by his death,. . .how can we live with out him, whose disciples even the prophets were, and in spirit waited for him as their teacher? Wherefore, he whom they justly waited for, when he came, raised them up from the dead.”
Kuriakos zoe = Lord’s LIFE, not Lord’s day. No mention whatever is made here of Sunday, nor is it called here the Lord’s day. That term was NOT applied to the 1st day of the week until many years later. (early 300's) The argument that Sunday was called the “Lord’s Day within a few short years after John the Revelator died, falls flat in the water.

Kuriakos zoe is NOT Lord’s Day, it is Lord’s life.

Ignatius, if it be Ignatius, is speaking of living a life like Christ, and Christ most certainly kept the Sabbath.

Ignatius, appears to be talking about the ancient prophets, not about Christians. It would thus appear that this quote must be talking about something other than breaking the Sabbath, since the ancient prophets most certainly did keep the Sabbath.

So the whole thing is rather confusing.

Now let’s look at the longer version ---

Probably written in the early 300’s by someone expanding and interloping upon the bishops writings to encourage the new movements happening at that time.

It reads:

“For if we still live according to the Jewish law, and the circumcision of the flesh, we deny that we have received grace.—ch. 8.

But let every one of you keep the Sabbath after a spiritual manner, rejoicing in meditation on the law, not in relaxation of the body, admiring the workmanship of God, and not eating things prepared the day before, nor using lukewarm drinks, and walking within a prescribed space, nor finding delight in dancing and plaudits which have no sense in them. And after the observance of the Sabbath, let every friend of Christ keepthe Lord's Day as a festival, the resurrection-day, the queen and chief of all the days [of the week].—ch. 9.

It is absurd to speak of Jesus Christ with the tongue, and to cherish in the mind a Judaism which has now come to an end. For where there is Christianity there cannot be Judaism.—ch. 10.
This quote that is supposed to prove that Christians had given up the Sabbath early on, which (while claiming to be from Ignatius) was written in the early 300’s and is actually commanding "every" Christian to "keep the Sabbath"! Moreover, since the quote also forbids Judaizing, it follows that the writer of the long form of this epistle believed that Sabbath keeping transcended Judiaism. In other words, a Christian could tell people that they needed to keep the Sabbath, and by stripping it of Jewish petty rules, present it’s claims without Judaizing! (A concept that disappeared in later centuries as the Sunday push became ever stronger)

[Dedication]

The Roman calendar had an eight day weekly cycle BEFORE Christ was born.

However most after 19 BC observed a seven day week. Thus any conflicts with eight or seven day weeks is not part of the equation for Christians.

The Jews always had a seven day weekly cycle, and the Jews were God's people with God's Holy Day which they kept in tact all those years.

The eight day week was out of sync and until the Romans adopted the standard seven day week they were in a mess in more ways then one with their calendars until they settled for the Julian calendar which we now still follow.

Babylonians had the seven day week, each day named after one of their gods, and the Romans simply renamed their seven day week after their own gods. Interestingly the one god remained constant (the day of the sun)

Eygpt had a seven day week -- that's where Julius Ceasar started importing the idea of a seven day week for Rome. True the eight day Roman week continued to rival the week as set forth by God in CREATION, and held by God's people throughout the centuries, but when Christianity began to spread out from it's Jewish birthplace, the seven day week went with it and was fully established throughout the world.

So truly --
The seven day week originated from GOD Himself at Creation, any eight day week is in itself a pagan idea.

An eighth day in the week is clearly a departure from the God ordained system.

I've often wondered if the "eighth head" of a seven headed beast in Rev. 17 has something to do with this as well.

[Dedication]

Sunday worshipping came from a mixture of things --

One, as I pointed out in one post was the decree by Hadrain about 135 A.D.outlawing worship upon the Sabbath day. If they couldn't worship on Sabbath, they met together the following day, (besides they assured themselves, it was the resurrection day)

Two: due to the persecution of Jews who were constantly rebelling against Rome and Rome was coming down on them with an extremely heavy hand (especially in 135 A.D.practically attempting to wipe them off the map), Christians did not want to be identified with them.

Thirdly, Gnostic beliefs, which were mixing paganism and eastern mystism with Greek philosophy etc. etc. with Christian sounding themes and were coming up with "eighth day" ideas, which by your own words comes from Rome.

Finally, the "venerable day of the sun" was indeed a day to honor the Sun god. Go back even over the early quotes you gave to supposedly "prove" early Christians worshipping on Sunday. How is it that they wrote about SUNDAY in those early years to Roman emperors if supposedly there was no sunday???

Constantine was a sunworshipper.

The official recognition of sun worship in the Roman Empire began during the time of Aurelian when he instituted the cult of "Sol invictus". The invinsible sun.

Constantines coins were inscribed: "SOL INVICTO COMITI" (COMMITTED TO THE INVINCIBLE SUN).

Sun worship and Mithraism were basically the same thing. Mithraism was at an all time high as the merger between Christianity and Rome took place.

QUOTE:
Mithraism was the fastest growing cult just prior to the year 321 and was the major rival of Christianity. Franz Cumont, a scholar of Mithraism, wrote, quoting Minicius Felix, "The Mithraists also observed Sun-day and kept sacred the 25th of December as the birthday of the Sun." Many scholars have pointed out how the Sun-worshipping Mithraists, the Sun-worshipping Manicheans and the Christians were all syncretized and reconciled when Constantine led the takeover by Christianity, even if it meant the latters surrender of most vital Scriptural truths, especially its Hebrew roots.

However, other Sun-worshipping groups were included too, because of the general importance and popularity of Sol Invictus, the Invincible Sun-Deity. Mario Righetti, a renowned Catholic liturgist, writes, "the Church of Rome, to facilitate the acceptance of the faith by the pagan masses, found it convenient to institute the 25th December as the feast of the temporal birth of Christ, to divert them from the pagan feast, celebrated on the same day in honor of the 'Invincible Sun', Mithras."
"Come out of her My People" by C. J. Koster

[icedragon101]

The Roman calendar had an eight day weekly cycle BEFORE Christ was born.

[quote] However most after 19 BC observed a seven day week. Thus any conflicts with eight or seven day weeks is not part of the equation for Christians.I really appreciate the effort, but could you quote references. I would like to check your source

The Jews always had a seven day weekly cycle, and the Jews were God's people with God's Holy Day which they kept in tact all those years.I am aware of this and it is not a disputed issue

The eight day week was out of sync and until the Romans adopted the standard seven day week they were in a mess in more ways then one with their calendars until they settled for the Julian calendar which we now still follow. out of sync, I agree. however when was it changed. As I under stand it the first time ti was an empire wide law was when constantine changed it.

Babylonians had the seven day week, each day named after one of their gods, and the Romans simply renamed their seven day week after their own gods. Interestingly the one god remained constant (the day of the sun)this issue with he name is not important, the issue is weather there was a weekly worship on the day of the sun,? was it just a civil calender or a religious one? simply because it is named after a god does not mean it was religious, there has to be a religious festival or ceremony to accompany it. if it was religous which God was it?
Eygpt had a seven day week -- that's where Julius Ceasar started importing the idea of a seven day week for Rome. True the eight day Roman week continued to rival the week as set forth by God in CREATION, and held by God's people throughout the centuries, but when Christianity began to spread out from it's Jewish birthplace, the seven day week went with it and was fully established throughout the world. I like this quote just need a source, this might actually be helpful. thank-you

So truly --
The seven day week originated from GOD Himself at Creation, any eight day week is in itself a pagan idea.

An eighth day in the week is clearly a departure from the God ordained system.NO disagreement here. i am not advocating for an 8day week, just that was what was reference in the

I've often wondered if the "eighth head" of a seven headed beast in Rev. 17 has something to do with this as well. might be something

[Dedication]

The Roman calendar had an eight day weekly cycle BEFORE Christ was born.

I really appreciate the effort, but could you quote references. I would like to check your source

I was simply surfing the net looking for "eight day week roman" and found a huge conflicting bunch of information.
Yes, there needs to be some authentic source on this, the confusion of information on the web shows there is no unification of thought on this matter. By what I've read it appears nobody seems to know for sure.

One source
www.12x30.net/artifact.html (http://www.12x30.net/artifact.html)
had a nice clay tablet with Roman Numerals and pictures and names and seven pegs for seven days -- a seven week calendar looking very Roman, but the website said it couldn't be Roman because Rome had an eight week market week --- hmmmmmmmm.:confused:

One website: therthdimension.org/AncientRome/Calendar/calendar.html
gave the dates I quoted.

Personally from what I could gather, the seven day week was being more and more accepted by the Romans from the time of Julius Ceasar , and was finally made official by decree by Constantine.

The Babylonians had a seven day week -- and the Mithra (sunworshipping) cult so popular in Constantines day came from the east.

Another interesting thought from another website:

"The 7-day week was introduced in Rome (where ides, nones, and calends were the vogue) in the first century A.D. by Persian astrology fanatics, not by Christians or Jews." www.ac.wwu.edu/~stephan/Astronomy/7day.html (http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~stephan/Astronomy/7day.html)

Then there's still the letter of Justin the martyr to a Roman emperor around 156 AD talking about "the day called Sunday."

By the way are links allowed?
Some forums don't like them?
If not please tell me and I'll delete the above.

[icedragon101]

The Babylonians had a seven day week -- and the Mithra (sunworshipping) cult so popular in Constantines day came from the east. do you have a link for this?

[Tonks]

Recently I read a book that challanged my belief about the 10 commandments.

I am an Seventh-day Adventist. The SDA Church teaches that the Catholic claims to have changed the 10 commandments. The Catholics have indeed claimed this. The SDA church says this is a fullfillment of Daniel 7 where the 4th beast "thinks to change times and laws". Well there is a PROBLEM. Despite What the Catholic Claim they did not actually Change the commandments, they REORDERED and REGROUPED them. they are all still there just arranged differently.


Properly, the Roman church uses the numbering of the commandments as they were originally numbered. As do the Lutherans and I believe the Orthodox.

The first Catechism, the Roman Catechism, issued after Trent can be found here (http://www.catholicapologetics.info/thechurch/catechism/trentc.htm). Section 3 deals with the Decaloge

[Dedication]

do you have a link for this?

Each website is some person's opinion as to how to look at evidence, and reflects upon their own world view. Their information is informative however I tend to incorporate things into my own world view which puts different interpretations on some things.

My world view takes into account Genesis scripture -- for example -- I believe God ceated the things on this planet in literal six days, and rested, blessed and sanctified the 7th, thus creating the week (which I don't think you disgree with) and I also believe that there was a flood that destroyed most all of the first creation and life started anew with Noah and his sons in the general area of Mesopotamia.

I'm only restating that because it bears on how I interprete data from websites.

Since Noah and his family were worshipers of God and knew all about Adam and Eve and creation and the Sabbath I interprete the Babylonian or Sumeriancultures in Mesopotamia as having in their back ground the TRUE story but that they preverted it into their pagan religions.

This tends to reverse the things one often reads on the internet where a popular line of thought is that Isael merely picked up their beliefs from the nations around them and modified them somewhat.

An example is this website (http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~loxias/week.htm)
which points out the seven day week comes from the first culture (after the flood) Sumeria but of course doesn't recognize that early Sumerians KNEW NOAH and the truth, and preverted it, their culture still had traces of truth mixed in with their plunge into paganism, and God called Abraham out of there to preseve the real truth.

Anyway --
Back to your question.

A simple and probably not too authoritive website on the week (http://qwertyranch.blogspot.com/2006/12/fascinated-by-week.html)

States:

"The seven-day week began with the Sumerians, who tied seven days to seven gods and planets. The Babylonians took the week and changed Sumerian gods to their Babylonian equivalents"


"Constantine believed that Mithra and Jesus were the same god. He told Christians to stop worshipping on the sabbath and worship on the day of Mithra the Invincible Sun instead. So, on Sunday, celebrate the sun!"

Here's a more authoritative website the British Mythology on Mithra (http://www.mysteriousbritain.co.uk/gods&goddesses/mithra.html)



Mithra

The Sun God worshipped throughout the Roman Empire since it was first encountered by them in Persia during the reign of Emperor Nero...

Each day of the week was attributed to a planet, and the day associated with the Sun was held to be very holy.
Or how about this website:
The Iowa State Daily Article on Mithra (http://media.www.iowastatedaily.com/media/storage/paper818/news/2004/12/08/HotTopics/Column.Mithra.Is.The.Reason.For.The.Season-1102514.shtml)

And the Wikipedi
On Mithraism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithraism)

"It has been claimed that both Mithraism and Christianity considered Sunday their holy day, though for different reasons, although the evidence that Mithraists practiced weekly worship, any more than any other pagan religion of the time, is lacking."
And really that shouldn't surprise us -- pagans were more into celebrations and rituals then into what we as Christians know as "worship".

However, every study into Mitharism shows this is a great counterfeit of the true CHRIST.

Here's a unitarian website on Mitharism and Constantine (http://members.aol.com/MercStG/ChriMithPage1.html)

[Cribstyl]

Sunday worshipping came from a mixture of things --

One, as I pointed out in one post was the decree by Hadrain about 135 A.D.outlawing worship upon the Sabbath day. If they couldn't worship on Sabbath, they met together the following day, (besides they assured themselves, it was the resurrection day)

Two: due to the persecution of Jews who were constantly rebelling against Rome and Rome was coming down on them with an extremely heavy hand (especially in 135 A.D.practically attempting to wipe them off the map), Christians did not want to be identified with them.

Thirdly, Gnostic beliefs, which were mixing paganism and eastern mystism with Greek philosophy etc. etc. with Christian sounding themes and were coming up with "eighth day" ideas, which by your own words comes from Rome.

Finally, the "venerable day of the sun" was indeed a day to honor the Sun god. Go back even over the early quotes you gave to supposedly "prove" early Christians worshipping on Sunday. How is it that they wrote about SUNDAY in those early years to Roman emperors if supposedly there was no sunday???

Constantine was a sunworshipper.

The official recognition of sun worship in the Roman Empire began during the time of Aurelian when he instituted the cult of "Sol invictus". The invinsible sun.

Constantines coins were inscribed: "SOL INVICTO COMITI" (COMMITTED TO THE INVINCIBLE SUN).

Sun worship and Mithraism were basically the same thing. Mithraism was at an all time high as the merger between Christianity and Rome took place.

QUOTE:
Mithraism was the fastest growing cult just prior to the year 321 and was the major rival of Christianity. Franz Cumont, a scholar of Mithraism, wrote, quoting Minicius Felix, "The Mithraists also observed Sun-day and kept sacred the 25th of December as the birthday of the Sun." Many scholars have pointed out how the Sun-worshipping Mithraists, the Sun-worshipping Manicheans and the Christians were all syncretized and reconciled when Constantine led the takeover by Christianity, even if it meant the latters surrender of most vital Scriptural truths, especially its Hebrew roots.

However, other Sun-worshipping groups were included too, because of the general importance and popularity of Sol Invictus, the Invincible Sun-Deity. Mario Righetti, a renowned Catholic liturgist, writes, "the Church of Rome, to facilitate the acceptance of the faith by the pagan masses, found it convenient to institute the 25th December as the feast of the temporal birth of Christ, to divert them from the pagan feast, celebrated on the same day in honor of the 'Invincible Sun', Mithras."
"Come out of her My People" by C. J. Koster


Sunday worship is a scriptual affirmative from the start of the church. When the apostles waited for the annointing of the Holy Spirit to carry out their commission, it fell on Penticost, "a Sunday"...we read of baptism, breaking bread, prayers and new membership.

Act 2:41 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Act&chapter=2&translation=kjv&x=11&y=10#)Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added [unto them] about three thousand souls.

Act 2:42 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Act&chapter=2&translation=kjv&x=11&y=10#)And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.


If you read Acts from the start, "who can deny each event that is written to teach us how the church was established?"

Ask yourself, did Jews "break bread" during worship in the synagouge?
We know that "bread braking" is communion of the body and blood of Jesus Christ (.......do this in remembrance of me).
History's records that Sunday was the day that Christians primarilly broke bread.

It is written ;)

CRIB

[Dedication]

Sunday worship is a scriptual affirmative from the start of the church. When the apostles waited for the annointing of the Holy Spirit to carry out their commission, it fell on Penticost, "a Sunday"

Penticost is a Jewish festival which occurs 50 days after Passover. In the Old Testament it is called the "Feast of Harvest" and the "feast of weeks". It is also called the "closing season of the Passover".
""And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the Sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave-offering; seven Sabbaths shall be complete. Even unto the morrow after the seventh Sabbath shall ye number fifty days."

So Christ was simply fulfilling the types which the Jewish feasts signified. He died on Passover as the "Passover Lamb" He rose on the morrow after the Sabbath as the "first fruits from the dead", and on the morrow after the seventh Sabbath was Penticost when the Holy Spirit poured out and a "harvest" was brought in.


There is NOTHING here about a new sabbath --


...we read of baptism, breaking bread, prayers and new membership.

Act 2:41 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Act&chapter=2&translation=kjv&x=11&y=10#)Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added [unto them] about three thousand souls.

Act 2:42 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/tools/printer-friendly.pl?book=Act&chapter=2&translation=kjv&x=11&y=10#)And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

Still nothing concerning a new sabbath ... keep reading --

Acts 2:46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,
Acts 2:47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

So they went to worship IN THE TEMPLE and then would go to a house to "break bread" and eat their meal, and new members were added EVERY DAY, and they were breaking bread EVERY DAY.



...
If you read Acts from the start, "who can deny each event that is written to teach us how the church was established?"

Ask yourself, did Jews "break bread" during worship in the synagouge?
We know that "bread braking" is communion of the body and blood of Jesus Christ (.......do this in remembrance of me).
History's records that Sunday was the day that Christians primarilly broke bread.

I have read Acts from start to finish, and I don't deny anything.
I see there that they broke bread DAILY FROM HOUSE TO HOUSE.
By the way "breaking bread" is not necessarily communion in the sense we understand it today.

"It is found that the term "Breaking of Bread" refers in the Jewish culture of the Second Temple period and following it into the Mishnaic period to the act of breaking off a piece or pieces of a loaf of bread as the consummation of the blessings recited over the food at the beginning of the supper, each of the participants at the table receiving a piece of the same loaf that is broken by the one pronouncing the blessing. The term, "Breaking of Bread" came to be the name of the fellowship meeting practiced by the early Jewish believers and followed by Gentile believers in lands outside of the land of Israel.

"In Rabbinic literature there is preserved for us a great amount of material which testifies of the existence of the well rooted custom of breaking of bread in Jewish culture of the second Temple period and the following Mishnaic period."
For more info (http://www.netivyah.org.il/English%20Web/MidrashaArticles/breaking_bread.html)




There is much in Acts that the apostles worshipped on the 7th day Sabbath, NOT on the sunday.