All About GOD - Growing Relationships with Jesus and Others
Sabbath Testimony
Sabbath Testimony
American Congregationalists: No authority in the New Testament for substitution of the first day for the seventh
"The current notion that Christ and His apostles authoritatively substituted the first day for the seventh, is absolutely without any authority in the New Testament."
Dr. Lyman Abbott, in the Christian Union, June 26, 1890
Anglican: Nowhere commanded to keep the first day
"And where are we told in the Scriptures that we are to keep the first day at all? We are commanded to keep the seventh; but we are nowhere commanded to keep the first day. The reason why we keep the first of the week holy instead of the seventh is for the same reason that we observe many other things, - not because the Bible, but because the church, has enjoined [commanded] it."
Isaac Williams, Plain Sermons on the Catechism, Vol. 1, pp 334, 336.
Anglican/Episcopal: The Catholics changed it
"We have made the change from the seventh day to the first day, from Saturday to Sunday, on the authority of the one holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church of Christ."
Episcopalian Bishop Symour, Why we keep Sunday.
Baptist: Sunday Sabbath not in the scriptures
"There was and is a commandment to keep holy the Sabbath day, but that Sabbath day was not on Sunday. It will be said, however, and with some show of triumph, that the Sabbath was transferred from the Seventh to the First day of the week, with all its duties, privileges and sanctions. Earnestly desiring information on this subject, which I have studied for many years, I ask, where can the record of such a transaction be found? Not in the New Testament - absolutely not. There is no scriptural evidence of the change of the Sabbath institution from the Seventh to the First day of the week ...
"I wish to say that this Sabbath question, in this aspect of it, is the gravest and most perplexing question connected with Christian institutions which at present claims attention from Christian people; and the only reason that it is not a more disturbing element in Christian thought and in religious discussion is because the Christian world has settled down content on the conviction that some how a transference has taken place at the beginning of Christian history.
"To me it seems unaccountable that Jesus, during three years' discussion with His disciples, often conversing with them upon the Sabbath question, discussing it in some of its various aspects, freeing it from its false glosses [of Jewish traditions], never alluded to any transference of the day; also, that during forty days of His resurrection life, no such thing was intimated. Nor, so far as we know, did the Spirit, which was given to bring to their remembrance all things whatsoever that He had said unto them, deal with this question. Nor yet did the inspired apostles, in preaching the gospel, founding churches, counseling and instruction those founded, discuss or approach the subject.
"Of course, I quite well know that Sunday did come into use in early Christian history as a religious day, as we learn from the Christian Fathers and other sources. But what a pity that it comes branded with the mark of paganism, and christened with the name of a sun god, when adopted and sanctioned by the papal apostasy, and bequeathed as a sacred legacy to Protestantism!"
Dr. Edward Hiscox, author of The Baptist Manual. From a photostatic copy of a notarized statement by Dr. Hiscox.
"There was never any formal or authoritative change from the Jewish seventh day Sabbath to the Christian first day observance"
William Owen Carver, The Lord's Day in One Day p.49
Church of England: No warrant from scripture for the change of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday
"Neither did he (Jesus), nor his disciples, ordain another Sabbath in the place of this, as if they had intended only to shift the day; and to transfer this honor to some other time. Their doctrine and their practice are directly contrary, to so new a fancy. It is true, that in some tract of time, the Church in honor of his resurrection, did set apart that day on the which he rose, to holy exercises: but this upon their own authority, and without warrant from above, that we can hear of; more then the general warrant which God gave his Church, that all things in it be done decently, and in comely order."
Dr. Peter Heylyn of the Church of England, quoted in History of the Sabbath, Pt 2, Ch.2, p7
Congregationalist: The Christian Sabbath' [Sunday] is not in the Scripture
"The Christian Sabbath' [Sunday] is not in the Scripture, and was not by the primitive [early Christian] church called the Sabbath."
Timothy Dwight, Theology, sermon 107, 1818 ed., Vol. IV, p49 [Dwight (1752-1817) was president of Yale University from 1795-1817].
Disciples of Christ: It is all old wives' fables to talk of the 'change of the Sabbath'
"If it [the Ten Commandments] yet exists, let us observe it ... And if it does not exist, let us abandon a mock observance of another day for it. 'But,' say some, 'it was changed from the seventh to the first day.' Where? when? and by whom? - No, it never was changed, nor could it be, unless creation was to be gone through again: for the reason assigned [in Genesis 2:1-3] must be changed before the observance or respect to the reason, can be changed. It is all old wives' fables to talk of the 'change of the Sabbath' from the seventh to the first day. If it be changed, it was that august personage changed it who changes times and laws ex officio, - I think his name is "Doctor Antichrist.'"
Alexander Campbell, The Christian Baptist, February 2, 1824, vol 1, no. 7
Episcopal: Bible commandment says the seventh day
"The Bible commandment says on the seventh-day thou shalt rest. That is Saturday. Nowhere in the Bible is it laid down that worship should be done on Sunday."
Phillip Carrington, quoted in Toronto Daily Star, Oct 26, 1949 [Carrington (1892-), Anglican archbishop of Quebec, spoke the above in a message on this subject delivered to a packed assembly of clergymen. It was widely reported at the time in the news media].
Lutheran: They err in teaching Sunday Sabbath
But they err in teaching that Sunday has taken the place of the Old Testament Sabbath and therefore must be kept as the seventh day had to be kept by the children of Israel ... These churches err in their teaching, for scripture has in no way ordained the first day of the week in place of the Sabbath. There is simply no law in the New Testament to that effect"
John Theodore Mueller, Sabbath or Sunday, pp.15, 16
"We have seen how gradually the impression of the Jewish Sabbath faded from the mind of the Christian church, and how completely the newer thought underlying the observance of the first day took possession of the church. We have seen that the Christian of the first three centuries never confused one with the other, but for a time celebrated both."
The Sunday Problem, a study book by the Lutheran Church (1923) p.36
"They [Roman Catholics] They refer to the Sabbath-day as having been changed into the Lord's Day, contrary to the Decalog, as it seems. Neither is there any example whereof they make more than concerning the changing of the Sabbath-day. Great, say they, is the power of the Church, since it has dispensed with one of the Ten Commandments!"
Augsburg Confession of Faith, art. 28; written by Melanchthon and approved by Martin Luther, 1530; www.iclnet.org
Methodist: Jesus did not abolish the moral law - no command to keep holy the first day
The moral law contained in the Ten Commandments, and enforced by the prophets, He Jesus did not take away. It was not the design of His coming to revoke any part of this. This is a law which can never be broken ... Every part of this law must remain in force upon all mankind and in all ages; as not depending either on time or place, or any other circumstances liable to change, but on the nature of man, and their unchangeable relation to each other."
John Wesley, Sermons on Several Occasions, Vol.1, No. 25
"It is true that there is no positive command for infant baptism. Nor is there any for keeping holy the first day of the week. Many believe that Christ changed the Sabbath. But, from His own words, we see that He came for no such purpose. Those who believe that Jesus changed the Sabbath base it only on a supposition."
Amos Binney, Theological Compendium, 1902 edition, pp 180-181, 171 [Binney (1802-1878), Methodist minister and presiding elder, whose Compendium was published for forty years in many languages, also wrote a Methodist New Testament Commentary].
"Take the matter of Sunday. There are indications in the New Testament as to how the church came to keep the first day of the week as its day of worship, but there is no passage telling Christians to keep that day or to transfer the Jewish Sabbath to that day."
Harris Franklin Rall, Christian Advocate July 2, 1942 pg. 26
Moody Bible Institute: "Sabbath was before Sinai"
"I honestly believe that this commandment [the Sabbath commandment] is just as binding today as it ever was. I have talked with men who have said that it has been abrogated [abolished], but they have never been able to point to any place in the Bible where God repealed it. When Christ was on earth, He did nothing to set it aside; He freed it from the traces under which the scribes and Pharisees had put it, and gave it its true place. 'The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath' [mark 2:27]. It is just as practicable and as necessary for men today as it ever was - in fact, more than ever, because we live in such an intense age.
"The [Seventh-day] Sabbath was binding in Eden, and it has been in force ever since. This Fourth Commandment [Exodus 20:8-11] begins with the word 'remember,' showing that the Sabbath had already existed when God wrote the law on the tables of stone at Sinai. How can men claim that this one commandment has been done away with when they admit that the other nine are still binding?
"Dwight. L. Moody, Weighed and Wanting", 1898, pp.46-47 [D.L. Moody, (1837-1899) was the most famous evangelist of his time, and founder of the Moody Bible Institute].
"This Fourth is not a commandment for one place, or one time, but for all places and times."
D.L. Moody, at San Francisco, Jan. 1st, 1881.
Presbyterian: Sunday kept the Gentiles happy
"Sunday being the first day of which the Gentiles solemnly adored that planet and called it Sunday, partly from its influence on that day especially, and partly in respect to its divine body (as they conceived it) the Christians thought fit to keep the same day and the same name of it, that they might not appear carelessly peevish, and by that means hinder the conversion of the Gentiles, and bring a greater prejudice that might be otherwise taken against the gospel"
T.M. Morer, Dialogues on the Lord's Day
Roman Catholic: No such law in the Bible
"Nowhere in the bible do we find that Jesus or the apostles ordered that the Sabbath be changed from Saturday to Sunday. We have the commandment of God given to Moses to keep holy the Sabbath day, that is, the seventh day of the week, Saturday. Today, most Christians keep Sunday because it has been revealed to us by the [Roman] church outside the bible."
Catholic Virginian, Oct. 3, 1947
"You may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctified."
James Cardinal Gibbons, The Faith of Our Fathers (1917 ed.), pp.72,73
"If Protestants would follow the Bible, they should worship God on the Sabbath Day. In keeping the Sunday they are following a law of the Catholic Church."
Albert Smith, chancellor of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, replying for the cardinal in a letter of Feb. 10, 1920.
Question: "Have you not any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?"
Answer: "Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her - she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday, the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday, the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority"
Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism 3rd ed. p. 174
"Question: How prove you that the Church hath power to command feasts and holydays?
Answer: By the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of; and therefore they fondly contradict themselves, by keeping Sunday strictly, and breaking most other feasts commanded by the same Church."
Henry Tuberville, An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine (1833 approbation), p.58 (Same statement in Manual of Christian Doctrine, ed. by Daniel Ferris [1916 ed.], p.67)
"The Catholic Church, ... by virtue of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday."
The Catholic Mirror, official organ of Cardinal Gibbons, Sept. 23, 1893.
"1. Is Saturday the 7th day according to the Bible and the 10 Commandments?
"I answer yes.
"2. Is Sunday the first day of the week and did the Church change the 7th day, Saturday, for Sunday, the 1st day?
"I answer yes.
"3. Did Christ change the day?
"I answer no! Faithfully yours,
"J. Cardinal Gibbons"
Gibbons' autograph letter.
Some theologians have held that God likewise directly determined the Sunday as the day of worship in the NEW LAW, that he himself has explicitly substituted Sunday for the Sabbath. But this theory is entirely abandoned. It is now commonly held that God simply gave His church the power to set aside whatever day or days she would deem suitable as holy days. The church chose Sunday, the first day of the week, and in the course of time added other days as holy days."
John Laux, A Course in Religion for Catholic High Schools and Academies 1936, vol.1 p.51
"Question: Which is the Sabbath day?
Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day.
Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?
Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday."
Peter Geiermann, The Convert's Catechism of Catholic Doctrine (1946 ed.), p.50. Geiermann received the "apostolic blessing" of Pope Pius X on his labors, January 25, 1910.
"The Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by right of the divine, infallible authority given to her by her Founder, Jesus Christ. The Protestant, claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh Day Adventist is the only consistent Protestant.
The Catholic Universe Bulletin, Aug. 14, 1942, p.4
"The observance of Sunday by the Protestants is an homage they pay, in spite of themselves, to the authority of the [Catholic] church." Monsignor Louis Segur,
Plain Ta
American Congregationalists: No authority in the New Testament for substitution of the first day for the seventh
"The current notion that Christ and His apostles authoritatively substituted the first day for the seventh, is absolutely without any authority in the New Testament."
Dr. Lyman Abbott, in the Christian Union, June 26, 1890
Anglican: Nowhere commanded to keep the first day
"And where are we told in the Scriptures that we are to keep the first day at all? We are commanded to keep the seventh; but we are nowhere commanded to keep the first day. The reason why we keep the first of the week holy instead of the seventh is for the same reason that we observe many other things, - not because the Bible, but because the church, has enjoined [commanded] it."
Isaac Williams, Plain Sermons on the Catechism, Vol. 1, pp 334, 336.
Anglican/Episcopal: The Catholics changed it
"We have made the change from the seventh day to the first day, from Saturday to Sunday, on the authority of the one holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church of Christ."
Episcopalian Bishop Symour, Why we keep Sunday.
Baptist: Sunday Sabbath not in the scriptures
"There was and is a commandment to keep holy the Sabbath day, but that Sabbath day was not on Sunday. It will be said, however, and with some show of triumph, that the Sabbath was transferred from the Seventh to the First day of the week, with all its duties, privileges and sanctions. Earnestly desiring information on this subject, which I have studied for many years, I ask, where can the record of such a transaction be found? Not in the New Testament - absolutely not. There is no scriptural evidence of the change of the Sabbath institution from the Seventh to the First day of the week ...
"I wish to say that this Sabbath question, in this aspect of it, is the gravest and most perplexing question connected with Christian institutions which at present claims attention from Christian people; and the only reason that it is not a more disturbing element in Christian thought and in religious discussion is because the Christian world has settled down content on the conviction that some how a transference has taken place at the beginning of Christian history.
"To me it seems unaccountable that Jesus, during three years' discussion with His disciples, often conversing with them upon the Sabbath question, discussing it in some of its various aspects, freeing it from its false glosses [of Jewish traditions], never alluded to any transference of the day; also, that during forty days of His resurrection life, no such thing was intimated. Nor, so far as we know, did the Spirit, which was given to bring to their remembrance all things whatsoever that He had said unto them, deal with this question. Nor yet did the inspired apostles, in preaching the gospel, founding churches, counseling and instruction those founded, discuss or approach the subject.
"Of course, I quite well know that Sunday did come into use in early Christian history as a religious day, as we learn from the Christian Fathers and other sources. But what a pity that it comes branded with the mark of paganism, and christened with the name of a sun god, when adopted and sanctioned by the papal apostasy, and bequeathed as a sacred legacy to Protestantism!"
Dr. Edward Hiscox, author of The Baptist Manual. From a photostatic copy of a notarized statement by Dr. Hiscox.
"There was never any formal or authoritative change from the Jewish seventh day Sabbath to the Christian first day observance"
William Owen Carver, The Lord's Day in One Day p.49
Church of England: No warrant from scripture for the change of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday
"Neither did he (Jesus), nor his disciples, ordain another Sabbath in the place of this, as if they had intended only to shift the day; and to transfer this honor to some other time. Their doctrine and their practice are directly contrary, to so new a fancy. It is true, that in some tract of time, the Church in honor of his resurrection, did set apart that day on the which he rose, to holy exercises: but this upon their own authority, and without warrant from above, that we can hear of; more then the general warrant which God gave his Church, that all things in it be done decently, and in comely order."
Dr. Peter Heylyn of the Church of England, quoted in History of the Sabbath, Pt 2, Ch.2, p7
Congregationalist: The Christian Sabbath' [Sunday] is not in the Scripture
"The Christian Sabbath' [Sunday] is not in the Scripture, and was not by the primitive [early Christian] church called the Sabbath."
Timothy Dwight, Theology, sermon 107, 1818 ed., Vol. IV, p49 [Dwight (1752-1817) was president of Yale University from 1795-1817].
Disciples of Christ: It is all old wives' fables to talk of the 'change of the Sabbath'
"If it [the Ten Commandments] yet exists, let us observe it ... And if it does not exist, let us abandon a mock observance of another day for it. 'But,' say some, 'it was changed from the seventh to the first day.' Where? when? and by whom? - No, it never was changed, nor could it be, unless creation was to be gone through again: for the reason assigned [in Genesis 2:1-3] must be changed before the observance or respect to the reason, can be changed. It is all old wives' fables to talk of the 'change of the Sabbath' from the seventh to the first day. If it be changed, it was that august personage changed it who changes times and laws ex officio, - I think his name is "Doctor Antichrist.'"
Alexander Campbell, The Christian Baptist, February 2, 1824, vol 1, no. 7
Episcopal: Bible commandment says the seventh day
"The Bible commandment says on the seventh-day thou shalt rest. That is Saturday. Nowhere in the Bible is it laid down that worship should be done on Sunday."
Phillip Carrington, quoted in Toronto Daily Star, Oct 26, 1949 [Carrington (1892-), Anglican archbishop of Quebec, spoke the above in a message on this subject delivered to a packed assembly of clergymen. It was widely reported at the time in the news media].
Lutheran: They err in teaching Sunday Sabbath
But they err in teaching that Sunday has taken the place of the Old Testament Sabbath and therefore must be kept as the seventh day had to be kept by the children of Israel ... These churches err in their teaching, for scripture has in no way ordained the first day of the week in place of the Sabbath. There is simply no law in the New Testament to that effect"
John Theodore Mueller, Sabbath or Sunday, pp.15, 16
"We have seen how gradually the impression of the Jewish Sabbath faded from the mind of the Christian church, and how completely the newer thought underlying the observance of the first day took possession of the church. We have seen that the Christian of the first three centuries never confused one with the other, but for a time celebrated both."
The Sunday Problem, a study book by the Lutheran Church (1923) p.36
"They [Roman Catholics] They refer to the Sabbath-day as having been changed into the Lord's Day, contrary to the Decalog, as it seems. Neither is there any example whereof they make more than concerning the changing of the Sabbath-day. Great, say they, is the power of the Church, since it has dispensed with one of the Ten Commandments!"
Augsburg Confession of Faith, art. 28; written by Melanchthon and approved by Martin Luther, 1530; www.iclnet.org
Methodist: Jesus did not abolish the moral law - no command to keep holy the first day
The moral law contained in the Ten Commandments, and enforced by the prophets, He Jesus did not take away. It was not the design of His coming to revoke any part of this. This is a law which can never be broken ... Every part of this law must remain in force upon all mankind and in all ages; as not depending either on time or place, or any other circumstances liable to change, but on the nature of man, and their unchangeable relation to each other."
John Wesley, Sermons on Several Occasions, Vol.1, No. 25
"It is true that there is no positive command for infant baptism. Nor is there any for keeping holy the first day of the week. Many believe that Christ changed the Sabbath. But, from His own words, we see that He came for no such purpose. Those who believe that Jesus changed the Sabbath base it only on a supposition."
Amos Binney, Theological Compendium, 1902 edition, pp 180-181, 171 [Binney (1802-1878), Methodist minister and presiding elder, whose Compendium was published for forty years in many languages, also wrote a Methodist New Testament Commentary].
"Take the matter of Sunday. There are indications in the New Testament as to how the church came to keep the first day of the week as its day of worship, but there is no passage telling Christians to keep that day or to transfer the Jewish Sabbath to that day."
Harris Franklin Rall, Christian Advocate July 2, 1942 pg. 26
Moody Bible Institute: "Sabbath was before Sinai"
"I honestly believe that this commandment [the Sabbath commandment] is just as binding today as it ever was. I have talked with men who have said that it has been abrogated [abolished], but they have never been able to point to any place in the Bible where God repealed it. When Christ was on earth, He did nothing to set it aside; He freed it from the traces under which the scribes and Pharisees had put it, and gave it its true place. 'The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath' [mark 2:27]. It is just as practicable and as necessary for men today as it ever was - in fact, more than ever, because we live in such an intense age.
"The [Seventh-day] Sabbath was binding in Eden, and it has been in force ever since. This Fourth Commandment [Exodus 20:8-11] begins with the word 'remember,' showing that the Sabbath had already existed when God wrote the law on the tables of stone at Sinai. How can men claim that this one commandment has been done away with when they admit that the other nine are still binding?
"Dwight. L. Moody, Weighed and Wanting", 1898, pp.46-47 [D.L. Moody, (1837-1899) was the most famous evangelist of his time, and founder of the Moody Bible Institute].
"This Fourth is not a commandment for one place, or one time, but for all places and times."
D.L. Moody, at San Francisco, Jan. 1st, 1881.
Presbyterian: Sunday kept the Gentiles happy
"Sunday being the first day of which the Gentiles solemnly adored that planet and called it Sunday, partly from its influence on that day especially, and partly in respect to its divine body (as they conceived it) the Christians thought fit to keep the same day and the same name of it, that they might not appear carelessly peevish, and by that means hinder the conversion of the Gentiles, and bring a greater prejudice that might be otherwise taken against the gospel"
T.M. Morer, Dialogues on the Lord's Day
Roman Catholic: No such law in the Bible
"Nowhere in the bible do we find that Jesus or the apostles ordered that the Sabbath be changed from Saturday to Sunday. We have the commandment of God given to Moses to keep holy the Sabbath day, that is, the seventh day of the week, Saturday. Today, most Christians keep Sunday because it has been revealed to us by the [Roman] church outside the bible."
Catholic Virginian, Oct. 3, 1947
"You may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctified."
James Cardinal Gibbons, The Faith of Our Fathers (1917 ed.), pp.72,73
"If Protestants would follow the Bible, they should worship God on the Sabbath Day. In keeping the Sunday they are following a law of the Catholic Church."
Albert Smith, chancellor of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, replying for the cardinal in a letter of Feb. 10, 1920.
Question: "Have you not any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?"
Answer: "Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her - she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday, the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday, the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority"
Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism 3rd ed. p. 174
"Question: How prove you that the Church hath power to command feasts and holydays?
Answer: By the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of; and therefore they fondly contradict themselves, by keeping Sunday strictly, and breaking most other feasts commanded by the same Church."
Henry Tuberville, An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine (1833 approbation), p.58 (Same statement in Manual of Christian Doctrine, ed. by Daniel Ferris [1916 ed.], p.67)
"The Catholic Church, ... by virtue of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday."
The Catholic Mirror, official organ of Cardinal Gibbons, Sept. 23, 1893.
"1. Is Saturday the 7th day according to the Bible and the 10 Commandments?
"I answer yes.
"2. Is Sunday the first day of the week and did the Church change the 7th day, Saturday, for Sunday, the 1st day?
"I answer yes.
"3. Did Christ change the day?
"I answer no! Faithfully yours,
"J. Cardinal Gibbons"
Gibbons' autograph letter.
Some theologians have held that God likewise directly determined the Sunday as the day of worship in the NEW LAW, that he himself has explicitly substituted Sunday for the Sabbath. But this theory is entirely abandoned. It is now commonly held that God simply gave His church the power to set aside whatever day or days she would deem suitable as holy days. The church chose Sunday, the first day of the week, and in the course of time added other days as holy days."
John Laux, A Course in Religion for Catholic High Schools and Academies 1936, vol.1 p.51
"Question: Which is the Sabbath day?
Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day.
Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?
Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday."
Peter Geiermann, The Convert's Catechism of Catholic Doctrine (1946 ed.), p.50. Geiermann received the "apostolic blessing" of Pope Pius X on his labors, January 25, 1910.
"The Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by right of the divine, infallible authority given to her by her Founder, Jesus Christ. The Protestant, claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh Day Adventist is the only consistent Protestant.
The Catholic Universe Bulletin, Aug. 14, 1942, p.4
"The observance of Sunday by the Protestants is an homage they pay, in spite of themselves, to the authority of the [Catholic] church." Monsignor Louis Segur,
Plain Ta
Views: 219
Comment
-
Comment by Lahry Sibley on October 9, 2009 at 7:41am
-
Well dear saint,
Thank you for your testimony and comments. I know God has blessed you all these years. God has dealt with me about this for several years, but only since Feb of this year have I been keeping the Sabbath. I still attend church services on Sunday, usually two morning and one evening. But on the 7th day, we spend quietly at home with Him, unless there is a special meeting somewhere. We have so abundantly blessed.
I think you are right on target with the picking and choosing. But the whole crux of the matter is that folks have not been crucified with Christ. See, a dead person does not break commanments. But the Sabbath is more than part of the decalog. It is the very first proclamation of the Bible by God Himself.
So you and I will continue to obey Him, and share the truth where there is an open ear. It's just that not many ears are open these days. Again, thank you for your kind exhortation. God bless you so very much.
Lahry
-
Comment by maya on October 9, 2009 at 7:21am
-
So true, bless you! Since childhood , am now 40. i have always practiced 7th day as the Sabath, in fact it is the reason why i find it difficult to find a church because aside from SDA all the protestant churches practice Sunday as sabath, what confuses me is that if we do not follow the ten commandments anymore, can we now kill? steal?...then why should we stop practicing the sabath? why choose which commandment to follow ? thanks for answering these questions.... GOD BLESS YOU
-
-
Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
His Word, says it all. Simple.
-
-
More testimony....
As some of you already know, I have been involved, here and elsewhere in discussions about the 7th day Sabbath rest of God, hallowed and sanctified by Him on the 7th day of creation. On another forum, one of our dear brothers wrote the following article. I believe it is a "Saving Faith" issue, and with his permission I am sharing it with you. However, he did ask that I not quote him, so the piece is without earthly author. That in no way alters its value or its truthfulness. You would be blessed to take a minute or two and read this valuable essay. Here it is.....
Correct interpretation of 7th day rest vs rest in Christ
I agree that Christ indeed gives us rest which can be perpetual if we abide in Him continually. But we need to understand the difference between "resting" in Christ as our Savior and "resting" from our labors so that we may contemplate "resting in Christ as our Savior". Since the 7th day Sabbath rest involves ceasing from our daily labor I will not explore the first sense of the word rest. But I will address the ceasing from our daily chores which the 7th day Sabbath rest enjoins upon man.
A great number of Christians who rest in Christ on a daily basis still have jobs which occupy their thoughts and time a great percentage of every day. Are they to be criticized for working? Are we to accuse them of disobedience because they work some days and rest others and therefore do not esteem every day alike? Can we rightly accuse them of not following the spirit of the Lord? And, would the spirit of the Lord lead anyone to slothfulness so that every day can be considered alike? Or, are there six days for us to work and one day, the 7th day of each week, for us to rest? The later is the only statement backed by any command of Christ.
Why can't we all esteem every day alike? Well, we don't want to work every day of the week because that provides no rest. But can we rest in perpetual cessation from our labors? The Lord cursed the earth because of sin and for this reason we must labor diligently to provide for our families. This curse is to be a blessing to man to uplift him from sin. So it is well within God's plan of salvation for man to work six days. Likewise, the seventh (7th) day of the week was not to be squandered as if it had no purpose. It too is part of God's plan of salvation. It provides a specific time for man to bask in the contemplation of God's goodness. If God had not provided one day per week for us to cease from our labors then we would be continually working. If He commanded us to work every day and we stopped for a rest then we would be disobedient. But Christ rested on the 7th day and thereby partitioned the month into weeks of seven days setting aside one day per week for us to rest. It would seem to me that rest and work are not synonymous nor can they happen at the same time.
If the Lord had instructed us to never work but to rest perpetually then your concept would be nothing less than obedience to God's command. But the truth is that there is no such command to rest perpetually in the sense of ceasing our labors. In fact, the Bible condemns the man who will not work and states that the Lord hates slothfulness. But there is a command which gives us six (6) days to work and one to rest from our work. It stands to reason that in light of this command those who obey it are demonstrating their obedience to Christ's commands while those who pretend to be obedient by resting every day simply cannot provide any command from Christ to justify their actions. They may cite Romans 14 as granting this liberty but they are twisting those verses to serve their own purpose rather than harmonizing them with the rest of scripture.
There are many verses in the Bible which have been perverted to serve man. Men with unregenerate hearts read verses which present some difficulties and their inclination is to interpret them to please themselves and justify their disobedience to God's commands. They speak boldly against keeping all of God's commandments presenting their case with the most subtle of arguments appealing to the carnal heart of man which is naturally resistant to authority. All the while they represent those who are upholding God's law as the one's causing all the troubles. We need to be certain we are standing on the Lord's side calling men to obedience to all of God's commandments rather than taking the side of the enemy leading men to disobey even the least of God's commandments.
Now what about the law? Which law are we to obey? We often hear Christians speak of their relationship with Christ. Well, the only way a sinner can be joined to Christ is if they are free of the sin which separates them from Christ. And, since sin is "the transgression of the law" it stands to reason that if we put away sin that would constitute putting away any transgression of the law.
Now here is an interesting quandary. When Galatians 5:18 is quoted and one is asked which law is referenced they quickly reply, "the law of Moses," or, "the Ten Commandments." Yet, when Hebrews 10:16 is cited and the same question is asked they respond with, "the law of Christ." Yet, it is the same Greek word translated law. How can they so easily flip-flop back and forth between two interpretations, two understandings of the same word? They are simply repeating what they have been taught. Would it not be better to harmonize the two passages together so that the two occurrences of the same word retains the same meaning from book to book and verse to verse?
Here is an example:
What if the word "law" used in the following verses always means "The Ten Commandments?" Can we reconcile the two verses with each other without destroying the law in Galatians while upholding it in Hebrews?
AV Galatians 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
AV Hebrews 10:16 This [is] the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
Galatians says clearly that we are not under the law when we are led by the Spirit. While Hebrews clearly makes the point that God is going to write His law in our hearts and minds. Let's think about this for a moment. If in our carnal state we were God's enemies and could not be subject to His law (Romans 8:7) then what change could we expect in our lives when God writes His law in our hearts? Couldn't we rightly expect that the carnal heart would be replaced with a heart not only able to submit to God's law but desirous to keep His law?
But Galatians says that if we are led of the Spirit we are not under the law. The common interpretation of this verse leave us with the impression that the law of Ten Commandments are no longer binding upon us today since we have the "spirit" to lead us. I guess the idea is that the Word of God is impertinent in this era of spirituality. But doesn't that contradict what Hebrews 10:16 seems to be saying? An alternative interpretation of Galatians may help reconcile the two verses and thus harmonize scripture with scripture.
There are at least two other possible interpretations of Galatians 5:18. The first one seems to be the prominent one in the context of Galatians 5 which speaks of the fruits of the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit. That being, if the Spirit of God leads you then you will not be partaking of the fruits of the flesh which carry condemnation but rather you will be showing the fruit of that Spirit and there is no law that condemns that fruit. Remember, the law was not made for the righteous but for the sinner. It's purpose was to expose sin and make it exceeding sinful through death. So those who are guided by the Spirit of God are not transgressing the law and therefore do not fall under its condemnation. In this sense, they truly are not under the law--because the law only condemns sinners, not the righteous.
The second sense of this phrase, "not under the law," could certainly pertain to the wider message of Galatians which deals with how one is saved. Paul is very clear that one is not saved by works in keeping the law but by faith in Jesus. But we must understand more fully what that means.
It certainly does not mean that faith in Christ leads one to transgress the law. In fact, Paul makes the argument twice that the Jews failed because they did not mix faith with their works. They tried to obtain to the righteousness of the law by works apart from faith in Jesus. Anyone who has been around the Christian block a time or two well knows that a man cannot raise himself up by his bootstraps. We are not able to change our hearts from enmity against God to love for God. We can choose Christ but it is God who must change our hearts and keep them pure. We have free will and can decide to follow Christ or the Devil. But even when we decide to follow Christ it is impossible for us to accomplish anything without Christ. Thus, the second meaning of "not under the law" can be rightly understood as presenting the impossibility that any man can earn salvation by keeping the law.
So to sum it up.
1. We are not under the law in the sense that it condemns our actions if we are led by the Spirit of God. This is because the Spirit of God leads us into those things which the law does not condemn. There is no law against love, joy, peace, long-suffering, charity, kindness, temperance, etc. No law condemns right actions. The law of God does, however, condemn the fruits of the flesh. But if we are not partaking of those things then we cannot be condemned by the law which forbids them. Thus, we are not under the condemnation of the law. That is, as long as we are walking in the Spirit of God having the fruit of that Spirit.
2. Also, we are not under the law as a means of salvation. God has repeatedly told His people to obey His law. Yet, it is impossible for the carnal heart to do this thing. Thus, the only way that one can obtain to the righteousness of God as witnessed by the law is by faith in Jesus Christ. Alone we must fail but with God all things are possible. God will change our hearts. He will write His law in them so that the carnal mind which was enmity against God is replaced with a heart full of love for God's law. We are commanded to obey God's law but not apart from faith in Christ. Only by faith can a man walk pleasing to God.
Now a quick note about the Ten Commandment law and the law of Christ. Christ was and is the mediator between God and man. Christ created the world and walked and talked with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. It was Christ who appeared to Moses and Abraham. It was Christ who gave the law on Mount Sinai. It was Christ who died on the cross. It was Christ who magnified the law on the Mount of Blessings. It was Christ who proclaimed that He did not come to destroy the law but to fulfill it and that no part of it would pass away until heaven and earth passed away. And, it was Christ who pointed the lawyer to the Ten Commandment law when asked what he must do to be saved. And, it was Christ who made it clear that all the law and the prophets were based on two great commandments: Love God first and man as oneself. His apostles would later write that love fulfills the law.
Thus, the Ten Commandment law, while it could offer no mercy nor salvation to any man, instructed them then and us now regarding that which constitutes godly love. So when Jesus said to love each other he was reiterating His Ten Commandment law spoken at Sinai and written by His own finger on tables of stone. And His apostles would write, "this is not a new commandment but the same one you heard from the beginning. Yet, it is though I am writing you a new commandment because from the beginning you have not understood it." (my paraphrase).
Now you mentioned something about you and I being on opposite sides of the veil. Moses had to veil his face when he brought the tables of the law of God down from the mount. The people could not bear to look upon his face because it shown brightly from being in the presence of Holy God. And now that glory shines even more brightly in the face of Jesus Christ. Moses merely carried the Word of God. Jesus is the incarnate Word of God. The veil still hangs over the peoples' faces preventing them from seeing the Word of God in the person of Jesus Christ. They can but barely discern the outline of His righteousness. If that veil were to be removed then they would behold Him in all His glorious righteousness, they would be convicted of sin, and might therefore repent.
When we uphold the law we peek behind that veil to glimpse at the righteousness of God. When we gaze into that law we see our sinfulness and are convicted of our sins which drives us to Christ for forgiveness. When we refuse to lift that veil and look upon the righteousness of God in His law then we do not see our own defects, do not seek forgiveness, and cannot rightly appreciate the cross of Christ.
Welcome to
All About GOD
The Good News
Meet Face-to-Face & Collaborate
© 2024 Created by AllAboutGOD.com.
Powered by
You need to be a member of All About GOD to add comments!
Join All About GOD