Catholic tradition, not the Bible, teaches a change to Sundaykeeping.

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Aunty Jane

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2021
7,022
3,863
113
Sydney
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
However, I stand by the observation that “The Lord's day" refers to resurrection Sunday and NOT a time period in the future.
Since Christians were never instructed to commemorate the resurrection…there was no such term as “resurrection Sunday” used in the Bible. The first day of the week was not viewed as some kind of Christian Sabbath because the first Christians no longer observed a Sabbath, which was incumbent only on Jews, under the old covenant. “Christ is the end of the Law”. (Rom 10:4; Rom 7:6)
Just because the Romans used a word to describe the first day of the week does not make it wrong for Christians to use that term. Let's use Scripture to reason together. I previously used one translation of Scripture that used that Roman term but the ESV, one of the most literal translations available, does not.

Matthew 28:1 (ESV)
28 Now after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb.
Yes, “the first day of the week“ came to be called ”Sunday” and it was a day the Romans held as sacred to their sun god. Roman Catholicism transferred the Jewish Sabbath to Sunday, and retains a good number of things related to sun worship in their rituals to this day. First century Christians however were not commanded to observe the Sabbath. It was not to be forced on Gentiles, as it pertained only to Jews. It was not mentioned as part of the “necessary things” that Christians were to observe. (Acts 15:28-29)

It is interesting to note that the Gregorian calendar, (used to this day) was implemented by pope Gregory but curiously retained the all the names of the Roman gods in their days of the week, and months of the year…..that alone should raise some red flags. What genuine Christian would do such a thing? The Bible indicates God’s loathing of false worship.

According to Clark’s Biblical Law, Sunday Sabbath observance began when “Constantine the Great passed an edict commanding all judges and inhabitants of cities to rest on the venerable day of the Sun.”

The Bible says that the apostle Paul shared a meal with fellow believers “on the first day of the week,” Sunday, but this was only logical, since Paul was leaving the next day. (Acts 20:7)
Similarly, some congregations were told to set aside funds on “the first day of every week,” Sunday, for relief work, but this was just a practical suggestion for personal budgeting. The contributions were kept at home, not turned in at a place of meeting. (1 Cor 16:1-2)
Now, anyone who is not a JW knows there is a word that means "the first day of the week" and that word is Sunday in our language. :oops:
It seems as if some are putting more emphasis on this “day” than the Scriptures themselves do.

Some may point to what Jesus said at Matthew 24:20, as proof that Christians would observe the sabbath, where he said….. “Keep praying that your flight may not occur in wintertime, nor on the sabbath day.”
But, keep in mind that Jesus was speaking to Jewish followers who were well acquainted with the great difficulty in trying to travel on the sabbath day because of the restrictions that kept Jews within 2,000 cubits of their cities on that day.
We know that it was Jesus’ custom to illustrate his teachings with things with which the people of his day were thoroughly familiar.

Since there was never a command for Christians to observe a Sabbath, “the Lord’s day“ was a future time as the Scriptures themselves tell us that…..”Jehovah’s day” is the culmination of all the prophesies pertaining to the end of the present world system of things….it must “pass away” in order for God first purpose to be re-established on earth. (Rev 21:2-4) His Kingdom must “COME” so that God’s will is “done on earth as it is in heaven”.

God must clear away the satanic rot that has polluted the world since the rebellion in Eden….every last vestige of his influence must be destroyed so that God’s Kingdom under Christ and his elect (chosen ones) can bring the human race back into reconciliation with their Creator.
There is a greater “Sabbath” to come…a “day” of peace and rest that all humanity will enjoy under Christ’s 1000 year reign. (2 Pet 3:8)

Jesus Christ is called “Lord of the Sabbath”….can you see why? (Matthew 12:1-8)
 

Aunty Jane

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2021
7,022
3,863
113
Sydney
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Because JW's aversion to celebrating anniversaries of any kind, they are theologically bound to rationalize some other use of the term, such as a future state where the king reigns.
Are you serious? Anniversaries of any kind? It was God himself who instituted anniversaries that pertained to his worship. It was he who instituted the anniversary of the Lord’s death and made sure that his people never forgot to celebrate that which was the greatest act of sacrifice in mankind’s history.
He never instituted a commemoration of Christ’s resurrection, which facilitated his return to heaven.…just his sacrificial death. Christendom turned the Sunday resurrection into Easter, which we know was just a renamed festival to the pagan fertility goddess of that name whose emblems were rabbits and eggs. And you wonder why we won’t take part in any of that….?

If you look at the festivals that the Jews were told to celebrate you will understand why, after the golden calf incident, that they were not from that time onward allowed to hold their own festivals under any circumstances. Every single festival was to be celebrated under strict supervision and carried out to the letter of God’s instruction. That way, no festival could creep in under the disguise of false worship and be retained as something for, or from God. Christendom is full of them.

Jehovah’s Witnesses therefore refuse to celebrate any occasion that is borrowed from false worship…and any investigation into what Christendom accepts as “Christian” celebrations is soon uncovered as having its roots in paganism…..something God forbids. (2 Cor 6:14-18)
We will not touch them.….we can only ask why would you?
This is confusing two phrases.
  1. "The Lord's Day" - referring to resurrection Sunday as noted above.
  2. "The Day of the Lord," referring to the end of history, a future state.
I know who is confusing things….and it isn’t us….neither of those statements is correct…..but, you do you…because you always find a way to justify what God condemns. I will let him inform you about all those things….

What is “the end of history?”…..can history ever end? Prophesy is history written in advance.
An “end“ is certainly coming….but it isn’t the end of history or prophesy.
 

Aunty Jane

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2021
7,022
3,863
113
Sydney
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
I wouldn't use the word "Roman" here. The early church developed a consensus for Sunday worship. Nothing particularly Roman about that occurrence.
Constantine made it official is all…..”Christianity” was already off the rails well before then, but no one had the kind of effect that the Roman church had on its subjects…..using fear instead of love, all manner of false ideas were indoctrinated in its members from childhood…..giving rise to the saying that ‘if you raised a child till the age of 5 with the teachings of the RCC, they would remain Catholics for life.’ Fear of an angry god and his punishments in a fiery hell were enough to keep people in line for centuries….not to mention the inquisition.

”The church” as it became from the second century onward, was an increasing departure from the teachings of Jesus and the apostles…..early church “fathers” introduced foreign concepts very gradually, and they were usually a fusion of pagan Roman religion with a very weakened ”Christianity”. They were admitted with barely a whimper of protest, when Constantine decreed the state religion to be adopted by his subjects…..such was the power and influence of “the church”. But it’s main influencer was a pagan sun worshipper whose baptism on his deathbed could hardly be related to any true notion of Christianity. He was an astute politician and used religion to consolidate his divided empire.
 
J

Johann

Guest
”The church” as it became from the second century onward, was an increasing departure from the teachings of Jesus and the apostles…..early church “fathers” introduced foreign concepts very gradually, and they were usually a fusion of pagan Roman religion with a very weakened ”Christianity”. They were admitted with barely a whimper of protest, when Constantine decreed the state religion to be adopted by his subjects…..such was the power and influence of “the church”. But it’s main influencer was a pagan sun worshipper whose baptism on his deathbed could hardly be related to any true notion of Christianity. He was an astute politician and used religion to consolidate his divided empire.
Many historians and theologians would challenge the notion that early church developments constituted a departure from "true" Christianity, instead viewing them as organic developments within the tradition handed down from the apostles.
Are you referring to the Church Fathers starting from Augustine onward? Or are you grouping all the early Church Fathers together under the same label?
 

Aunty Jane

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2021
7,022
3,863
113
Sydney
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Many historians and theologians would challenge the notion that early church developments constituted a departure from "true" Christianity, instead viewing them as organic developments within the tradition handed down from the apostles.
There are no such things as “organic developments” as far as Bible teachings are concerned…..
The things that Jesus taught are solid and need no “development” that changes their meaning altogether.
Are you referring to the Church Fathers starting from Augustine onward? Or are you grouping all the early Church Fathers together under the same label?
I found this quote from Oxford University Professor J. N. D. Kelly interesting….
“During the first three centuries of its existence, the Christian Church had first to emerge from the [monotheistic] Jewish environment that had cradled it and then come to terms with the predominantly Hellenistic (Greek) culture surrounding it.”

Then, speaking of early teachers who later became known as church fathers, Professor Kelly continues: “Most of them exploited current philosophical conceptions. . . . They have been accused of Hellenizing Christianity (making it Greek in form and method), but they were in fact attempting to formulate it in intellectual categories congenial [suited] to their age. In a real sense they were the first Christian theologians.” These early “theologians” set about adapting primitive Bible-based Christianity to current philosophical ideas.

We have to acknowledge that “theology“ is not “Christianity”….it is the accepted teachings of the church, which I believe deviated from Christ’s teachings monumentally as time went on.
 

mailmandan

Well-Known Member
Feb 24, 2020
5,372
5,833
113
The Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No. Of course not. No-one has.

Does God give His children power and strength to obey His commandments? Yes or no?
Yes. The power and strength comes from God to obey His commandments yet none of us have flawlessly obeyed His commandments 100% of the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brakelite

Brakelite

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2020
9,900
7,171
113
Melbourne
brakelite.wordpress.com
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Yes. The power and strength comes from God to obey His commandments yet none of us have flawlessly obeyed His commandments 100% of the time.
Who's claiming otherwise? Regardless, the law is a vital component of the gospel. Grace and law cannot be separated. Once we are saved, it is essential we walk in obedience. This is a sign of our love for our Saviour. And even though we may be justified through the blood of the Cross, it is only through abiding in Christ, obeying His commandments, and walking in the power of His resurrection, that we finally get to heaven.
However much in the past or in the present we have failed to overcome, for us to say it is impossible to overcome sin through faith in the Redeemer is actually to justify and to encourage sin.
The question you asked, have you sinned, is flawed. You should be asking, is the sacrifice of Christ as the Lamb of God, and the power of His resurrection, and Jesus's present ministry in the heavenly sanctuary sufficient to save God's people from their sins? Not in their sins, but from. Will Jesus be truly successful "as a refiner and purifier of silver... to purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer into the Lord an offering in righteousness". Malachi 3:3?
When Christ comes, will His church truly be without spot and blemish? Or is it merely an accounting entry that redeems us and delivers us from sin?
Remember, the just shall live by his faith. Do you have the faith to believe you can be freed from sin and habits and addictions that glorify none but Satan?
 
Last edited:

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,258
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Constantine made it official is all…..”Christianity” was already off the rails well before then, but no one had the kind of effect that the Roman church had on its subjects…..using fear instead of love, all manner of false ideas were indoctrinated in its members from childhood…..giving rise to the saying that ‘if you raised a child till the age of 5 with the teachings of the RCC, they would remain Catholics for life.’ Fear of an angry god and his punishments in a fiery hell were enough to keep people in line for centuries….not to mention the inquisition.

”The church” as it became from the second century onward, was an increasing departure from the teachings of Jesus and the apostles…..early church “fathers” introduced foreign concepts very gradually, and they were usually a fusion of pagan Roman religion with a very weakened ”Christianity”. They were admitted with barely a whimper of protest, when Constantine decreed the state religion to be adopted by his subjects…..such was the power and influence of “the church”. But it’s main influencer was a pagan sun worshipper whose baptism on his deathbed could hardly be related to any true notion of Christianity. He was an astute politician and used religion to consolidate his divided empire.
Constantine did make it official. But Sunday worship -- the Lord's Day (so called because he was thought to have risen from the dead that day) -- was not a Roman invention. Nearly two centuries before Constantine legislated it into an official day of rest, chapter 67 of Justin Martyr's First Apology suggests that Sunday worship had taken root. Chapter 15 of the Epistle of Barnabas is even earlier than Justin Martyr, stating "Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead. And when He had manifested Himself, He ascended into the heavens." Around the same time we have chapter 9 of Ignatius's Letter to the Magnesians, stating "If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord's Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death." And the Didache, perhaps the earliest of all, states in Chapter 14 "But every Lord's day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure."

With this history, I hesitate to pin the observance of the Lord's Day on a nod to the Sun god.
 

Brakelite

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2020
9,900
7,171
113
Melbourne
brakelite.wordpress.com
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
I stand corrected in that it is a term in Scripture.

However, I stand by the observation that “The Lord's day" refers to resurrection Sunday and NOT a time period in the future.


Plain wrong. Just because the Romans used a word to describe the first day of the week does not make it wrong for Christians to use that term. Let's use Scripture to reason together. I previously used one translation of Scripture that used that Roman term but the ESV, one of the most literal translations available, does not.

Matthew 28:1 (ESV)
28 Now after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb.


Now, anyone who is not a JW knows there is a word that means "the first day of the week" and that word is Sunday in our language. :oops:


Yea, from The Lord's Day - Revelation 1:10 ... The First Day!
  1. Early Christians from 30-300AD referred to Sunday as the Lord's day BECAUSE it was the day Jesus rose from the dead.
  2. "Sunday" is only used in languages such as German, Dutch, and English, whereas Latin-based languages, such as Spanish, Italian, and French use a derivative of the Latin word "Dominica," literally "Lord's Day." So the very notion of the first day of the week having something to do with the sun depends on the language you speak. (Mario Derksen)
The established history of "The Lord's Day" referring to the day Christ was raised from the dead, the first day of the week (Sunday) is undeniable. Because JW's aversion to celebrating anniversaries of any kind, they are theologically bound to rationalize some other use of the term, such as a future state where the king reigns. This is confusing two phrases.
  1. "The Lord's Day" - referring to resurrection Sunday as noted above.
  2. "The Day of the Lord," referring to the end of history, a future state. What is the day of the Lord? | GotQuestions.org

I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day (the first day of the week), and I heard a voice behind me. It sounded like the blast of a trumpet.
Rev 9:10 (VOICE)
While I agree with you that history records a very early tradition of Sunday observance in the Christian Church, such does not mean it was based on apostolic teaching. I disagree with Jane who said the early church did not keep the Sabbath. I think we would have heard about that in the historical records of it were true. The Pharisees for a stay would have been jumping through fiery hoops in condemning the early church, members of which were mostly Jewish, of they were ignoring the Sabbath. In fact, history records references to the church honouring the Sabbath in nearly every century up to this day.
There is absolutely no reason to believe that the apostle John meant the first day of the week when he mentioned being in the Spirit on the "Lord's day". It is far more plausible, believable, and consistent to accept he was referring to the Sabbath. Regardless what the church claimed later.
 

Brakelite

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2020
9,900
7,171
113
Melbourne
brakelite.wordpress.com
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Constantine did make it official. But Sunday worship -- the Lord's Day (so called because he was thought to have risen from the dead that day) -- was not a Roman invention. Nearly two centuries before Constantine legislated it into an official day of rest, chapter 67 of Justin Martyr's First Apology suggests that Sunday worship had taken root. Chapter 15 of the Epistle of Barnabas is even earlier than Justin Martyr, stating "Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead. And when He had manifested Himself, He ascended into the heavens." Around the same time we have chapter 9 of Ignatius's Letter to the Magnesians, stating "If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord's Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death." And the Didache, perhaps the earliest of all, states in Chapter 14 "But every Lord's day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure."

With this history, I hesitate to pin the observance of the Lord's Day on a nod to the Sun god.
It was at first honoured out of fear. In those early centuries the Romans grew to despise the Jews because of their continuing uprisings and revolts. The Christians had been meeting with Jews in the synagogue every Sabbath. However, they started to compromise the Sabbath so as to be not seen by Rome as Jewish, and this to escape persecution. Second, in those early years the Jews in the synagogue established prayers with the express purpose of encouraging the Christians to leave, prayers that blasphemed Christ and caused the Christians to "out" themselves, most having been attending the synagogue in secret, and not openly as Christian worshipers. They were recognised and ejected when they refused to respond to such prayers. It was later that Sunday became an official day of rest, and after that adopted officially by the church in Rome who then began to persecute Sabbath keepers in much the same way as they did the Arians. With the help of pagan Rome.
 
J

Johann

Guest
I found this quote from Oxford University Professor J. N. D. Kelly interesting….
“During the first three centuries of its existence, the Christian Church had first to emerge from the [monotheistic] Jewish environment that had cradled it and then come to terms with the predominantly Hellenistic (Greek) culture surrounding it.”
Incredible—without the Church Fathers, we might never have received the Bible!

The Bible, as we know it today, was indeed shaped by the early Christian Fathers (ECFs) and the early church councils. However, the process by which the Bible was canonized is complex and multifaceted, involving various influences, including Jewish traditions, early Christian writings, and theological debates. Here's a more detailed breakdown:

Jewish Roots of the Old Testament: The Old Testament (Hebrew Bible) was largely inherited from Judaism, with early Christians accepting the Jewish scriptures as authoritative. These texts were written long before the early Christian Fathers and were central to the faith of Jesus and His earliest followers. The Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures, was widely used in the early church.

New Testament Formation: The New Testament writings, including the Gospels, the letters of Paul, and other apostolic writings, were circulated among early Christian communities. These writings were valued for their direct connection to Jesus and the apostles, and over time, they were increasingly recognized as authoritative. The early Christian Fathers played a significant role in preserving, copying, and teaching from these texts.

Role of the Early Church Fathers: The early Christian Fathers were instrumental in the process of determining which books were to be included in the canon of Scripture. Through their writings, debates, and participation in church councils, they contributed to the recognition and exclusion of certain texts. For instance, figures like Athanasius and Augustine argued for the inclusion of certain books in the New Testament while excluding others. Their theological perspectives influenced the criteria for what was considered "canonical" or inspired by God.

Councils and Canonization: The formal process of canonization involved church councils, such as the Councils of Hippo (393 AD) and Carthage (397 AD), where church leaders, many of whom were early Church Fathers, ratified the list of books that would comprise the Christian Bible. These councils affirmed the canon that had been widely accepted by the church, solidifying the New Testament as we know it today.

--And as to the "beloved" Professor J. N. D. Kelly--

The Anglicans are members of the Church of England or one of the churches that are part of the worldwide Anglican Communion, a Christian tradition that traces its roots to the early church and the Protestant Reformation in England. The Anglican Church is known for its middle way (via media) between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, seeking to balance elements of both traditions.

Key Aspects of Anglicanism:
Historical Background:

Origins: The Anglican Church originated in the 16th century during the English Reformation. King Henry VIII broke away from the Roman Catholic Church in 1534, primarily due to political and personal reasons, including his desire for an annulment that the Pope refused to grant. This led to the establishment of the Church of England, with the English monarch as its supreme head.
Development: The Church of England maintained many Catholic traditions and liturgies but also adopted Protestant theological principles, especially under the influence of figures like Thomas Cranmer, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who helped shape the English Reformation.
Doctrine and Beliefs:

Scripture and Tradition: Anglicans hold the Bible as the primary authority in matters of faith, interpreted within the context of church tradition and reason. They often emphasize the "three-legged stool" of scripture, tradition, and reason as foundational to their faith.
The Book of Common Prayer: A central text for Anglican worship and doctrine, first compiled by Thomas Cranmer in 1549. It has been revised several times but remains a key element of Anglican identity, guiding worship, prayers, and liturgical practices.
Sacraments: Anglicans traditionally recognize two sacraments instituted by Christ—Baptism and the Eucharist (Holy Communion). Some also acknowledge other sacramental rites such as Confirmation, Ordination, Marriage, Reconciliation (Confession), and Anointing of the Sick, though these are not viewed with the same level of sacramental authority as in Roman Catholicism.
Church Structure:

Episcopal Governance: The Anglican Church is episcopally governed, meaning it has a hierarchical structure with bishops as key leaders. The Archbishop of Canterbury is the spiritual leader of the worldwide Anglican Communion, although each national church is autonomous.
Autonomous Provinces: The Anglican Communion is a global fellowship of independent churches in different countries, each self-governing but in communion with the Church of England and each other. Notable member churches include the Episcopal Church in the United States, the Anglican Church of Canada, and the Church of England.
Theological Diversity:

Broad Church: Anglicanism is known for its theological diversity, encompassing a broad range of beliefs from conservative, traditionalist Anglicans who lean towards Catholic practices (Anglo-Catholics), to more evangelical and reformed Anglicans, and liberal Anglicans who emphasize social justice and modern interpretations of faith.
Via Media: Anglicanism is often described as a "middle way" between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, attempting to reconcile the catholic heritage with the reformation principles of sola scriptura (scripture alone) and justification by faith.
Worship and Liturgy:

Liturgical Worship: Anglican worship is typically liturgical, meaning it follows a set pattern of prayers, readings, and rituals. The Book of Common Prayer plays a central role in this, and services often include recitation of creeds, readings from scripture, and the celebration of the Eucharist.
Variety in Practice: While liturgical, Anglican worship can vary widely. High church services might resemble Roman Catholic mass, with elaborate rituals and vestments, while low church services might be simpler and more focused on preaching and scripture.
Global Influence:

Anglican Communion: The Anglican Communion is one of the largest Christian denominations worldwide, with tens of millions of adherents. It includes churches in Africa, Asia, the Americas, and Oceania, reflecting the global spread of British influence.
Ecumenical Relations: The Anglican Church has engaged in dialogues with other Christian denominations, including the Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox Church, and various Protestant denominations, seeking unity while respecting doctrinal differences.
Modern Challenges:

Internal Debates: Anglicans today face internal debates over issues such as the ordination of women, LGBTQ+ inclusion, and the interpretation of scripture. These debates have led to divisions within the Communion, with some provinces adopting more progressive stances and others holding to traditional views.

Cultural and Social Engagement: Anglicans are often involved in social justice issues, education, and healthcare, reflecting their commitment to living out the Christian faith in the world.
In summary, Anglicanism is a major Christian tradition with a rich history, theological diversity, and a global presence. It balances elements of both Protestantism and Catholicism, with a strong emphasis on liturgy, scripture, and tradition.

I think this one went "sour" for you.
J.
 

mailmandan

Well-Known Member
Feb 24, 2020
5,372
5,833
113
The Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Who's claiming otherwise? Regardless, the law is a vital component of the gospel. Grace and law cannot be separated. Once we are saved, it is essential we walk in obedience. This is a sign of our love for our Saviour. And even though we may be justified through the blood of the Cross, it is only through abiding in Christ, obeying His commandments, and walking in the power of His resurrection, that we finally get to heaven.
However much in the past or in the present we have failed to overcome, for us to say it is impossible to overcome sin through faith in the Redeemer is actually to justify and to encourage sin.
The question you asked, have you sinned, is flawed. You should be asking, is the sacrifice of Christ as the Lamb of God, and the power of His resurrection, and Jesus's present ministry in the heavenly sanctuary sufficient to save God's people from their sins? Not in their sins, but from. Will Jesus be truly successful "as a refiner and purifier of silver... to purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer into the Lord an offering in righteousness". Malachi 3:3?
When Christ comes, will His church truly be without spot and blemish? Or is it merely an accounting entry that redeems us and delivers us from sin?
Remember, the just shall live by his faith. Do you have the faith to believe you can be freed from sin and habits and addictions that glorify none but Satan?
The law is not a vital component of the gospel (1 Corinthians 1:18-21; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4) and grace, and law don't mix. (Matthew 9:14-17; Romans 3:24-28; Romans 5:20; Romans 6:14; Galatians 2:16; Galatians 2:21; Galatians 3:10, 24-26; Philippians 3:9)

Do you believe that the death, burial and resurrection of Christ is the ALL-sufficient means of your salvation apart from your best efforts to obey the law? (Romans 3:21-22) Do you promote sinless perfection? (1 John 1:8-10)
 

Aunty Jane

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2021
7,022
3,863
113
Sydney
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
With this history, I hesitate to pin the observance of the Lord's Day on a nod to the Sun god.
It’s that very history...all extra biblical, that convinces me that the “weeds” of Jesus’ parable were “already at work” (2 Thes 2:7) in the first century.......sown by the devil “while men were sleeping”.......that can be taken two ways......it either pertains to the death of all the apostles, whom Paul said were “sleeping” until Christ’s return, (2 Thess 4:13-16) or it pertains to the spiritual “sleep” that engulfed “the church” as soon as the apostles passed away. They were acting as a “restraint” against the foretold apostasy, but when the last apostle John died...there was no longer any restraint and the weeds infiltrated, very early.

Sun worship is very evident in Roman Catholicism....

Mass Archives - St. Francis of Assisi Roman Catholic Church
What do the hand gestures mean in Catholic statuary and eastern ...

The monstrance and the halo...both from sun worship...

The Vatican Obelisk | Turismo Roma
There is a Babylonian sun wheel in St Peter’s Square,(which isn’t square at all)
And there is an obelisk in the middle which was imported from Egypt and is a symbol of the sun god Ra.
 
J

Johann

Guest
The law is not a vital component of the gospel (1 Corinthians 1:18-21; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4)
If “The Law” In 1 Corinthians 15:56 Is In Reference To The Law of Moses, Does This Mean That “Covenant Eschatology” Is True?
This question can be broken down into two questions. The first question is: “Is ‘the law’ in 1 Corinthians 15:56 a reference to the law of Moses?” The second question is: “Does this mean that covenant eschatology is true?”

The answer to the first question is “yes” - “the law” in 1 Corinthians 15:56 is a reference to the law of Moses. The answer to the second question is “no”.

Using the principle of consistency of language, Paul is not referring to a different law in 1 Corinthians because he used this same phraseology in referring to the law of Moses in 1 Corinthians 9:8; 14:34.

According to the “covenant eschatology” advocates, they claim that the Law of Moses was not taken away until A.D. 70. They believe that 1 Corinthians 15:56 supports their false doctrine because it is supposedly showing that the law of Moses is still binding since 1 Corinthians was written around the mid-50s A.D.

1 Corinthians 15:50-58 states: “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption. Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed— in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written: ‘Death is swallowed up in victory.’ O Death, where is your sting? O Hades, where is your victory? The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord.”

Paul states that the “sting of death is sin.” When we examine the historical account of Genesis 1-3, we learn that God did create man immortal because physical death was a consequence of human sin (Romans 5:12-21). Adam and Eve had access to the partaking of the tree of life. We learn that Satan came and deceived the woman and she along with her husband fell into transgression (Genesis 3:1-6; 1 Timothy 2:13). Sin brought about spiritual separation from God (Isaiah 59:1,2; Romans 6:23), but it also would bring forth eternal, conscious punishment in hell if the sin not repented of and covered by the blood of Christ before a person dies physically (Acts 17:30; Romans 6:3,4; Revelation 1:5).

Paul states that the “strength of sin is the law.” Paul is stating that sin (using the figure of speech of personification) took advantage of the existence of law (particularly in this context – the law of Moses – since the law of Moses was given to the Jews only – Deuteronomy 5:1-3) to condemn the Jews. It must be noted though that the Gentiles who were under the “law of the heart” in Romans 2:14-15 [the law that was enforced upon Gentiles before the universal “law of Christ” (the gospel – 1 Corinthians 9:21)] would have been subject to spiritual death when they transgressed that law. Paul was once a Jew who recognized that the law of Moses did not hold any ultimate provision unto salvation (Romans 7:1-25). He realized that only through the gospel of Jesus Christ was there victory over sin. The consequence of sin is that it brought forth physical death. The termination of physical death was broken by the resurrection of Jesus Christ because physical death could not hold onto Jesus. He was released from the pangs of physical death and had victory over the grave (Psalm 16:8-11). Therefore, part of the victory that sin brought abuse to the law of Moses would end.

This verse cannot be used to support the “covenant eschatology” view because Paul, an inspired writer, would not contradict himself elsewhere in his epistles where he states that the law of Moses had been nailed to the cross (Colossians 2:14-17; Ephesians 2:14-16) and was, therefore, no longer binding.

This verse cannot be used to support the “covenant eschatology” view because the Gentiles were never amenable to the law of Moses anyways and most of the Corinthian members were primarily made up of Gentiles (1 Corinthians 2,5,6,8). The “death” of 1 Corinthians 15:56 would be, according to the covenant eschatologists' misuse of it, referring to the result of transgressing the law of Moses. But how could that be possible if the Gentiles were never amenable to the law of Moses?

Paul was writing in the gnomic (or general) present tense. The primary force of the present tense in this context is to bring something to the forefront. What is Paul wanting to bring to the forefront? What is his primary emphasis? Paul makes a stark contrast between the law of Moses and what Jesus Christ was able to do: “The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.” The law of Moses condemns; yet it could not make any provision where one could be made righteous in the sight of God. But the gospel of Christ does shower forth the opportunity for a person to be made righteous in the sight of God (Romans 1:16-17). It is through the resurrection of Jesus Christ and the implications of the resurrection (Romans 4:21-25) that we can be brought spiritually back into fellowship with God (Ephesians 2:1-10), but also because Jesus is the firstfruits of those who never die again (1 Corinthians 15:20,23); then when Jesus returns those who are in Him will be the first to rise from the grave to enter into eternal life with the Savior (1 Thessalonians 4:13-16).
 

Aunty Jane

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2021
7,022
3,863
113
Sydney
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Incredible—without the Church Fathers, we might never have received the Bible!
The Bible is God’s word…not men’s.

God could have used the rocks to produce his word…..he didn’t need corrupt men to do any of it.
The Scriptures were not written by a single Catholic….nor any of the church fathers…and for good reason.
The canon ends with the apostle John…..all the Bible writers were Jewish.
 
J

Johann

Guest
It’s that very history...all extra biblical, that convinces me that the “weeds” of Jesus’ parable were “already at work” (2 Thes 2:7) in the first century.......sown by the devil “while men were sleeping”.......that can be taken two ways......it either pertains to the death of all the apostles, whom Paul said were “sleeping” until Christ’s return, (2 Thess 4:13-16) or it pertains to the spiritual “sleep” that engulfed “the church” as soon as the apostles passed away. They were acting as a “restraint” against the foretold apostasy, but when the last apostle John died...there was no longer any restraint and the weeds infiltrated, very early.

Sun worship is very evident in Roman Catholicism....

Mass Archives - St. Francis of Assisi Roman Catholic Church
What do the hand gestures mean in Catholic statuary and eastern ...

The monstrance and the halo...both from sun worship...

View attachment 49477
There is a Babylonian sun wheel in St Peter’s Square,(which isn’t square at all)
And there is an obelisk in the middle which was imported from Egypt and is a symbol of the sun god Ra.
Some inconsistencies-

Your position raises several important points and concerns about the origins of Christian practices and the early church's susceptibility to corruption.

Observance of the Lord's Day
1. Biblical Basis for the Lord's Day:
The observance of the Lord's Day, which is commonly understood as Sunday, is rooted in the New Testament. In Acts 20:7 (Lexham Bible), we read: "On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul spoke to them, intending to depart on the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight." This passage indicates that the early church gathered on the first day of the week, which later became known as the Lord's Day, to break bread and hear teaching.

2. Early Christian Practice:
In 1 Corinthians 16:2 (Lexham Bible), Paul instructs: "On the first day of every week, each one of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that there will be no collecting when I come." This verse suggests that the early Christians were already setting aside time on the first day of the week for their collections, further supporting the practice of meeting on this day.

3. Historical Context and Sun Worship:
While it's true that the first day of the week was associated with the Sun god in Roman culture, the Christian observance of Sunday is not necessarily a continuation of pagan practices. The early church distinguished its worship from pagan rituals by emphasizing the resurrection of Jesus Christ, as seen in Revelation 1:10 (Lexham Bible), where John refers to "the Lord’s day" as the day he was in the Spirit, indicating a distinct Christian significance.

The "Weeds" of Apostasy
1. Apostolic Warnings:
Paul's warning about the "mystery of lawlessness" already at work (2 Thessalonians 2:7, Lexham Bible) emphasizes the presence of early corruption. This indicates that the seeds of apostasy were being sown even during the apostles' lifetimes. However, this does not necessarily imply that the entire church fell into error immediately after their deaths. The "restraint" mentioned may refer to the apostolic authority and teaching which played a crucial role in maintaining doctrinal purity.

2. The Role of the Apostles:
In 1 Thessalonians 4:13-16 (Lexham Bible), Paul describes the dead in Christ as "sleeping," awaiting the resurrection. This aligns with the idea that the apostles' death does not immediately correlate with the complete collapse of the church’s integrity but rather indicates a transitional phase in church history.

3. The Continuity of the Faith:
Despite the challenges faced by the early church, the Scriptures promise that the gates of hell will not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18, Lexham Bible). This suggests a divine preservation of the church's core teachings and practices, despite the infiltration of false teachings and corrupting influences.

Roman Catholicism and Sun Worship
1. Historical Developments:
It is accurate that later Roman Catholicism incorporated various cultural elements, some of which had origins in pagan practices. However, the New Testament itself provides no explicit evidence that the early Christian observance of Sunday was intended to honor the Sun god.

2. Distinction of Christian Worship:
The focus of Christian worship on Sunday is primarily to commemorate the resurrection of Christ and the new creation inaugurated by His victory over death. This is seen in Colossians 2:16-17 (Lexham Bible), which highlights that such observances are shadows of what was to come, with Christ being the substance.

In conclusion, while there are historical concerns regarding the integration of pagan elements into Christianity, the New Testament provides a basis for the observance of the Lord's Day separate from sun worship. The early church's practices, as reflected in Scripture, demonstrate a distinct focus on the resurrection of Christ rather than pagan deities.