God's seventh-day Sabbath: Its not Sunday.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by colbe

 

You keep repeating he decided the Canon of Scripture so why do you reject the Eucharist?

I keep saying that he had a list that is exactly the same as the normal New Testament that Protestants use today. That does not mean he inverted that list. My point was that it existed before any council or Pope ever made any determination on a canon. So the Bible was not made by the Catholic Church.
The Eucharist, I think now, was probably based on something Jesus invented, but it was made into something else later to make it out that priests could somehow offer Jesus to God.

Most all of Christianity went to Holy Mass or a Church service yesterday, SUNDAY. They gathered in assembly to worship God.

Catholics can go to Mass any day of the week. I live almost next door to a Catholic church, so I know.
I don't care if people go to church on Sunday, it bothers me not a bit, and never has. I just do not want someone to tell me that I have to, too.
The Church created Sunday worship as an anti-sabbath to distance themselves from the Jews who killed God.
Sunday as a sabbath was invented by the Puritans.
I know this stuff because I am a Seventh Day Adventist who goes to church on Saturday, so I need to know why, and why other people don't.

By what authority do you declare Mary and Joseph are not Catholic?

None. I just don't see how they could have since the Catholic Church wasn't invented until 400 years later.

edit on 2-9-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

You still haven't said who determined the Canon?

You reject Pope Damasus did and this a fact from history. Name who did. For about the 5th time...asking.

You're ignoring the entire Canon with your "only" the New Testament. What of the "strange" books Athanasius had on his list? Why aren't you quoting from them, Athanasius is your guy? Because they are not divinely inspirited. Athanasius had NO authority.

Athanasius list is NOT the same Old and New Testament Canon. And you accept Luther's Canon whose list is not the same either but changed because his heresies are so obvious in the 7 books of the Canon he tossed.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by colbe

 

You keep repeating he decided the Canon of Scripture so why do you reject the Eucharist?

I keep saying that he had a list that is exactly the same as the normal New Testament that Protestants use today.
That does not mean he inverted that list.
My point was that it existed before any council or Pope ever made any determination on a canon.
So the Bible was not made by the Catholic Church.
The Eucharist, I think now, was probably based on something Jesus invented, but it was made into something else later to make it out that priests could somehow offer Jesus to God.

Most all of Christianity went to Holy Mass or a Church service yesterday, SUNDAY. They gathered in assembly to worship God.

Catholics can go to Mass any day of the week. I live almost next door to a Catholic church, so I know.
I don't care if people go to church on Sunday, it bothers me not a bit, and never has. I just do not want someone to tell me that I have to, too.
The Church created Sunday worship as an anti-sabbath to distance themselves from the Jews who killed God.
Sunday as a sabbath was invented by the Puritans.
I know this stuff because I am a Seventh Day Adventist who goes to church on Saturday, so I need to know why, and why other people don't.

By what authority do you declare Mary and Joseph are not Catholic?

None. I just don't see how they could have since the Catholic Church wasn't invented until 400 years later.

edit on 2-9-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

Athanasius was an Eastern Catholic who believed in the Eucharist and recognized Rome's authority.

Athanasius battled the early heresies long before the revolt, first by Luther.

And you're trying to sell he was Protestant or whatever non-Catholic Christian sect. He wasn't, Protestantism did not come along until October 31, 1517. If you speak of his authority to of canonized your Bible, why do you ignore his Catholic beliefs?

Makes no sense brother.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by colbe

 

You keep repeating he decided the Canon of Scripture so why do you reject the Eucharist?

I keep saying that he had a list that is exactly the same as the normal New Testament that Protestants use today.
That does not mean he inverted that list.
My point was that it existed before any council or Pope ever made any determination on a canon.
So the Bible was not made by the Catholic Church. The Eucharist, I think now, was probably based on something Jesus invented, but it was made into something else later to make it out that priests could somehow offer Jesus to God.

Most all of Christianity went to Holy Mass or a Church service yesterday, SUNDAY. They gathered in assembly to worship God.

Catholics can go to Mass any day of the week. I live almost next door to a Catholic church, so I know.
I don't care if people go to church on Sunday, it bothers me not a bit, and never has. I just do not want someone to tell me that I have to, too.
The Church created Sunday worship as an anti-sabbath to distance themselves from the Jews who killed God.
Sunday as a sabbath was invented by the Puritans.
I know this stuff because I am a Seventh Day Adventist who goes to church on Saturday, so I need to know why, and why other people don't.

By what authority do you declare Mary and Joseph are not Catholic?

None. I just don't see how they could have since the Catholic Church wasn't invented until 400 years later.

edit on 2-9-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

jim,

The Remnant is Roman Catholic.

God is going to show you personally very "soon." The tops, the pinnacle of the faith is Jesus' presence in the Eucharist. You're almost there, you just said it. The Eucharist is from Christ.

One day, you shall give me hug. I predict.

jim dewey,

I don't have time to underline so I'll say it. You have been given a "grace" to live near a Catholic Church. Go there,
before or after Mass when it isn't locked. Go sit or better kneel in front of the Tabernacle. Our Lord is there.
You will see a lighted candle by the Tabernacle.

You don't even have to pray. You can, do speak to Our Lord. He will send you the grace to believe. If the Church is locked, most are, go to the parish office and ask them to open it. Tell them, you wish to pray in front of the Tabernacle.

So many testimonies about doing this very thing has changed the most hardened sinner, not you, just giving
example of how powerful Our Lord's presence in the Eucharist is...

love,

colbe

reply to post by colbe

Protestantism (not every single group/sect), ignores the saints . . .

Protestantism has Fox's Book of Martyrs, which is the account of the martyrdom of the Protestant saints by the evil Medieval Catholic Church.
You can read it on-line, so you don't have to but an s physical book.

The Lord's Day is Sunday, it is no longer the Sabbath or celebrated on Saturday. This is the New Covenant.

You just believe it because you also believe that someone can make it so just by saying it is.

Take the Apostles word for it.

If the actual Apostles said so, then it would be in the New Testament but it isn't.

You never shared what was John talking about in Rev 1:10 (the Lord's Day)?

It just says, "Lord's Day" without any qualification.

Mark 2:28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."
Matthew 12:8 For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath."
Luke 6:5 Then Jesus said to them, "The Son of Man is Lord of the ...

Looking at those statements, it would be safe to assume that the Lord's Day was the Sabbath.

"Myth"...oh my gosh, I would laugh if it wasn't so serious friend.

Do you not see where Christians go on Sunday? Today and throughout twenty centuries of history, it was/is known in the oral (tradition) and written Word, the where and why.

It was not made official until the fifth century.

I'm saying that this is something that I know from my studies, that there is no evidence for an ancient Israel. If you think there is, then you can bring it up. My evidence can only be you inability to produce any evidence that there was.

Historian Oded Borowski, Associate Professor of Biblical Archaeology and Hebrew at Emory University, wrote a book, Daily Life in Biblical Times, that explains daily life in ancient Israel between 1200 BC and 586 BC. Is that ancient enough for you? Borowski goes into detailed descriptions of what daily life was like in ancient Israel.

He was a real person but a lot about him is myth.

You're contradicting yourself. If Herod was, in fact, a king, then he had to have had a land or people to which he was "king", right? Unless you believe that Herod was only a king in his own imagination, and that the Israel he reigned over was a fiction.

What I mean by Ancient Israel, is Ancient Israel, which even by the stories in the Old Testament, has not existed since the time of the Assyrian Empire. Obviously there was a province of Judea within Palestine.

Israel hasn't existed since the time of the Assyrian Empire? Um, hate to break it to you, but Israel is a nation right now even today.

The only new ones are "Believe in Jesus" "Repent" "Be Baptized" and "Do Not Fornicate, and Do Not Get Divorced".

Again, all of these are found in the Torah and the Tanach.

Believe in Jesus: Christ was long prophesied in the Bible before He ever walked the Earth.
Repent: The entire ritual in the Temple had much to say about repentance, long before the New Testament arrived. This is especially true during the High Holidays - Yom Kippur, and the Day of Atonement.
Be Baptized: Ritual immersion. Baptism is analogous to the regular visitation to the mikveh, and was long used as a ceremony in the Torah to remove spiritual impurities.
Do Not Fornicate: Thou Shalt not Commit Adultery, one of the Ten Commandments.
Divorce: Just a stronger reinforcement of the Adam and Eve story.

No need to elaborate. The above references give you the general drift.

I have my doubts that these are relevant to the situation that Jesus was dealing with. My argument is that the Torah says 'don't step out of the door of your tent on the Sabbath'. The Pharisees said 'don't walk more than so many paces on the Sabbath'. How is the Pharisee's rule "harder"?

Because, even today, the rabbinical rules regarding what you can or cannot do on the Sabbath compose whole volumes, treatises written by halachic authorities who argue such minute and arcane details as to whether you can or cannot ride an elevator on the Sabbath, whether you can take a bath, turn on a flashlight, if you are permitted to bathe, etc. The level of minutiae and detail in rabbinical law is well beyond the general precepts in the Torah.

The rules surrounding the Sabbath to this day are very, very stringent, and far beyond what is outlined in the Torah.

reply to post by CookieMonster09

Borowski goes into detailed descriptions of what daily life was like in ancient Israel.

Educated guesses.

. . . the Israel he reigned over was a fiction.

Judea, not Israel, a province of Palestine. He was allowed to call himself "King" by permission from the Roman government after demonstrating his subservience to the Roman gods. He took over the Hasmonean dynasty from Hyrcanus who inherited a kingdom that briefly gained independence under the Maccabees.

Israel hasn't existed since the time of the Assyrian Empire? Um, hate to break it to you, but Israel is a nation right now even today.

There is a group of zionists in Palestine calling themselves "Israel". Calling yourself that does not make it so.

Christ was long prophesied in the Bible before He ever walked the Earth.

That's a Christian myth that some people believe in. Jesus took existing prophecies and reinterpreted them to be about himself. That is not the same thing.

- Yom Kippur, and the Day of Atonement.

They were to "afflict their soul" whatever that means, probably to worry about if they did all the rituals right. They would not have been thinking about changing anything, which is what "repent" means.

mikveh, and was long used as a ceremony in the Torah to remove spiritual impurities.

Real impurities according to "ceremonial" laws, not the same as Christian baptism which has to do with real sins and rebirth.

Thou Shalt not Commit Adultery, one of the Ten Commandments.

Applied in a very limited way, mostly against women while men could go to prostitutes.

Just a stronger reinforcement of the Adam and Eve story.

So was Jesus lying when he said Moses allowed divorce with a letter, for whatever reason, as long as it was in writing?

The rules surrounding the Sabbath to this day are very, very stringent, and far beyond what is outlined in the Torah.

"Far beyond" only in the number of words.

Satyrday,
or as any beliber would say " everyday is gods day , therefor everyday is sabbath "



And i tend to lean on the latter, either its always or none at all,

Educated guesses.

Doubtful. If you can cite a single academic, theological, or other reputable source to support your absurd claim that ancient Israel was a figment of your imagination, I am all ears. Thus far, we only have your opinion, and that's not been oh so very credible thus far.

Judea, not Israel, a province of Palestine. He was allowed to call himself "King" by permission from the Roman government after demonstrating his subservience to the Roman gods. He took over the Hasmonean dynasty from Hyrcanus who inherited a kingdom that briefly gained independence under the Maccabees.

Judea was still part of the Land of Israel. Now you are just talking gibberish. So, how can King Herod be a temporal king, and the land of Israel - or Judea if you so prefer - not exist?

There is a group of zionists in Palestine calling themselves "Israel". Calling yourself that does not make it so.

All I can say is, "Wow." No bias there!

So, as an American, if I have a belief that the land of America belongs to modern-day Americans, does that make me an "American-ist"? What if I lived in Canada, and thought the same thing about the land of Canada?

That's a Christian myth that some people believe in. Jesus took existing prophecies and reinterpreted them to be about himself. That is not the same thing.

So, you call yourself a Seventh Day Adventist but you don't believe Christ is the Messiah fulfilled in the words of the prophets? Strange.

I find your theory kind of funny, actually. As if Christ danced and turned to try to wiggle Himself into the prophecies so He could proclaim Himself the Messiah. Patently ridiculous.

They were to "afflict their soul" whatever that means, probably to worry about if they did all the rituals right. They would not have been thinking about changing anything, which is what "repent" means.

Goodness forbid if the Jewish people actually repented. Ever. Least of all on the holiest day of the year. No, we can't have that, right? But, then again, if ancient Israel never existed, then I guess these religious rituals never existed. Never mind.

Real impurities according to "ceremonial" laws, not the same as Christian baptism which has to do with real sins and rebirth.

Yes, because only Christians know how to cleanse themselves from sin. No other religion can. Only Christianity. Goodness forbid if the Jewish people, or Buddhists, or Taoists, or anyone else try to repent or cleanse themselves from sin. That would be...well, impossible.

Applied in a very limited way, mostly against women while men could go to prostitutes.

Adulterers were stoned.

So was Jesus lying when he said Moses allowed divorce with a letter, for whatever reason, as long as it was in writing?

No, Christ was putting a "fence around the Torah", and placing even heightened strictures on His followers from a marital standpoint. Divorce is frowned upon, but still very much allowed in Judaism.

These strictures Christ set forth were so misinterpreted by the Gentile Church, such that the Romish Church even today uses bogus "annulments" to make void perfectly legitimate marriages.

"Far beyond" only in the number of words.

The current rabbinical restrictions on the Sabbath exceed those set forth in the Torah. If you have evidence to the contrary from a reputable source, again, I am all ears. I am quite sure no evidence will be forthcoming.

reply to post by CookieMonster09

. . . reputable source to support your absurd claim that ancient Israel was a figment of your imagination . . .

Israel Finkelstein is an Israeli archaeologist and academic. en.wikipedia.org...
Read his book, Unearthing the Bible.

Judea was still part of the Land of Israel.

There is no such thing as a land of Israel other than in a story. Probably the the Assyrians recorded the name of a Canaanite tribal leader who they killed, and a myth was made up about that person, as having been a king. Then of course a king needs to have an ancestry, so then the other stories come along.

So, as an American, if I have a belief that the land of America belongs to modern-day Americans, does that make me an "American-ist"?

If I was a white American of European ancestry and decided along with my other white friends to petition the Federal government as American Indians to have a reservation to build a casino on, that would not fly.

. . . you don't believe Christ is the Messiah fulfilled in the words of the prophets?

The number one thing with being an Adventist, at least the way I was taught years ago, is to believe the Bible rather than man-made myths. There is no straight-forward prophecy about the type of Messiah that Jesus became. He invented his own version rather than accepting a pre-existing version. I would be happy to be proven wrong, so take a shot if you think that you can.

Goodness forbid if the Jewish people actually repented. Ever. Least of all on the holiest day of the year. No, we can't have that, right? But, then again, if ancient Israel never existed, then I guess these religious rituals never existed.

You may become a Christian yet.

Yes, because only Christians know how to cleanse themselves from sin. No other religion can. Only Christianity. Goodness forbid if the Jewish people, or Buddhists, or Taoists, or anyone else try to repent or cleanse themselves from sin. That would be...well, impossible.

Exactly. Otherwise Christianity serves no purpose.

Adulterers were stoned.

So? I was talking about fornication.

The current rabbinical restrictions on the Sabbath exceed those set forth in the Torah.

And I am supposed to just believe it because you said so? I'm not a cult member who believes whatever they are told out of admiration for the leader. You need to provide an example.
As I understand the rules, they seem rather lenient compared to doing practically nothing according to Moses.
The "difficult" part is figuring it out, which is what rabbis get paid to do.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by colbe

 

Protestantism (not every single group/sect), ignores the saints . . .

Protestantism has Fox's Book of Martyrs, which is the account of the martyrdom of the Protestant saints by the evil Medieval Catholic Church.
You can read it on-line, so you don't have to but an s physical book.

The Lord's Day is Sunday, it is no longer the Sabbath or celebrated on Saturday. This is the New Covenant.

You just believe it because you also believe that someone can make it so just by saying it is.

Take the Apostles word for it.

If the actual Apostles said so, then it would be in the New Testament but it isn't.

You never shared what was John talking about in Rev 1:10 (the Lord's Day)?

It just says, "Lord's Day" without any qualification.

Mark 2:28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."
Matthew 12:8 For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath."
Luke 6:5 Then Jesus said to them, "The Son of Man is Lord of the ...

Looking at those statements, it would be safe to assume that the Lord's Day was the Sabbath.

"Myth"...oh my gosh, I would laugh if it wasn't so serious friend.

Do you not see where Christians go on Sunday? Today and throughout twenty centuries of history, it was/is known in the oral (tradition) and written Word, the where and why.

It was not made official until the fifth century.

edit on 2-9-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

The book is anti-Catholic piece of work. You left off part of my reply. Protestantism has no devotion to the saints. Name one. And name the Protestant saints before 1552? How many centuries is that jd? Oh right, Protestantism didn't exist. 33 A.D. till now, a complete history of THE faith, Roman Catholicism.

Recall the English murdered and Catholics murdered during Protestant persecution? Cromwell starved to death 2 million Irish Catholic. All of them martyrs.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by colbe

 

Protestantism (not every single group/sect), ignores the saints . . .

Protestantism has Fox's Book of Martyrs, which is the account of the martyrdom of the Protestant saints by the evil Medieval Catholic Church.
You can read it on-line, so you don't have to but an s physical book.

The Lord's Day is Sunday, it is no longer the Sabbath or celebrated on Saturday. This is the New Covenant.

You just believe it because you also believe that someone can make it so just by saying it is.

Take the Apostles word for it.

If the actual Apostles said so, then it would be in the New Testament but it isn't.

You never shared what was John talking about in Rev 1:10 (the Lord's Day)?

It just says, "Lord's Day" without any qualification.

Mark 2:28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."
Matthew 12:8 For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath."
Luke 6:5 Then Jesus said to them, "The Son of Man is Lord of the ...

Looking at those statements, it would be safe to assume that the Lord's Day was the Sabbath.

"Myth"...oh my gosh, I would laugh if it wasn't so serious friend.

Do you not see where Christians go on Sunday? Today and throughout twenty centuries of history, it was/is known in the oral (tradition) and written Word, the where and why.

It was not made official until the fifth century.

edit on 2-9-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

My "saying" something, my opinion or your opinion means nothing. It has been shared, given to Christians
by the first Christians. It has been revealed, which day they were talking about, the meaning of "the first day of the week."

Jesus went to worship God in assembly but there are some who say no. They sit home to their loss.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by colbe

 

Protestantism (not every single group/sect), ignores the saints . . .

Protestantism has Fox's Book of Martyrs, which is the account of the martyrdom of the Protestant saints by the evil Medieval Catholic Church.
You can read it on-line, so you don't have to but an s physical book.

The Lord's Day is Sunday, it is no longer the Sabbath or celebrated on Saturday. This is the New Covenant.

You just believe it because you also believe that someone can make it so just by saying it is.

Take the Apostles word for it.

If the actual Apostles said so, then it would be in the New Testament but it isn't.

You never shared what was John talking about in Rev 1:10 (the Lord's Day)?

It just says, "Lord's Day" without any qualification.

Mark 2:28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."
Matthew 12:8 For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath."
Luke 6:5 Then Jesus said to them, "The Son of Man is Lord of the ...

Looking at those statements, it would be safe to assume that the Lord's Day was the Sabbath.

"Myth"...oh my gosh, I would laugh if it wasn't so serious friend.

Do you not see where Christians go on Sunday? Today and throughout twenty centuries of history, it was/is known in the oral (tradition) and written Word, the where and why.

It was not made official until the fifth century.

edit on 2-9-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

You are professing Martin Luther's heresy, not God's revelation. Sola Scriptura is false. It even says in your
KJV Bible, not everything Jesus did or said is written down.

Paul is an APOSTLE. You reject we can't know what day they met to worship God in the New Covenant.
Sunday worship has been going on for 2000 years.

~ ~ ~

Acts Of Apostles 20:7
And on the first day of the week, when we were assembled to break bread, Paul discoursed with them, being to depart on the morrow: and he continued his speech until midnight.


1 Corinthians 16:2
On the first day of the week let every one of you put apart with himself, laying up what it shall well please him; that when I come, the collections be not then to be made.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by colbe

 

Protestantism (not every single group/sect), ignores the saints . . .

Protestantism has Fox's Book of Martyrs, which is the account of the martyrdom of the Protestant saints by the evil Medieval Catholic Church.
You can read it on-line, so you don't have to but an s physical book.

The Lord's Day is Sunday, it is no longer the Sabbath or celebrated on Saturday. This is the New Covenant.

You just believe it because you also believe that someone can make it so just by saying it is.

Take the Apostles word for it.

If the actual Apostles said so, then it would be in the New Testament but it isn't.

You never shared what was John talking about in Rev 1:10 (the Lord's Day)?

It just says, "Lord's Day" without any qualification. Mark 2:28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath." Matthew 12:8 For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath." Luke 6:5 Then Jesus said to them, "The Son of Man is Lord of the ... Looking at those statements, it would be safe to assume that the Lord's Day was the Sabbath.

"Myth"...oh my gosh, I would laugh if it wasn't so serious friend.

Do you not see where Christians go on Sunday? Today and throughout twenty centuries of history, it was/is known in the oral (tradition) and written Word, the where and why.

It was not made official until the fifth century.

edit on 2-9-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

I have to smile, you don't bother to wonder what John means by "the Lord's Day." "Safe to assume" no assurance in that statement, sounds like grasping.

It's because none of these three verses say "the Lord's Day." The meaning has been revealed but you reject the oral revelation of God passed down.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by colbe

 

Protestantism (not every single group/sect), ignores the saints . . .

Protestantism has Fox's Book of Martyrs, which is the account of the martyrdom of the Protestant saints by the evil Medieval Catholic Church.
You can read it on-line, so you don't have to but an s physical book.

The Lord's Day is Sunday, it is no longer the Sabbath or celebrated on Saturday. This is the New Covenant.

You just believe it because you also believe that someone can make it so just by saying it is.

Take the Apostles word for it.

If the actual Apostles said so, then it would be in the New Testament but it isn't.

You never shared what was John talking about in Rev 1:10 (the Lord's Day)?

It just says, "Lord's Day" without any qualification.

Mark 2:28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."
Matthew 12:8 For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath."
Luke 6:5 Then Jesus said to them, "The Son of Man is Lord of the ...

Looking at those statements, it would be safe to assume that the Lord's Day was the Sabbath.

"Myth"...oh my gosh, I would laugh if it wasn't so serious friend.

Do you not see where Christians go on Sunday? Today and throughout twenty centuries of history, it was/is known in the oral (tradition) and written Word, the where and why.

It was not made official until the fifth century.

edit on 2-9-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

The day has never changed. Paul tells us the day, He's a first Christian. Protestantism didn't exist in the fifth century. 33 A.D. until October 31, 1517, Christian history is Roman Catholic less a couple of early sects.

Silly too, "official" means some type of authority. Protestantism rejects the authority of the Church.

of·fi·cial
əˈfiSHəl/
adjective
adjective: official

1. relating to an authority or public body and its duties, actions, and responsibilities.

May I have a high-five from any Catholics, dear non-Catholic brothers and sisters in Christ or any Orthodox on the ATS religion forum?

This thread is cancelled. Go home nothing to argue here, another rebut of the thread title, we can know, God's revealed it. And evidence for those limiting God's revelation, the Bible Aloners,

Christians all agree Jesus arose on Sunday. They accept the meaning of "the first day of the week" as written in all four Gospels below. The Holy Day of Easter is Sunday.

Church comes from the word assemble. Paul says it twice, the first Christians assembled to worship God on the "first day of the week."



Matthew 28:1
And in the end of the sabbath, when it began to dawn towards the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalen and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre.


Mark 16:2
And very early in the morning, the first day of the week, they come to the sepulchre, the sun being now risen.


Mark 16:9
But he rising early the first day of the week, appeared first to Mary Magdalen, out of whom he had cast seven devils.


Luke 24:1
And on the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came to the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared.


John 20:1
And on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalen cometh early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre; and she saw the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

reply to post by colbe

Cromwell starved to death 2 million Irish Catholic. All of them martyrs.

There is an episode of the BBC TV show about Ireland, Ballykissangel (Season 6, episode 7, where they call it a "Mass Rock") that alludes to that time, where they find a rock on a hillside with a cross carved into it that was used as a makeshift altar to have their rites out of site of the English.
I have to side with the Catholics in this particular situation, where they are the ones being persecuted. Cromwell was guilty of a multitude of crimes.

I don't think that saints are in need of being worshipped.

You left off part of my reply.

Most of my posts that are in the form of a reply to an earlier post have a link at the top, so you can jump back to see the whole thing.

They sit home to their loss.

I had this confirmed to me a few days ago by my sister in law who is a Catholic, that the church made Saturday just as good as Sunday. So you are behind the times with church decisions and beating a dead horse. Protestants should be defending Sunday, not Catholics. You are actually undermining the authority of the church with your misguided defense of Sunday sanctity over Saturday.

t's because none of these three verses say "the Lord's Day."

It is the day that the Lord is the lord of. That to me sounds like it is the Lord's day. I don't see how you can fail to make the connection.

Silly too, "official" means some type of authority.

The distinctive quality of Sunday was officially established by the Ecumenical Council of the Church, but not until the 400's.
The church giveth and the church taketh away. So, bye-bye Sunday specialness, and get caught up with your church authority. Try talking to you local priest rather than listening to me having to inform you about your own church.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by colbe

 

Cromwell starved to death 2 million Irish Catholic. All of them martyrs.

There is an episode of the BBC TV show about Ireland, Ballykissangel (Season 6, episode 7, where they call it a "Mass Rock") that alludes to that time, where they find a rock on a hillside with a cross carved into it that was used as a makeshift altar to have their rites out of site of the English.
I have to side with the Catholics in this particular situation, where they are the ones being persecuted. Cromwell was guilty of a multitude of crimes.

I don't think that saints are in need of being worshipped.

You left off part of my reply.

Most of my posts that are in the form of a reply to an earlier post have a link at the top, so you can jump back to see the whole thing.

They sit home to their loss.

I had this confirmed to me a few days ago by my sister in law who is a Catholic, that the church made Saturday just as good as Sunday. So you are behind the times with church decisions and beating a dead horse. Protestants should be defending Sunday, not Catholics. You are actually undermining the authority of the church with your misguided defense of Sunday sanctity over Saturday.

t's because none of these three verses say "the Lord's Day."

It is the day that the Lord is the lord of. That to me sounds like it is the Lord's day. I don't see how you can fail to make the connection.

Silly too, "official" means some type of authority.

The distinctive quality of Sunday was officially established by the Ecumenical Council of the Church, but not until the 400's.
The church giveth and the church taketh away. So, bye-bye Sunday specialness, and get caught up with your church authority. Try talking to you local priest rather than listening to me having to inform you about your own church.

edit on 5-9-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

History shows for 2000 years and to this day, the faithful gather to worship God in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. "Breaking Bread" is the first term used for the Eucharist. Quite a percentage of non-Catholic Christians assemble for their service and homily on Sunday. Both Catholics and Protestants gather together on Sunday in a building called a Church.

The Saturday evening Mass is new to the faith, it fulfills the Sunday obligation for those who cannot attend on Sunday, it is called the Vigil Mass.

Using "I" or "That to me" proves nothing. Your PO or mine doesn't matter, it is what has been revealed by the Apostles and of course, logical, are Christ's teachings.

You do not have Athanasius' extra OT books in your KJV so your denial of a Catholic Canon was a lame rebuttal. Silly Luther tossed 7 books from the Canon to his loss. Pay no attention to the heretic behind the curtain. The world knows why he removed them, they obviously showed his new teachings (heresies) to be false. Jesus established THE faith. The Bible is a Catholic book. God wants you to become Roman Catholic.

I am not planning this time to reply to everyone of your divided up responses. Takes much too long a time.

Protestant and Orthodox celebrate the day Our Lord arose from the dead too, the first day of the week, Easter
Sunday.

I shared verses about the Lord's resurrection. There is this repeated term in them...the first day of the week. Hmmm, multiple verses saying when Our Lord arose from the dead and no responses.


God bless you jimdewey,


colbe

reply to post by colbe

History shows for 2000 years and to this day, the faithful gather to worship God in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Maybe you should give up your Catholic membership and join a Protestant church, so you can worship Sunday, since your church no longer supports your view that you are more blessed if you go on Sunday.

colbe,

re: "... multiple verses saying when Our Lord arose from the dead and no responses."

Actually, there is only one verse - Mark 16:9 - that says that the resurrection took place on the first day of the week. And even that verse is suspect. Most good study Bible versions in their notes question whether Mark wrote verses 9-20 as opposed to them being added at a later date. But even if verse 9 were authentic it could just as well be translated with the comma being placed after the word "risen" (past tense) instead of after the word "week". As you know, punctuation marks were not in the early writings and had to be determined by the translators according to their subjective understanding of the text's meaning. Several versions that place the comma after "risen" are "The Centenary Translation", "The Sacred Scriptures-Bethel Edition", "The Contemporary English Version", and God's New Covenant-A New Testament Translation". At any rate, the verse says nothing about a first day of the week observance as a special day for rest and worship.