Charles spurgeon on roman catholicism: “a vast mountain of rubbish covering the truth

I have taken the liberty of removing from Walter's list - that which he himself refuses to defend against the church of many scholars today that Barnabas and the letter of Ignatias are fakes and forgeries.

Now let us see what we have left.

Certainly Walter makes a good case in the list above for the fact that by the middle to late 2nd century AD - the "traditions of man" were already being placed in the stead of the Sabbath sanctified by God in Gen 2:3 and Spoken by God at Sinai.

Yet notice how "distinctly" they make the claim that Sunday is the Lord's Day -- and that each weekly Sunday is to be celebrated in honor of Christ's resurrection. THIS is the kind of language that you use when you are trying to introduce something like a holy day. "Rember the Sabbath day to KEEP IT HOLY.. God blessed the Seventh-day and Made IT Holy" -- and so the man-made tradition above appeals to very much the same language for Sunday.

How deafening the silence of SCRIPTURE by contrast to the actions of man when man-made tradition is trying to establish its own sanctified day of worship.


No Wonder Christ said in Mark 7 --

7 " BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.'
8 ""Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.''
9 He was also saying to them, ""You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition.
10 ""For Moses said, " HONOR YOUR FATHER AND YOUR MOTHER'; and, " HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER OR MOTHER, IS TO BE PUT TO DEATH';
11 but you say, "If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),'
12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother;
13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.''

And this begs the question of how it is that error could have come into the Christian church by so soon a time as the middle of the 2nd century A.D. -

ERRORs of the form of falsehoods and forgeries claiming to be of Barnabas and Ignatius.

Errors of the form that would begin to delete the Command of God and replace it with the traditions of man - in regard to one of the Ten Commandments.

Well - what does Paul predict in regard to error coming in??

Acts 20
28 ""Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
29 ""I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock;
30 and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.


Paul warns the saints in Gal 1 "Though WE or an angel from heaven should come to you with a different gospel...let him be accursed".

Paul tells Timothy to remain in Ephesus (1Tim 1) for the express purpose of suppressing error trying to raise itself up in that church at that very time.



John the Beloved in A.D. 96 says, “I was in the spirit on the Lord’s Day.” – Rev. 1:10 -- makes no mention at all of "week day one" being the "Lord's day"


Luke in about A.D. 60 says, “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them.” – Acts 20:7 -- points to a one time meeting on Saturday evening called for the purpose of a farewell sermon with a full day of Sunday-travel planned for the next morning.

(And this after already stating in vs 5 and 6 that Paul would NOT travel on holy days - such as the Lev 23 annual Sabbaths).

in Christ,

Bob

 

Bob PRESUMES his position is correct and ASSUMES that that all these quotations in the second century are "traditions of men." However it is both this PRESUMPTION and ASSUMPTION that is being challenged!

Bob's hypocrisy is glaring. First he and all SDA advocates argued that Constantine was the first to change the Sabbath to Sunday! However, when that perversion of history is exposed, then they simply reset their peg to the Second century and make the same vain invalid claim.

What Bob failed to recognize is that these distinct claims that Sunday is the Lord's day is not set in contrast to other Christians observing Saturday but it is set in contrast to the JEWISH observance as the Jews were still the primary enemies of Christians apart from religious Rome.

Victorinus in A.D. 300 says, “On the former day we are accustomed to fast rigorously that on the Lord’s Day we may go forth to our bread with giving of thanks, lest we should appear to observe any other Sabbath with the Jewish, which Sabbath He in His body abolished[/U].”

All these texts beg the question as none of these texts deal directly with the Sabbath issue and is just more PRESUMED rhetoric by Bob.

More hypocrisy by Bob. He knows fully well that the Greek term "kuriakos" in this kind of context was universally recognzied as Sunday in the Roman Empire! Paul uses it in a religious observance context in 1 Cor. 11:20 as it was a universally recognized term in the Roman Empire for the religious observances in the worship of Ceasar as the god/man.

First the Greek preposition "en" translated "upon" restricts the time frame to be within the first day of the Week. It is this day that was set apart for gathering together to break bread and for preaching.

If Bob's theory was correct, then they would have identified the time frame within "en" the seventh day of the week for such designated worship activities as coming together to break bread and for preaching.

The very words "when the disciples came together" demonstrates such assembling was not on the Seventh day but on the new Sabbath day - Sunday - "en" in which they regularly assembled for worship activitives such as breaking bread and for preaching of the word.

They ate at home and would not gather together as an assembly to break bread or to hear preaching on any other day but the day of worship - The Lord's Day - The first day of the week.

 

Works better if you "quote me" when trying to "Accuse me". Of course empty accusations seem to be your preferred method so far ... so you may not go for the idea of actually having a quote of me saying something that you want to claim I am saying.

I realize this idea gets in the way of your non-stop ranting and ad hominem - but at some point you need to think about appealing to the objective unbiased Bible student instead of all playing to your imagined "yes men".

in Christ,

Bob

 

Hint - in the actual Bible there is not "one Sabbath law" - there is the Ex 20:8-11 law regarding THE Seventh day -- as in "Tomorrow is THE sabbath" and there are other laws mentioned in Lev 23 that are very specific to very specific days selected by God.

This is not the "ONE law for as many days as you might like to imagine" system you seem to offer up in fiction.

In each of the cases whether it is an ANNUAL Sabbath or the WEEKLY Sabbath - a very specific context and reason and TIME is given for EACH.

No mixing and matching as you please.

God alone blesses, sanctifies and establishes these Sabbaths.

In the case of the Seventh-day Sabbath memorial of creation we have GOD saying --

1 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts.
2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.
3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

Ex 16
23 then he said to them, ""This is what the LORD meant: Tomorrow is the Sabbath observance, a holy Sabbath to the LORD. Bake what you will bake and boil what you will boil, and all that is left over put aside to be kept until morning.''
24 So they put it aside until morning, as Moses had ordered, and it did not become foul nor was there any worm in it.
25 Moses said, ""Eat it today, for today is a Sabbath to the LORD; today you will not find it in the field.
26 "" Six days you shall gather it, but on the seventh day, the Sabbath, there will be none.''
27 It came about on the seventh day that some of the people went out to gather, but they found none.

28 Then the LORD said to Moses, "" How long do you refuse to keep My commandments and My instructions?



Ex 20
8 ""Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 "" Sixdays you shall labor and do all your work,
10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you.
11 "" For in six days the LORD made theheavens and the earth, the sea and allthat is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

 

I did quote you and your words were "traditions of men" in regard to these 2nd century quotations and they are your PRESUMPTIONS without evidence!

 

There is only ONE Sabbath law and that is the fourth commandment however, there are more than one reasons for observing it as Creation is altogether omitted from Deuteronomy.

It is this ONE Sabbath law or fourth commandment that is given more than ONE reason for observing it, which is the basis for all Sabbath applications in Levitucus 23 and 25 or anywhere else in the Old Testament.

You are the one trying to dice and splice what God presents as ONE COMMANDMENT with various applications.

 

I promised Dr Walter an answer: Here's a little of it:



Mark 16:9, the meaning of the time-phrase, ‘proh-i prohtehi tou sabbatou’

As an example of the universally accepted interpretation, I propose “Die Wuppertaler Studienbibel”, which is said, “besitzt keine Parallele”, “Als Er aber auferstanden war, in der Frühe am ersten Tage nach dem Sabbat, erschien Er zuerst der Maria aus Magdala… Sie ging hin und verkündete…”

“While then having risen / having been raised though, in the morning on the First Day after the Sabbath, He appeared to Mary Magdalene… She went and told…”. (Quoted from F. Rienecker, ‘Das Evangelium des Markus’.)

Rienecker comments, “…der erste Mensch, dem der Auerstandene begegnet…” Note that the whole story concerns Jesus’ first APPEARANCE : “on the First Day of the week” – that naturally followed “AFTER the Sabbath”; it is NO account of Jesus’ resurrection!

The commentaries I have read don’t pay any attention to the idea that the Adverbial time-phrase ‘proh-i prohtehi tou sabbatou’ could (or should, according to Dr Walter) mean “the "first Sabbath in a new series of Sabbaths"”. The day Jesus appeared on undoubtedly is the ‘week-day’ “after the (weekly) Sabbath” as Wuppertaler explains it. As I have said, it has never before been questioned that ‘prohtehi tou sabbatou’ is the First Day : “OF THE WEEK”. Dr Walter’s idea is a novelty of his own invention— with the view to his private Sunday-propaganda agenda.

I have not mentioned the futility of Dr Walter’s attempts due to the most basic fact of all, that Mark 16:9 in no way whatsoever, states that Jesus ‘ROSE’ from the dead ‘proh-i prohtehi tou sabbatou’. What’s the use for Dr Walter’s Sunday-Resurrection promotion by the supposition ‘proh-i prohtehi tou sabbatou’ means “the "first Sabbath in a new series of Sabbaths"” IF THERE IS NO ‘RESURRECTION’ found in the text? The resurrection as historical actuality “on the First Day” or of the First Day, is alleged in 16:9 in only bad commentaries written by bad connoisseurs. The historical event “on the First Day” and of the First Day in Mark 16:9, whether “on the first day” or of the first day “"in a new series of Sabbaths"” or not, was, “he APPEARED”— NOT, ‘he rose’!

Although I believe Mark’s ‘second ending’ is ‘canon’, it is impossible to deny it has been ‘added’. The fact the second ending was not ‘original’ but was added later, explains its omission in some manuscripts. It also explains the different “vocabulary, style and subject-matter of the section” (Vincent Taylor). YET, no one before Dr Walter has come up with what he has conjured.

 

There are more, ‘endings’ to Mark. There are variants of the ‘recognised’ second ending. They all, are later. They, all are more predisposed. They all are from the age of predominant Sunday-observance. Yet they all, do not mention that Jesus rose; or the day that He would have raised on— or that He rose ‘on the first day “"in a new series of Sabbaths"”. Why? Because it would have been most absurd. But after two millennia of ‘text criticism’, Dr Walters discovers, that is, what Mark 16:9 means, specifically in connection with the word ‘prohehi’-‘prohton’ which “is a common Markan word” (Taylor). So would ‘prohtos’ be.

‘Prohtos’, “first”, says Dr Walter, in Mark 16:9, means ““the "first Sabbath in a new series of Sabbaths"”. But Dr Walter ignores the morphology, “the form and structure of words in a language, especially the consistent patterns of inflection, combination, derivation and change etc. that may be observed and classified. (Collins) Dr Walter maintains regardless, Mark 16:9 declares Jesus rose from the dead on “the "first Sabbath in a new series of Sabbaths"”, but while “first”, ‘prohtos’ is in the Dative Case “sabbath”, ‘sabbaton’, should also have been in the Dative Case, like this, ‘prohtehi sabbatohi’, which of course is not the case.

Even were Dr Walter right, “the "first Sabbath in a new series of Sabbaths"” would have meant the first “Sabbath” in a new series of Sabbaths— the first LAST day or first SEVENTH day, “in a new series of Sabbaths” or LAST or SEVENTH days. Or ‘the most important’ “in a new series of Sabbaths” or LAST or SEVENTH days; the First Day of the week never would have come in the picture; only the Sabbath or the last or Seventh Day : OF THE WEEK, would have featured.

So, Dr Walter’s idea is simply too absurd, and too fantastic for scholars to ever give thought.

Never forget, Mark doesn’t speak of the Resurrection at all, which makes Dr Walter’s interpretation that Jesus ROSE from the dead “the "first Sabbath in a new series of Sabbaths"”, even more ludicrous.

That brings us to the term, ‘sabbatou’, which Dr Walter maintains, “… = singular and only used of the fourth commandment Sabbath” …and thus never means ‘of the week’…?

Claimed Dr Walter,
“Mark 16:2 gives the normal reading for the "first day of the week" but the change in verse 9 is intentional. "Mia" is simply the regular ordinal number "first" but "prote" refers to the first in a series. Sabbaton is the regular term used for the day following the Jewish Sabbath when used with "mia" but "Sabbatou" is the normal term used for the fourth commandment Sabbath. Hence, Jesus arose "proii" early between 3am to 6am on the "first Sabbath of a new series" identified in verse 2 as the "first day of the week."”

… “but "Sabbatou" is the normal term used for the fourth commandment Sabbath”? That’s strange, isn’t it?!
“Jesus … on the "first Sabbath of a new series" … arose "proii" early” which is directly Mark 16:9 supposed to be, at least according to Dr Walter— “the "first Sabbath of a new series" identified in verse 2 as the "first day of the week…"” but… … “but "Sabbatou" is the normal term used for the fourth commandment Sabbath”— the Seventh Day? The Seventh Day— ‘of the week’? If that, is not self-contradictory, I wonder what is.

 

O yes, now I remember, Dr Walter said, ‘the Seventh Day’, but NEVER the Seventh Day ‘OF THE WEEK’!
“…nowhere in God's Word did he ever say that the Sabbath was the seventh day "OF THE WEEK." He would never say that because if He had said that then he would have changed because he applied the Sabbath to the 1st, 7th, 8th, 10th, 14th, 15th, 21st, 22nd and 28th days of the month in Levitucs 23 as well as the 50th day after 7 regular sabbaths, 7th YEAR and 50th YEAR. Hence, the principle is merely one sabbath after six non-sabbaths!
The "first day of the week" is the New covenant Sabbath and it too is one Sabbath after six non-sabbaths.”

“Spurgeon, Moody and Pink interpreted the fourth commandment just as I do. They rejected the idea that it referred to the seventh day "of the week" and rejected the Jewish observation on the seventh day "of the week." Instead they saw it as the seventh day after six working days irregardless of what day "of the week" it might or might not fall on.

Spurgeon: “expressly one whole day in seven, to be a holy Sabbath to himself (Le 19:30 De 5:12)."

However, they all agreed that the Old Testament predicted and the New Testament established it on the first day "of the week" for Christians under the New Covenant and rejected the Jewish observation.”

GE:
Dr Walter’s BASIC idea is, every one and all of “the ceremonial feasts sabbaths” of the “laws”, WERE, “the Seventh Day Sabbath”— quote: Emphasis GE: “Saturdayism dishonors the Glory of God, repudiates the grace of God and despises the Person and works of Jesus Christ and perverts the Word of God. Seventh dayism brings the soul back under the bondage of the Old Covenant as it is the sign of the Old Covenant:“But as for you, speak to the sons of Israel, saying, 'You shall surely observe My Sabbaths; for this is a sign between Me and you throughout your generations.” Ex. 31:13; Ezek. 20:12, 19-21. and thus belongs to the Law covenant which God has abolished (Col. 2:14-16).”

Quote: “… he arose on "THE FIRST DAY SABBATH" and that is … pictured in the ceremonial feasts sabbaths (Lev. 23) and predicted by David in Psalm 118:20-24 with Acts 4:10-11; 13:33).”

Quote: “The Sabbath of the Jew is to him a task; the Lord's Day of the Christian, the first day of the week, is to him a joy, a day of rest, of peace, and of thanksgiving. ………….. Spurgeon, Moody and Pink interpreted the fourth commandment just as I do. They rejected the idea that it referred to the seventh day "of the week" and rejected the Jewish observation on the seventh day "of the week." Instead they saw it as the seventh day after six working days irregardless of what day "of the week" it might or might not fall on. Spurgeon: "expressly one whole day in seven to be a holy Sabbath to himself (Le 19:30 De 5:12)." However, they all agreed that the Old Testament predicted and the New Testament established it on the first day "of the week" for Christians under the New Covenant and rejected the Jewish observation.”

More BLATANT, my eyes, have never, read.

 

All ‘sabbaths’ in the Old Testament Scriptures – in “Leviticus 23” in particular and elsewhere – according to Dr Walter, ALWAYS OCCURRED ON the Seventh Day Sabbath ‘of the week’— today’s “Saturday”! Quote: “BobRyan: “Rather Lev 23 points out that GOD ALONE can determine what day is Holy.” Dr Walter: “Oh no you don't! Not "holy" but "SABBATH REST" days! These days were SABBATHS not just "holy."”.

The Seventh Day Sabbath ‘of the week’ – today’s, “Saturday” – REGARDLESS DISTINCTION in the Old Testament Scriptures between it and ‘ceremonial sabbaths’, LIKE ALL “"SABBATH REST" days”, THEN, fell on the ‘seventh day’, a “sabbath”, whereby “the Old Testament predicted and the New Testament pictured”:— quote, “the Lord’s day sabbath … a holy Sabbath … established … on the first day "of the week" for Christians under the New Covenant”. (Emphasis GE.) The Scriptures “Old Testament” and “New Testament”, both as one, according to Dr Walter, “rejected the idea that it (“the Lord’s day sabbath”,) referred to the seventh day "of the week" and rejected the Jewish observation on the seventh day "of the week"”.

Dr Walter avers nothing distinguished any ‘sabbath-day’ so that it could be a ‘ceremonial sabbath’ because it did not regularly fall on the “seventh day sabbath”— ‘of the week’. Even though according to Dr Walter, “sabbath” without exception meant “the seventh day”, it did not mean, quote,
“the seventh day "of the week"!”.
It meant, quote,
“not the seventh day "of the week"! but the seventh day after six working days!”;
“expressly one whole day in seven to be a holy Sabbath to himself”;
“the Sabbath law was not restricted by God to any day "of the week"”;
“the seventh day after six working days irregardless of what day "of the week" it might or might not fall on”;
“God never changed and never needed to change because nowhere in God's Word did he ever say that the Sabbath was the seventh day "OF THE WEEK"”!

So, according to Dr Walter – five times in this short discussion – “Sabbath” is “not the seventh day "of the week"! but the seventh day after six working days!”.

But, says the LORD,
“I will rain bread … and the people shall gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in MY LAW, or no. It shall come to pass that on the Sixth Day they shall prepare that which they bring in; and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily. … THIS SHALL BE (LAW), WHEN the LORD shall give you … bread (8) … the thing which the LORD commanded (16) … And the Children of Israel did so. … And it came to pass that on the Sixth Day (according to God’s Law), they gathered twice as much bread. … And Moses said unto them, This is that (Law) which the LORD HATH SAID, tomorrow SHALL BE THE REST OF THE HOLY SABBATH, SABBATH UNTO THE LORD : Bake which ye will bake … and that which remaineth over, lay up … until tomorrow. And they laid it up till the next day. … And Moses said, Eat that TODAY, FOR TODAY IS THE SABBATH UNTO THE LORD … THE SEVENTH DAY WHICH IS, THE SABBATH!” Exodus 16.

 

God, with “commandment”, “gave”, his, “Sabbath, Day”, with one day’s – “the Sixth Day’s” – notification; which HE, in advance and irrespective and regardless of man’s activities or choice of “working days”-behind, “willed”, before! …
“(29) See, for the LORD hath given you the Sabbath : THEREFORE He giveth you the Sixth Day … they shall PREPARE (5) … Let no man go out on THE SEVENTH DAY. SO, the people rested on the Seventh Day.”

God’s predestinating will and providence determined “the Seventh Day Sabbath OF THE LORD GOD”; not man’s retrospective overview of his own “working days”.

“Six days ye SHALL (henceforth) gather bread; but on the Seventh Day which is the Sabbath … unto the LORD … there shall …” BY THE LORD’S DOING “… be none”. (25,26)

God, while He “gave” “the Sixth Day” and “the Seventh Day”, NAMED “the Sixth Day” and “the Seventh Day”. God at once instituted ‘the week’, explaining by word-symbol or idiom of the “Rest Day” - “Sabbath Day” the ‘seven-days-cycle’ that HE, uniquely LIMITED in Divine Revelation by the otherwise inexplicable phenomenon of “the Seventh Day Sabbath”.

The great Charles Spurgeon in
“50 Q What is required in the fourth commandment? … The fourth commandment requires the keeping holy to God such set times as he has appointed in his Word, expressly one whole day in seven, to be a holy Sabbath to himself (Le 19:30 De 5:12)” clearly means, the word “himself” is God, “himself”.

Now what Dr Walter did with this teaching of Spurgeon’s, read!
“Spurgeon, Moody and Pink interpreted the fourth commandment just as I do. They rejected the idea that it referred to the seventh day "of the week" and rejected the Jewish observation on the seventh day "of the week." Instead they saw it as the seventh day after six working days irregardless of what day "of the week" it might or might not fall on.
Spurgeon: "expressly one whole day in seven, to be a holy Sabbath to himself (Le 19:30 De 5:12)"”… “to himself ”— to MAN, Dr Walter speaking of “the seventh day after six working days” OF MAN’S “working”! Dr Walter! … “the Sabbath law was not restricted by God to any day "of the week"” … “God never changed and never needed to change because nowhere in God's Word did he ever say that the Sabbath was the seventh day "OF THE WEEK"”!

 

But as the Book Dr Walter seven times without a word from, refers to, “Leviticus 23”, expressly DIFFERENTIATES between ‘The Sabbath’ and ‘sabbaths’,

Introductory remark, verse 2:
“Speak unto the children of Israel … the feasts of the LORD which ye shall proclaim holy CONVOCATIONS (or days of congregation), these, MY feasts”—

First of all, verse 3:
“Six days shall work be done (by you): but THE SEVENTH DAY (by name) is The-Sabbath-of-Rest” (by NAME! “The-Sabbath-of-Rest”, God’s, “Rest”! The “work” of “six days”, is man’s work; the “Rest” of The-Seventh-Day-Sabbath-of-Rest, is God’s Rest.) “The-Sabbath-of-Rest, an holy CONVOCATION (or day of Congregation); ye shall do no work therein: it is The-Sabbath-of-the-LORD in all your houses (in all the world in all times.)”

Again, man’s ‘rest’ is a doing nothing, whereas the “Rest” is “of the LORD”— “the LORD’S”, and greatly to be praised because the “Rest” is his, obtained in victory, through “the exceeding greatness of his power which God worked” to “finish all the works of God”! (Promise of Jesus’ resurrection.)

Then, subsequent and subordinate, verse 4:
“THESE, are the feasts of the LORD,
also holy convocations,
which, YOU,
shall (by Law) proclaim
IN (or ‘according to’) THEIR, SEASONS :”
“Seasons”, to “DATE: In the fourteenth”;
“Seasons”, to “MONTH
(“you”, determined and “proclaimed”) the FIRST”,
“Seasons”, to “DAY-and-TIME-in-the-AFTER-NOON-of-day”—
THIS, the “Season” and “the Feast of the LORD”, “the Passover of Yahweh” in the Book of Moses, ‘The Book for the Levites’…

…proving Dr Walter an ignorant and FOR NO REASON BUT SUNDAY-WORSHIP, malicious Seventh Day Sabbath of the LORD GOD antagonist.

 

I stand corrected....not saturday or sunday but everyday. Christ is the NEW sabbath so you can dispence with all OT ways. Christ is Lord of the Sabbath.

 

Interesting what D.L. Moody said in his affirmation of God's 4th Commandment -

Here is the part where Spurgeon affirms the validity of God's 4th commandment.

When I responded to the question about whether Spurgeon and Moody were open to editing the commandments of God via the traditions of men - I responded that they did seem to embrace that idea - and of course - in true faithfulness to Christ's teaching in Mark 7, I do not choose to edit the Commands of God with the traditions of men.

But still these men do affirm some valid points on the continued authority of God's 4th commandment. Credit where credit is due.

in Christ,

Bob

 

This is the part where reading Lev 23 would have served to correct your false idea above.

There are annual Sabbaths in Lev 23 that are NOT memorials of creation and do not fall on the Ex 20:8-11 (Gen 2:1-3) 7th day Sabbath given in Eden to mankind.

The "Sabbath was made for MANKIND" statement of Christ in Mark 2:27 is not about annual Lev 23 Sabbaths - but about the Seventh-day Sabbath of Gen 2:1-3 given TO Mankind at the making OF Mankind!

in Christ,

Bob

 

My response below is to the wild empty claim above about "Constantine the first to change" -

Now comes Walter's "bait and switch" hoping the readers do not notice the context for my statement above.

To your charge "Bob PRESUMES his position is correct and ASSUMES that that all these quotations in the second century are "traditions of men." "

I simply point out the obvious. That you yourself provide no Bible texts AT ALL that use the language of your non-biblical sources!! In other words your "traditions of men" clearly state the claim that week-day-1 -- the "day of the sun" (as Justin Martyr called it) is the Lord's Day - but no such claim is found in the actual Bible to support those "traditions of men".

AND THEN - you yourself shoot your own argument in the foot when you appeal to cases where they openly condemned the Word of God choosing rather the traditions of men. (Hint: Your quote of Spurgeon).

God said
Ex 20
8 ""Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 "" Sixdays you shall labor and do all your work,
10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God; ...
11 "" For in six days the LORD made theheavens and the earth, the sea and allthat is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

But the "traditions of man" said: Walter " Spurgeon, Moody and Pink interpreted the fourth commandment just as I do. They rejected the idea that it referred to the seventh day "of the week"

(A more catholic argument in this regard could hardly be imagined than is found in Walter's statement above)

God said --
Gen 2 –
2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.
3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.
4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made earth and heaven.


But the "traditions of man" said: Walter " Spurgeon, Moody and Pink interpreted the fourth commandment just as I do. They rejected the idea that it referred to the seventh day "of the week"

(A more catholic argument in this regard could hardly be imagined than is found in Walter's statement above -- unless of course you include Tyndale)


Tyndale even goes so far as to place Christians in the seat of Christ's Mark 2:27 statement "The Son of man is LORD of the Sabbath" - Tyndale claimes that Christians are free to change God's Law as it pleases them to do so!

Where then are the Bible believing Baptists and other protestants here who will stand up for the Word of God - though the heaven's fall? Why all the deafening silence on their part given Christ's Word in Matt 10 about remaining silent in such cases?

Are they really so ably represented by Bible-denying posts claiming that the Sabbath given by God is not referring to the 7th-day of the Week?

in Christ,

Bob

 

On threads such as this one - Protestants start out by exposing what they see as a flaw in the Catholic argument. But here we see the Catholic argument turns this around on Protestants - arguing that protestants themselves are embracing/approving/validating the Catholic argument over sola scriptura.

The RCC said --

The Faith Explained (an RC commentary on the Baltimore catechism post Vatican ii) states on Page 242 that

changing the Lord's day to Sunday was in the power of the church since "in the gospels ..Jesus confers upon his church the power to make laws in his name". page 243

nothing is said in the bible about the change of the Lord's day From Saturday to Sunday. We know of the change only from the tradition of the Church - a fact handed down to us...that is why we find so illogical the attitude of many Non-Catholics, who say that they will believe nothing unless they can find it in the bible and Yet will continue to keep Sunday as the Lord's day on the say-so of the Catholic church"

. (from "The Faith Explained" page 243.))

"we know that in the O.T it was the seventh day of the week - the Sabbath day - which was observed as the Lord's day. that was the law as God gave it...'remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.. the early Christian church determined as the Lord's day the first day of the week. That the church had the right to make such a law is evident...

The reason for changing the Lord's day from Saturday to Sunday lies in the fact that to the Christian church the first day of the week had been made double holy...

nothing is said in the bible about the change of the Lord's day from Saturday to Sunday..that is why we find so illogical the attitude of many non-Catholic who say they will believe nothing unless they can find it in the bible and yet will continue to keep Sunday as the Lord's day on the say-so of the Catholic church!!
=========================================================================================================

Christ said in Mark 7 --

7 " BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.'
8 ""Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.''
9 He was also saying to them, ""You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition.
10 ""For Moses said, " HONOR YOUR FATHER AND YOUR MOTHER'; and, " HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER OR MOTHER, IS TO BE PUT TO DEATH';
11 but you say, "If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),'
12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother;
13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.''

And this begs the question of how it is that error could have come into the Christian church by so soon a time as the middle of the 2nd century A.D. -

ERRORs of the form of falsehoods and forgeries claiming to be of Barnabas and Ignatius.

Errors of the form that would begin to delete the Command of God and replace it with the traditions of man - in regard to one of the Ten Commandments.

Well - what does Paul predict in regard to error coming in??

Acts 20
28 ""Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
29 ""I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock;
30 and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.


Paul warns the saints in Gal 1 "Though WE or an angel from heaven should come to you with a different gospel...let him be accursed".

Paul tells Timothy to remain in Ephesus (1Tim 1) for the express purpose of suppressing error trying to raise itself up in that church at that very time.

Let the sincere Bible student be informed.

in Christ,

Bob

 

In Nehemiah 13:18 God's Word says "you are adding to the wrath on Israel by profaning the Sabbath".

Joel 1 and 2 describe God's means of destroying the economy when the nation chooses open rebellion against God.

Suppose that "WE be lords over the Sabbath; WE may change it for Monday or any other day, as we see need, or have two every week, if one is not enough to teach the people" - idea actually offends a holy God who is "JUST and the justifier" of those who seek Him and who will by no means pardon those who are determined to live in rebellion.

Just what if?

In Gen 15:16 Abraham is told that he is not going to replace the Caananites because "The sin of the Amorite is not yet complete".

In Matt 23 Israel is told "fill up the measure of guilt of your fathers... that upon you may come the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth from Abel to Zechariah".

Just suppose that nations with the Light of God's Word - ARE held accountable for their trampling the Law of God at some point. What then?

in Christ,

Bob

 

The annual Sabbaths are derived from the ONE sabbath law in the fourth commandment just as the civil laws are based upon the ten commandments.

 

You need to read more of both Moody and Spurgeon on this subject in order to rightly present their view. They believed in the fourth commandment exactly as I do and a fuller reading will demonstrate that to you.