"THE LORD'S DAY IS THE SABBATH DAY NOT SUNDAY ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURES

[3rdAngel]

Well, we know that ‘Sunday’ was made the day to worship God because of the command by Emperor Constantine so that it merged with the worship of the Roman God of the Sun, ‘Sol’. This, to me, implies that ‘Sunday’ was not the original day of worship of the Jewish God, Yahweh. And since ‘Saturday’ was given over in contemporary times as a day of rest following Jewish beliefs, it was thus thrust upon the church society to retain Sunday Christian worship even while knowing that it did not follow the command of Sabbath Day worship but the Roman Catholic command (RC’s being the predominant Christian belief)

I agree with much of what you said here Soapy well written and thanks for helping to get back to discussing the OP. It is much appreciated.

But, again, the question is about “The Lord’s Day”! For me, the question is “Which Lord” is being referred to? In all, for me, I have no concrete idea and nor do I find it a point of material consequence. From the scriptures, Paul is the only person making reference to that phrase and there is no other information - except an inference to the Sabbath - that we have!

You mean John as John was the writer of Revelation's reference in Revelation 1:10. I agree mostly with what you say here, although I believe that the reference to "the Lords day" as shown in the OP to the scriptures referring to Gods' specific ownership of the day from Genesis 2:1-3 is clearly shown in many scriptures that include, Matthew 12:8; Isaiah 58:13-14; Leviticus 19:30 and Ezekiel 20:12; 20. All these scripture prove God's claim of ownership and authority over the seventh day Sabbath commandment from Genesis 2:1-3 and Exodus 20:8-11in God's 4th commandment.

I would stray away from Sunday as the Lord’s Day as there is no reference to God blessing the first day of the Jewish week. However, some may say that theLord’s day refers to the resurrection of Jesus on the ‘First Day’ of the week - which is Sunday in contemporary times … Who knows?

Well who would have guessed. After all this time I think you and I are in agreement Soapy. I liked reading your post here. Thank you for discussing the OP.

God bless.

 

[3rdAngel]

Might I suggest at this point that those here who think the Bible is a fairytale based upon what is clearly to them "urban myth" and "wives tales" go away from this thread for a few days and study the scholarly work of the agnostic Dr Bart Erhman.
Bart is a former Christian who lost his way, however he has written extensively in support of the Historical Jesus and has shown comprehensively and in a scholarly way that the man really existed.
Once you realise that part of the Bible that documents the life of a real man is true, please cross that part of the Bible fable out.
The lookup Pontius Pilot, a man atheists for a long time claimed never existed...until archeologists uncovered artifacts proving that story in the Bible is also truth. Now cross that off the list.
Christians can prove well beyond reasonable doubt that almost all of the new testament characters really existed using evidence outside of the Bible. Cross that off you fable list.

Let's move onto the old testament...did you know that for many years, the only evidence supporting the existence of the Hitittes was the Bible...until archeologists stumbled across archeological evidence proving they really existed? Cross that off your list.
Hexekiahs aqueducts in Jerusalem...clearly proven fact now that Hezekiah really existed. Cross that off your list.
Egypt...not even worth going into...it comprehensively supports the biblical narrative. Cross that off your list.

One could go on for days and thousands of pages of supporting evidence (extant to Bible writings) that on the balance of probabilities absolutely refute any claim the Bible characters are a myth.
When one adds all of this up, and then asks some simple questions:

Where did I come from?
Why am I here?
Where am I going...what comes next in the future? After I did is the life after death?

Genuinely think about those questions and consider this;

No one naturally wants to get sick or die. We resist those things...it doesn't make us feel good. Why is that?

The Bible clearly says, in order to be saved from eternal death, YOU MUST BELIEVE the gospel.
You cannot be saved if you do not believe.
So for those who say to Christians, "if God is true, come back and tell me and I'll change my mind and believe"

May I ask you to read the parable of the 10 virgins...they missed the wedding because their lamps went out and they did not carry spare oil. They went in search of oil and missed everything...they returned too late and banged on the door asking to be let in. As was the case with those killed in the flood who banged on the door of the ark pleading to be let in...it was too late. You cannot change your mind once the event starts. that event is close of probation and the second coming...or for those who did beforehand, when you die. You must make this choice now, not later.

Remember what Jesus said to doubting Thomas..."blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed"

I implore the doubters to just start with the basics and confirm using history the characters in the Bible. It's easy to find a huge amount of conclusive evidence to prove they existed. Please do that. Then study the theological stuff with a historical foundation of the characters. Once you do that, the wives tale folklore bias is gone and you can look more genuinely at finding answer to the epistomolical questions that are really important ...what comes next...is there anything being offered by my current world view? If it turns out there really is a Christian God, can I be saved as a person who consciously denies He exists?

Good points @AdamjEdgar thanks for sharing. I hope your post can be a blessing of wisdom to those who will receive it. Well said.

God bless

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Of course all days belong to the Lord but the Loed's day does not reder to either Saturday or Sunday. It is the day in the future when Christ will return and put all nations under his rule.

 

[3rdAngel]

Of course all days belong to the Lord but the Loed's day does not reder to either Saturday or Sunday. It is the day in the future when Christ will return and put all nations under his rule.

Hi LWS, for me the scriptures are very clear here....

The term "the Lord's day" was used by some in the early Church as a reference to Sunday worship in celebration of the resurrection of Jesus. It comes from a scripture in the bible found in Revelation 1

• REVELATION 1:10 10, I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet

The Greek words used for the day that JOHN was in the Spirit of is the for Lord's day are

• REVELATION 1:10 εγενομην εν πνευματι εν τη κυριακη ημερα και ηκουσα οπισω μου φωνην μεγαλην ως σαλπιγγος

The word "κυριακη" (translit. "kuriake") is an Adjective - Dative - Singular - Feminine. This means it is being used as a 'possessive' as ownership or belonging to ("of", see 1 Corinthians 11:20, "the Lord's supper"), which means the "day" in context belongs to "the Lord". It is literally "the Lord's (belonging to) day". This means, that the "day" in context is uniquely "the Lord's" out of all the 7 days of the week, for the day under consideration is that which exists within the week, as a day which repeats weekly. This is extremely important, as those who incorrectly assume it to mean "the first [day] of the week" in lieu of Jesus' resurrection, cannot get a weekly occurrence out of a one-time event, in fulfillment of typology of the Firstfruit/Wavesheaf in Leviticus 23:9-14, as made known in 1 Corinthians 15:20,23

The problem here however is that there is not a single scripture that references Sunday or the first day of the week (bible names for the days of the week) to being "the Lords day" in scripture.

According to the scripture "the Lords day" however can be referenced to "the Sabbath day" of Gods' 4th commandment found in Exodus 20:8-11.

Letting the scriptures answer this question

• WHAT DAY IS THE LORD'S DAY ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES?

• MATTHEW 12:8 FOR THE SON OF MAN IS LORD EVEN OF THE SABBATH DAY

This then promotes a bit of a dilemma for the Church as there is not a single scripture in all of the bible that days "the Lords day" from Revelation 1:10 is Sunday. Yet there is many scriptures referencing "the Lords day" or Gods' specific claims to ownership of any particular day to the Sabbath day that he blessed and set aside as a holy day of rest for a memorial of creation (see Genesis 2:1-3) and made one of Gods' 10 commandments (Exodus 20:8-11).

God's "ownership" of the Sabbath day or "Lord's day is also repeated elsewhere as "MY" (ownership of the day as in the Greek used in REVELATION 1:10 κυριακη). Other scriptures in the bible pointing to "the Lords day" as being the Sabbath day...

• MATTHEW 12:8 FOR THE SON OF MAN IS LORD EVEN OF THE SABBATH DAY. (the Sabbath day is Lord's day)

• ISAIAH 58:13-14 [13], If you turn away your foot from the SABBATH, from doing your pleasure on MY HOLY DAY (God's claim to ownership of the Sabbath day); and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the LORD, honorable; and shall honor him, not doing your own ways, nor finding your own pleasure, nor speaking your own words: [14], Then shall you delight yourself in the LORD; and I will cause you to ride on the high places of the earth, and feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father: for the mouth of the LORD has spoken it.

• LEVITICUS 19:30 You shall keep MY SABBATHS, (God's claim to ownership of the Sabbath day)and reverence my sanctuary: I am the LORD.

• EZEKIEL 20:12 Moreover also I gave them MY SABBATHS, (God's claim to ownership of the Sabbath day) to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the LORD that sanctify them.

As shown above from the scriptures the term "the Lords day" has direct links back to Gods' "seventh day Sabbath" in both the old and the new testament scriptures showing that the day God claims ownership over and authority over is the "seventh day Sabbath". However there is not scripture references in all of the bible that linked "the Lords day" of Revelation 1:10 back to Sunday worship or the first day of the week. Sunday worship as a replacement God 4th Commandment of the 10 commandments that give us the knowledge of what sin is when broken as shown in Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7 and 1 John 3:4 is not found anywhere in the scriptures. Sunday worship is a man-made teaching and tradition that is not supported in the bible. There is not a single scripture in all of Gods' Word that says Gods' 4th commandment has now been abolished and we are now commanded to keep Sunday in honor of the resurrection of Jesus.
I believe Jesus is calling us back to His Word and to come out from following man-made teachings and traditions that lead us away from God and His Word to break the commandments of God as Jesus tells us in John 10:16; John 4:23-24 and Matthew 15:3-9.

Take Care.

 

[samtonga43]

Oh just the usual, personal attacks and garbage.

Personal attacks? You are claiming that I attacked you personally in the post to which you are responding? Can you support your claim with evidence? I hope so...

Once again you demonstrated a reading comprehension fail. You do not just get to pick quotes out of context.

They are assumptions, whether in context or out of context.
And they are false.

The questions that you did not like were in reaction to a person being rude. There was no false assumption of someone being rude. That is a failure on your part.

Nothing at all to do with ‘not liking’ the questions. I thought I should point out to you what must be obvious to others – that you are assuming that I think it is a bad idea to be polite. That is a false assumption.

The second question is due to the fact that person had been corrected many times about being rude, I do not remember if it was you or 3rd. You both failed in that way countless times. So the question was not unjustified

I can assure you, SZ, that if either 3rdAngel or I were to begin correcting you when you are rude, we would have no time to eat, read a book, go for a walk, sleep, make love etc. etc.

When you try to prove something, context matters. Just because you disagree with someone does not make a statement a "false assumption".

Well, of course it doesn’t. Duh!

I understand context. That is not an excuse for advocating slavery.

Rash assumption once more. Who is advocating slavery? Oh my! Is there no end to your fallacious reasoning?

Lastly, of course you needed a single verse. You don't get to take credit for a single quote and claim that comes from the Bible. If one did that almost any religion could claim that any decent quote "came from my religions". Just admit it, the quote "With great power comes great responsibility" is not biblical at all. You were caught with your pants down,. You made a claim and could not support it.

I did not claim that this quote came from the Bible. You are assuming I did, but it is a false assumption, made due to your poor comprehension.

No, sorry, when it appears to be the case that means that an observation has been supported with evidence. It puts the burden of proof back upon you. But you seem to dodge that regularly.

Last sentence: please support this observation with evidence.

Oh my, another series of epic fails.

More irony. You’re outdoing yourself now, SZ.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Personal attacks? You are claiming that I attacked you personally in the post to which you are responding? Can you support your claim with evidence? I hope so...

I don't play that game. if you make an attack I will mention it. If you could not understand the attack then you are not going to understand it pages later. i do not fret over the past losses of others.

They are assumptions, whether in context or out of context.
And they are false.

No, claiming that they are assumptions is an accusation and you must support it. You do not get to claim 'assumption" any more than someone can claim that you are a child abuser without evidence. And if they are wrong then prove that they are wrong. It was your claim it is your burden of proof.

Nothing at all to do with ‘not liking’ the questions. I thought I should point out to you what must be obvious to others – that you are assuming that I think it is a bad idea to be polite. That is a false assumption.

No, if you claim that I am making an assumption you would once again have to prove that. One can never treat an assumption as a given. If one could do so I could claim that everything that you post is an assumption. And I would not have to prove anything.

I can assure you, SZ, that if either 3rdAngel or I were to begin correcting you when you are rude, we would have no time to eat, read a book, go for a walk, sleep, make love etc. etc.

I doubt it. At times I do answer rudeness with rudeness. I am almost never the first one to be rude I won't say that I am perfect, but what you perceive as rudeness may be merely corrections.

Well, of course it doesn’t. Duh!

Strange, quite often you act as if you do not know that.

Rash assumption once more. Who is advocating slavery? Oh my! Is there no end to your fallacious reasoning?

Wait a second, you jus made an unjustified accusation. How do you expect a polite answer when you do that. Ask again politely and properly and I will gladly answer. Remember, one of the rules of debate is to treat your opponent with respect.

I did not claim that this quote came from the Bible. You are assuming I did, but it is a false assumption, made due to your poor comprehension.

Oh please, you said that it was from the Bible. If you meant that the Bible taught that it can be refuted with a "So what?" So do most religions. But you asked for something positive from Spiderman and I gave you one I did not claim that it was unique to Spiderman since almost all correct teachings appear to be shared by most religions.

Last sentence: please support this observation with evidence.

Oh my, you still do not know how to demand evidence. That was a statement of opinion. But I will support it with "evidence". Your most recent post is an example of that. You kept repeating the claim of "assumption" without providing any evidence.

More irony. You’re outdoing yourself now, SZ.

No. It was true as shown by this post of yours that was just one failure after another.


Try to remember this one lesson, you don't get to claim "assumption" with impunity. Every time that you do so you really need to justify it. If you say "it was obvious" then it clearly was not.

 

[3rdAngel]

Personal attacks? You are claiming that I attacked you personally in the post to which you are responding? Can you support your claim with evidence? I hope so...

They are assumptions, whether in context or out of context.
And they are false.

Nothing at all to do with ‘not liking’ the questions. I thought I should point out to you what must be obvious to others – that you are assuming that I think it is a bad idea to be polite. That is a false assumption.

I can assure you, SZ, that if either 3rdAngel or I were to begin correcting you when you are rude, we would have no time to eat, read a book, go for a walk, sleep, make love etc. etc.

Well, of course it doesn’t. Duh!

Rash assumption once more. Who is advocating slavery? Oh my! Is there no end to your fallacious reasoning?

I did not claim that this quote came from the Bible. You are assuming I did, but it is a false assumption, made due to your poor comprehension.

Last sentence: please support this observation with evidence.

More irony. You’re outdoing yourself now, SZ.

I think the saying is true sis, you cannot correct someone that does not want to receive correction and the words of Jesus come true in Matthew 9:12-13. Thanks for sharing sis and being a part of this OP. I have enjoyed very much reading your posts (Merry Xmas) and God bless.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

It is the day in the future when Christ will return and put all nations under his rule.

Do I sense here a belief that Christs Second Coming is to literally rule the world?

That's not what the Bible actually says.

It (it says dead in Christ will be caught up in the sky with those who are alive and that we shall return to heaven with Him.

We do not return again to the earth until after the destruction of the devil and when the new heavens and new earth (Rev 21) are created and the New Jerusalem settles on the earth.

Christ will not be ruling a sinful evil creation at the Second Coming...that is not biblical (although there are quite a few who believe it). My understanding is that this doctrine has come from the Jewish faith...it's not really a sound Christian doctrine though.

 

[samtonga43]

You keep demonstrating fear. Rudeness, false attacks, refusing to answer questions. Those all indicate fear. All that you have to do is to try to have a proper discussion. That would take away my l claim of you acting as if you are afraid.. Can you act in such a way that it does not look as if you are afraid? There is a direct question for you.

You appear to be unable to answer my question. Here it is again:

"LOL! You think I'm afraid of you too? What is there to be afraid of, SZ? (Now there's a proper question; I wonder if you can answer?)"

Please try again.

 

[samtonga43]

You have not demonstrated one false assumption yet.

Here's one recent one -- plenty more to come.
You asked me why I think it is a bad idea to be polite.
You are assuming that I think it is a bad idea to be polite. That is a false assumption.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You appear to be unable to answer my question. Here it is again:

"LOL! You think I'm afraid of you too? What is there to be afraid of, SZ? (Now there's a proper question; I wonder if you can answer?)"

Please try again.

You appear to be too afraid to debate. You have not followed the rules for a debate, number is "be polite". You just can't help yourself. Look at this post. You used a smiley in an insulting manner. And you forgot that you are the one that needs to " try again".

 

[Subduction Zone]

Here's one recent one -- plenty more to come.
You asked me why I think it is a bad idea to be polite.
You are assuming that I think it is a bad idea to be polite. That is a false assumption.

Once again, you fail every time that you claim an assumption and do not provide any evidence for that charge. This is why you fail. I may have made false assumptions. But if all you can do is to claim one then you lose.

 

[Soapy]

I agree with much of what you said here Soapy well written and thanks for helping to get back to discussing the OP. It is much appreciated.

You mean John as John was the writer of Revelation's reference in Revelation 1:10. I agree mostly with what you say here, although I believe that the reference to "the Lords day" as shown in the OP to the scriptures referring to Gods' specific ownership of the day from Genesis 2:1-3 is clearly shown in many scriptures that include, Matthew 12:8; Isaiah 58:13-14; Leviticus 19:30 and Ezekiel 20:12; 20. All these scripture prove God's claim of ownership and authority over the seventh day Sabbath commandment from Genesis 2:1-3 and Exodus 20:8-11in God's 4th commandment.

Well who would have guessed. After all this time I think you and I are in agreement Soapy. I liked reading your post here. Thank you for discussing the OP.

God bless.

Well thank you for thanking me for agreeing together.

Sorry about the error : ‘Paul’ which should have been ‘John on Patmos’ - a rather glaring typo-in-mind-put-down-in-writing!!

And I see the possibility that “Lord’s Day” points to the Sabbath day as highly referred to by the various Bible scripture links you posted.

Reading extracts about the resurrection of Jesus on the third day - which equates to Jesus’ rebirth, immortality, and glorification, seems less and less likely to be the “Lord’s Day” spoken of by John on Patmos.

And concerning the commemoration of Jesus’ death, it is said:

• “And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, ‘This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you’” (Luke 22:19-20)

Could John on Patmos have been ‘in the spirit’ of the commemoration as commanded by Jesus as part of the celebrating the annual Passover?

Abraham spoke of seeing “Jesus’ Day”:

• “Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.” (John 8:56)

Joel 1:15 , Amos 5:15, Acts 2:20, and many more verses refer to ‘The day of the LORD’ but notice that this is explicitly ‘LORD’ (‘YHWH’: God the Father)

I would say that it is unlikely that, without some holy insight from the spirit of YHWH, we have no concrete way to determine exactly what John on Patmos meant by “Being in the spirit on the Lord’s Day”.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Do I sense here a belief that Christs Second Coming is to literally rule the world?

That's not what the Bible actually says.

It (it says dead in Christ will be caught up in the sky with those who are alive and that we shall return to heaven with Him.

We do not return again to the earth until after the destruction of the devil and when the new heavens and new earth (Rev 21) are created and the New Jerusalem settles on the earth.

Christ will not be ruling a sinful evil creation at the Second Coming...that is not biblical (although there are quite a few who believe it). My understanding is that this doctrine has come from the Jewish faith...it's not really a sound Christian doctrine though.

Will you please give the Bible verse that says people will "return to heaven" with Christ?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

You appear to be unable to answer my question. Here it is again:

"LOL! You think I'm afraid of you too? What is there to be afraid of, SZ? (Now there's a proper question; I wonder if you can answer?)"

Please try again.

Your question is not a real question and the other person is not obligated to answer it or even take it seriously.

 

[Soapy]

Will you please give the Bible verse that says people will "return to heaven" with Christ?

Just thinking: I think it’s meant to say, “Jesus returns to heaven with the saints”… maybe!

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Just thinking: I think it’s meant to say, “Jesus returns to heaven with the saints”… maybe!

Sorry, but I don't want anyone to think. It sometimes causes headaches. Just name the verse that says this.

 

[samtonga43]

Your question is not a real question and the other person is not obligated to answer it or even take it seriously.

Hi! Can you explain what is 'not real' about my question?

 

[samtonga43]

You appear to be too afraid to debate. You have not followed the rules for a debate, number is "be polite". You just can't help yourself. Look at this post. You used a smiley in an insulting manner. And you forgot that you are the one that needs to " try again".

Well, you say I need to try again. Do you have any authority here?
***
You find a smiley insulting? Aren’t you being somewhat over-sensitive?
***

You are assuming that I am 'afraid to debate' because it looks this way to you. However, just because "It looks to X" that Y is afraid to debate, does not mean that Y is afraid to debate.

Aren't you assuming that because something seems to you to be true, it is true?

 

[samtonga43]

Once again, you fail every time that you claim an assumption and do not provide any evidence for that charge. This is why you fail. I may have made false assumptions. But if all you can do is to claim one then you lose.

"Why do you think it is a bad idea to be polite?"
is akin to
"When did you stop beating your wife?"
or
When did you begin to think that you are intelligent?

They are assumptions / loaded questions.