Evidence for God from Science

Posted: **Tue Dec 13, 2005 12:47 pm**

Why did many christians accept the change of the sabbath form saturday to sunday? When and why did they change it? Its a commandment. The commandments shouldn't be changed. I'll one day prove it (I Hope). I should've never been changed.

Posted: **Tue Dec 13, 2005 1:38 pm**

Strictly speaking, the Sabbath was never changed. What did happen was that Christians began meeting on Sunday (the Lord's day) to worship celebrate Christ's resurrection--and this began happening in the apostles' day, so don't think it was something the Church Fathers decided on--rather than on Saturday.

As for keeping the fourth commandment, we are no longer under the Law, and that includes the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath principle still applies, but not in the form of a commandment.

God bless

I wonder how long it will be before I start getting objections based on the moral law still applying and/or straw men/slippery slopes such as, "so we are allowed to murder and worship false gods then?!? :p

Posted: **Tue Dec 13, 2005 2:17 pm**

I object

I am going to give brief Acts 15 Speech... This Came from a Respected Member of another Forum

Paul and Barnabas had returned to Antioch from their first missionary journey (Acts 13, 14). Shortly thereafter some Jewish Christians from Jerusalem came to Antioch and began teaching that the gentile Christians must be circumcised in order to be saved. Paul and Barnabas disagreed with them and they decided to go to Jerusalem to get to the bottom of the controversy. Note that Acts 15:1 does not mention the keeping of the law but Acts 15:24 does--these matters are tied very closely together.

When they arrived in Jerusalem, they all met with the Apostles and Church leaders to consider the matter. Peter recounted how the gospel had first been given to the gentiles through the conversion of Cornelius' household (Acts 10) and concluded with this statement in Acts 15:10 "Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?" If the Jews could not keep the law, why would the gentiles be required to?

James, the leader of the Jerusalem Church, gives his decision in verses 13-21. He concludes that the gentiles should not be required to keep the law but that they should be instructed and encouraged to abstain from "pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood." (verse 20) James reason for making this request is that there are Jews in every city (verse 21). Perhaps he is hoping that the gentile Christians can be a witness to these Jews.

Verses 23-29 contain the text of the letter that was sent to the gentile Christians from the Jerusalem Church. This letter was delevered to the Church in Antioch by Paul and Barnabus along with representatives of the Jerusalem Church who would testify of the matter in person. From this passage of scripture, it seems clear to me what the Apostles' intent was. I encourage each of you to read these scriptures yourself and prayerfully consider what God is saying to you through them.

Paul himself was always carefull to keep the law. However, when he recounts this Jerusalem meeting in Galatians 2 he emphasizes that he refused to allow Titus, who was with him and was a Greek, to be circumcised. In other scriptures, Paul encourages Jewish Christians to continue following the law and encourages the gentile Christians to continue in their "uncircumcision" (I Corinthians 7:19-20).

This does not mean that the gentile Christians are free to do whatever they want to do. Paul encouraged them to "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage" (Galatians 5:1). He also encouraged them to "Walk in the spirit..." (Galatians 5:16, Romans 8:1).

As you know, Jesus was also careful to follow the law. He said that not one jot or tittle would pass from the law until all was fulfilled (Matthew 5:18). When asked which commandment was the greatest Jesus did not respond with one of the '10' but rather said "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets" (Matthew 22:37-40). I personally believe that this is the one lesson that the Church most needs to learn today.

Jesus said that the law would be fulfilled and He went on to keep the law perfectly. No one before Him had been able to do this and no one after Him has succeeded either. However, Paul writing in Romans 8:4 said that "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." I want to make two points here: 1) the law contains the righteousness of God, and 2) God's intent is that this righteousness will be "fulfilled" in us.

Paul writes in Romans 13:8-10 "Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law." If we can learn to love one another the way that God loves us, this "righteousness" will be fulfilled in us as the scriptures promised it would be.

I love this passage of scripture in Romans 13. It tells us that love fulfills the law. Then it identifies which law it is talking about (Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet). Finally it includes a "catch-all" clause (if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself). All of the commandments are summed up in this phrase "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself".

Jesus intends for His followers to be righteous and full of His love one for another. We may not be able to all agree on what every scripture means but we can all do more to show His love. It may seem strange to you that this post started out discussing the law and ended up talking about God's love but I hope you can see that these two topics are related to each other by the scriptures--not by my words. In closing, let me remind each of you that "By this shall all [men] know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another" (John 13:35).

Posted: **Tue Dec 13, 2005 2:33 pm**

Posted: **Tue Dec 13, 2005 2:56 pm**

Even though almost all of my family is catholic I still love them (I'm not catholic). And as we all should, I love God with all my heart, strenght, soul, and with all my mind. I love him more than anyone for being a perfect god.
So if we somehow disobey a law but fulfill the first commandment and respect and love everybody what happens?

Posted: **Tue Dec 13, 2005 3:18 pm**

Posted: **Wed Dec 14, 2005 12:19 pm**

Thanks

Posted: **Fri Dec 16, 2005 10:07 pm**

Hello Halcyon Dude,

You're right about the Sabbath. It's a commandment and was blessed and hallowed by God at creation long before the Israelites were given the law at Sinai.

The truth is that Constantine was a Sun worshipper (the god Mithras actually) and when he allegedly converted to Christianity in the early fourth century, he determined to organise and develope it according to his own mandate.

The ancient pagans worshipped the sun and the moon gods by their various names - Shamash, Moloch, Remphan, Kiun or Kaiwan, Sin, Baal etc. They also worshipped the Mother Goddess associated with Venus, Diana, Aphrodite, Isis, Ishtar or Easter, Inanna, Demeter and so on.

Weekly worship by most pagans was conducted on the weekly day of the sun. This long preceded the incarnation of Christ.

Constantine and his successors made a number of decisions that served political purposes and one such decision was to change the weekly day of Christian worship from the seventh day (Sabbath) to the first day or day of the sun. The Romans wanted to remove all connections to the Jews who they hated and the Sabbath was viewed as a Jewish tradition rather than a command in the law of Almighty God.

Roman leaders wanted to appeal to the masses and gain as much support as possible so it was in their interest to appeal to the Sun worshippers by changing the Christian day of worship from the Sabbath to the same day as the pagans. They also substituted biblical injunctions, concepts, themes etc. with pagan rituals and passed off pagan gods as biblical in origin. Passover is one such example.

Greek mythology, the Sun cults, ancient Babylonian rituals, and Gnostic elements were syncretised into what we now call mainstream Christianity.

If you are interested in learning more about this, an online search using google for example, will provide a lot of helpful info. Key words like Mithras, Gnosticism and Christianity, winter solstice celebrations, Ishtar, quartodecimen disputes, etc. would probably give you a good start.

Biblical support for worshipping Almighty God on the seventh day Sabbath is overwhelming in both the OT and NT. There is in contrast no support for Sunday worship in spite of arguments to the contrary.

Many will disagree with what I have written here but we must all undertake a very honest and diligent study with prayer to prove certain for ourselves what we must do to please our heavenly Father.

What we believe and do as individuals is most important. Conformity to a group or majority consensus in this world will only lead to disappointment.

Submitting to God and doing His will no matter what that might entail is what His people are called to do.

I hope this helps,
R7-12

Posted: **Mon Dec 19, 2005 7:39 am**

Posted: **Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:03 pm**

Hello Jbuzza,

I said,

Biblical support for worshipping Almighty God on the seventh day Sabbath is overwhelming in both the OT and NT. There is in contrast no support for Sunday worship in spite of arguments to the contrary.

To which you replied,

Romans 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it.

This passage was taken out of context. The entire thought concerns the matter of how we affect those who are weak in the faith (Romans 14:1-4). In this particular case in chapter 14 of Romans, Paul gives the examples concerning eating and fasting. Regarding fasting, God's people are instructed to fast for particular reasons, therefore an individual will choose a particular day for fasting and prayer (coincidently, I'm fasting this very day for a particular reason, thus I have esteemed this day and others have not). The day one chooses to fast and pray may be esteemed (SGD 2929 krino: to separate, prefer, determine) over other days for this purpose. Some will see all days alike while others separate one above another for a holy purpose such as fasting as is the case in Romans 14. The evidence for this is given in verse 6,

He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks.

The issue is not the seventh day of the week which is the commanded day given for worship. This was never in doubt or questioned in the entire Bible. No one is to choose for themselves which day they wish to set aside as the weekly Sabbath because to do this and not observe the seventh day Sabbath is a sin.

The other text you cited was,

Colossians 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

I find it astonishing how the very texts which prove we are required to obey God are given in defense of doing away with His commands.

Do you think the brethren at Colosae kept the Holy Days, New Moons, and Sabbaths of God as did all the people of God? Well if they didn't, and keeping them wasn't necessary, and if they had been made void by Christ somehow fulfilling their requirement, then why the admonition to not allow anyone to judge you in respect to eating and drinking (Clean meats only and wine is not prohibited), or of keeping the Holy Days, New Moons, and Sabbaths of God?

The very fact that they were admonished not to allow anyone to pass judgment on how these things were observed, proves they were keeping them.

It should also be noted that the Greek equivalent to the English word 'is' at the end of verse 17 is not in the Greek texts. This provides a more clear understanding of the intent of the sentence. I will post it without the word 'is', highlight a few words, and place in parenthesis the additional though paul added to help isolate the point he was making.

Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days, (which are a shadow of things to come); but the body of Christ.

So it is the body of Christ or the church that is responsible for teaching correctly the commandments of God such as clean and unclean meats (Lev. 11:1ff, Deut 15:12ff), the proper use of alcohol (Deut. 14:22-26, Is. 5:11, Amos 9:13-15, Ec. 9:5-10, Hos. 4:11, Matt. 11:19; 26:27-28, 1 Cor. 11:21-22) and the correct observance of the Holy Days, New Moons, and Sabbaths of God, and not any man. In other words, judgments concerning the correct administration of the law of God are to be undertaken by the body of Christ and not by individuals alone.

BTW, the Holy Days, New Moons, and Sabbaths of God will carry on into the millennium as a requirement for all flesh as part of the way we are to correctly worship the one true God (Lev. 23:1ff, Num. 10:10, Ps. 81: 1-4, Amos 8:5, 1 Chron. 2:4, Neh. 10:33, Ez. 46:3, Ex. 16:23-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16, Deut. 5:12-15, Is. 56:2-6; 58:13; 66:23, Heb. 4:9-11, Col. 2:16-17, Zech. 14:16-19).

R7-12

Posted: **Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:33 pm**

Posted: **Mon Dec 19, 2005 6:03 pm**

Jbuzza,

First off I just want to say that the attitude behind your response is most welcome. It's very common for those who are against observing the law to attack those who speak according to it.

You seem to be very convinced that “there is nothing in the law for you” and if you are not interested in a discussion, that I believe could lead to a more accurate understanding of the truth, then we can leave it as it is.

I don't want to debate or argue but only have open, honest discussions as I'm sure you do also.

If, on the other hand, you would like me to share with you why I believe the law is current, spiritual, and central to Christ, I would be happy to discuss it.

There is much in your response that I would very much like to respond to but until you let me know whether you would like to continue or not, I would just like to leave you with a thought.

You said,

I believe that I cannot keep the Law

I can appreciate the perspective from where you are looking at this. What I would like you to consider is, what part of “you shall have no other gods before Me” are you incapable of keeping?

Perhaps the difficulty lies with the teachings this world offers concerning the purpose, value, principles, concepts and elements of the law of God and not with our ability to reason.

Anyway, I hope we can either leave the discussion on a friendly note or engage in one that is both friendly and edifying.

R7-12

Posted: **Tue Dec 20, 2005 7:22 am**

Posted: **Wed Dec 21, 2005 4:59 am**

Hi Jbuza,

You wrote,

I am very open to a discussion on the Law.

I'm glad to hear it.

I want to point out that I believe that I do keep the law in large part. I know that I fail to at times, and that the Grace of our Lord is great.

Yes, I'm an expert at failing to do what's right in the eyes of God. And indeed by the grace of God we are forgiven when we repent.

I am not arguing that the Law isn't good or that there is something wrong with trying to adhere to it.

Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good (Rom. 7:12)

I do however believe that loving my neighbor and honoring my God is a more sure way, for me, to please my father, and when I do so I know that I must be keeping the Law,

Lev. 19:18, Deut. 6:4-5, Matt. 22:37-40, Rom. 13:8-10, Gal. 5:14, James 2:8-9.

But I do not seek to keep the Law. I believe that Jesus freed me from the LAw.

Well I was with you right up to this point.

I wrote,

I can appreciate the perspective from where you are looking at this. What I would like you to consider is, what part of “you shall have no other gods before Me” are you incapable of keeping?

Your reply,

I beleive by seeking to honour my God that I am keeping that commandment.

So, you're a commandment-keeper are ya? Well we'll have to do something about that!

Seriously though, if you believe it's inecessary to keep the first commandment, then you have not been freed (not a good word to discribe this) from keeping that part of the law otherwise you wouldn't be required to honour your God.

Your position seems a bit confused for on the one hand you find ways of claiming that you keep the law and believe it is good, but on the other hand you distance yourself from the requirement to keep it and say that Christ has freed you from having to keep it.

It's true that the death of Christ has freed us from one aspect of the law but not the rest of the law.

What most people don't seem to realize is the law consists of many parts and different functions or purpose. Many wish to lump it all together and say that Christians are not required to keep any part of it.

What's your take on the Biblical injunction to observe the commands of God?

BTW, are you by chance from Canada or Australia?

Just curious,
R7-12

Posted: **Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:20 pm**