Butt out...

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:ClubV12

>>Those that keep the commandments of God.<<

Quote:jasd

Those, as elucidated upon by Jesus Christ would be: The Two Great Commandments.

Quote:

Quote:John317

No, the entire Decalogue, called the Ten Commandments.

If we really love God and love our neighbor we will obey all of the Ten Commandments.

I think that my argument is more persuasive as – St John would have elected to use nomos rather than entole for ‘commandments’ in Revelation 14:12 – should he have wished to reference the Decalogue. Peculiarly St John.

(I am extemporizing here – disabuse me should I have misspoken)

>>If you don't believe this, which of the Ten Commandments did Jesus mean for us to forget or ignore?<<

I don’t think He meant that we should slice and dice the Decalogue willy-nilly; however, given Gd’s declaratives in Hosea and Lamentations, which I reference on occasion – it is obvious that those who hold to the Seventh-day Sabbath which relies upon today’s calendar – errs in deriding those who worship Gd upon another day.

Both Saturday and Sunday, though kept for different reasons – are Biblically correct – for they have been set aside that Gd may be worshipped.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:ClubV12

>>Revelation 12:17 describes the true church.

"And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ."<<

Quote:jasd

No one keeps the commandments as specified by Jesus Christ. Even your thoughts sin against the Gd and the Decalogue. That said, no one confesses Jesus Christ more than the Pope and his fellow Catholics – even believing that the Eucharist transmutes to the body and blood of Jesus Christ.

>>That verse is not claiming that people will keep the commandments of God with absolute perfection.<<

I worded is as such – because every time I see it used – it is as a bludgeon, a hard sticking point. It was my way of saying, “Get real.”

(my eyes are shot/gone - will continue tomorrow, as Gd wills)

[John317]

>>Since it's inception the Papacy has setup laws demanding Sunday worship, particularly through out the dark ages, as has the United States! This is a simple matter of historic fact.<<

Did it not have authority to do so?

No, it didn't. No one has authority to demand that you disobey God's law. We must obey God rather than man.

Acts 4:18-19

So they called them and commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. [19] But Peter and John answered them, "Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge."

[ClubV12]

jasd incorrectly states,

"Both Saturday and Sunday, though kept for different reasons – are Biblically correct..."

There is nothing biblical about keeping Sunday as a replacement for Saturday, the fourth commandment. The Catholic church, rather proudly and without apology readily admits it was they who changed the day of worship to Sunday.

But what I want to know is, how did those Muslims end up worshipping on Friday??? We KNOW where Sunday came from. :)

[John317]

But what I want to know is, how did those Muslims end up worshipping on Friday??? We KNOW where Sunday came from.

That's interesting. I don't know the answer to your question except that the Koran calls for special prayers on Friday. I will have to look and see if there's any more information about its origins.

[John317]

Both Saturday and Sunday, though kept for different reasons &#150; are Biblically correct for they have been set aside that Gd may be worshipped.

Where does this come from? Where's the evidence that God sets aside Sunday for worship of God? Perhaps you are arguing that we should worship God every day, and of course we should, but that is different from saying Sunday was "set aside" for God's worship.

As far as God is concerned, Sunday is a work day. There are six work days in the week and only one day that is holy time. God calls it "my holy day" and "the holy day of the Lord."

It's absurd to think that there was a time when suddenly all the Jews became confused as to which day is the Sabbath. Jesus wasn't confused about it, was He? Was Paul confused in Acts 13: 41, 44? Dr. Luke referred to it as "the Sabbath" both in the Gospel and in the book of Acts.

When Jesus said that the Sabbath was made for mankind, was He talking about a day that couldn't even be identified?

The writer of the book of Hebrews clearly did not think that no one knew which day of the week was the Sabbath. He said that God rested on the seventh-day Sabbath, which was the reason that God blessed it and made it holy.

The readers of Hebrews obviously were well acquainted with the Sabbath, because if they weren't, the Sabbath as a symbol of rest in Christ would have been completely meaningless to them. In Hebrews 4, there's absolutely no evidence that the Sabbath had ceased to exist. The fact that the writer of Hebrews would use the Sabbath as a sign of something so wonderful as salvation shows that he didn't view the Sabbath as anything but a blessing.

[miz3]

Very interesting discussion.

1. Sunday worship (worship of the sun) was practiced long before the RCC. Although the RCC makes the claim that it changed the "day" it is wrong in that claim. As already pointed out the Sabbath (seventh day) has already been changed long before the existence of the RCC, the existence of the Jewish Nation, etc.

Sorry but the RCC are not the ORIGINAL changers of the Sabbath (seventh day). The RCC are just late copycats. Many ancient "religions" beat them to the punch by a whole lot of time.

2. Given number one above (which is true) then SDA need to revise their views of Scripture which paint the RCC as the "great heretic" of Bible Prophecy. The RCC was merely accepting a "day of worship" that was already in place before the RCC's own existence.

3. Regardless of what SDA say, their view of the RCC is based on the historical experience of those who inaugurated the Reformation. To those "reformers" the RCC was the worst possible entity and thus their view of Scripture would put the RCC in such a "prophetic" story. SDA having their roots firmly planted in the Reformation Churches would naturally be inclined to view the RCC the same as their "religious progenitors".

This is why SDA have this particular view of Scripture and it is also why they are wrong about their interpretations of "prophecy".

If SDA view "Sunday Worship" as the "Mark of the Beast" then they need to realize that the "Mark of the Beast" (Sunday Worship) was around long, long, before the RCC was even a gleam in someone's eye. Thus, the "Mark of the Beast" cannot be the RCC but in fact must be some other entity that occurred sometime during the early Genesis account of human experience. The term "Babylon" must also have occurred back in this early Genesis account as well.

Therefore ALL ENTITIES that follow this pattern whether they be the RCC copycats, or the Bolsheviks, the Muslims, the Communist culture, Evolution Theory, modern cultural equivalence theory, etc. (all Godless entities)are all making an "image" to the original that occurred as I said in the "early Genesis account".

SDA focus on the RCC is too narrow and will eventually catch them "sleeping".

[skyblue888]

miz3, we know that Sunday, "the venerable day of the Sun" was observed by the pagans before the existence of any Catholic pope just as the true Sabbath existed before the existence of any sunday worshiper.

But the pope thought that he could transfer the sacredness of the true Sabbath upon the "venerable day of the Sun," in order to unite both pagans and Christians. Of course the pope did not invent Sunday as a day of worship but he certainly attempted to elevate that day above the true Sabbath in the name of Christ. The papacy boasts of this so-called change as their mark of authority, as though they had acted in God's stead.

The law of God remains unchanged no matter what the pretentions of the man of sin may be.

sky

[miz3]

miz3, we know that Sunday, "the venerable day of the Sun" was observed by the pagans before the existence of any Catholic pope just as the true Sabbath existed before the existence of any sunday worshiper.

But the pope thought that he could transfer the sacredness of the true Sabbath upon the "venerable day of the Sun," in order to unite both pagans and Christians. Of course the pope did not invent Sunday as a day of worship but he certainly attempted to elevate that day above the true Sabbath in the name of Christ. The papacy boasts of this so-called change as their mark of authority, as though they had acted in God's stead.

The law of God remains unchanged no matter what the pretentions of the man of sin may be.

sky

You are missing the point.

Somebody already did that in the long ago. The Sabbath (seventh day) was the only day of sacredness even after Adam sinned. Somebody or somebodies decided in that long ago period to "CHANGE THE DAY OF WORSHIP" for whatever reason to making Sunday (the first day) the holy day of worship (for whatever reason, mainly to worship the sun instead of God). Thus, that somebody or those somebodies beat the Pope in making Sunday the first day holy instead of Saturday the seventh day which God made holy.

Thus, somebody or somebodies in that long ago elevated Sunday. In doing that they elevated themselves above God and they claimed the power to do this. There is no getting around this FACT.

The Pope did NOTHING NEW that had not already been done by someone else who thought to elevate themselves above God and think to change times and laws.

This make the SDA interpretation a gross falsehood in regard to the RCC and the Pope. The RCC and the Pope like so many others in human history were nothing but minor copycats. The RCC and the Pope are just another in a long list of humans who thought they are to trump God and decide what is sacred and what is not sacred.

SDA have erroneously elevated the RCC and the Pope to status the Bible does not give them. Is the RCC and Pope wrong? Yes, and Yes. However, the RCC and the Pope are not the "great" danger of prophecy that SDA have made them out to be.

[ClubV12]

I think you missed the point Miz3.

Pagan vs Christian. Pagans worshiped a sun god, lots of people did around the time the RCC church was coming into power. What better way to accomadate the "heathens" and bring them into christianity than by, essentially, accepting the obvious, Sunday, as the day of worship. For a "con man" it's a brilliant solution, it just doesn't square with the commandments, the fourth one. The pagans could care less WHY it was done or by whom, it met their needs at the time. They could have it all.

It is a factual statement. The RCC changed the former day of worship from Saturday to Sunday. They were the FIRST christian church to do so. Put what ever reason you want on it, that fact remains.

[skyblue888]

May be it is you, miz3, who is missing the point. I understand what you are saying but there is a difference. In Old Testament times the true Sabbath was never lost sight of. The "venerable day of the sun" did not take the place of the Sabbath in the minds of the Jews for centuries. True many in Israel at times apostatized and bowed the knee to Baal but the pagan day of worship never became the official day of worship for the professed people of God. At the time of the first coming of Christ it was still kept, at least outwardly.

Daniel 7:25 is a prophecy that was not fulfilled until the fourth century A.D. After Christ, the mystery of iniquity was already at work within the Early Church. After the death of the Apostles, this mystery deepened and it led to the establishment of the papal power. Then gradually, little by little, the sacredness of the Sabbath was transfered to Sunday until all Christendom kept it in the place of the Sabbath and that went on for many centuries until the light regarding the true Sabbath shone, coinciding with the rise of the Advent Movement in the 1840s. There were only a few through these centuries who kept the true Sabbath and they had to hide.

It was apostasy in the Early Church that led to the establishment of the papal power and Satan worked through the apostate leaders in his attempt to change the day of worship. The rest is history.

sky

[John317]

...You are missing the point.

Somebody already did that in the long ago.

.....The Pope did NOTHING NEW that had not already been done by someone else who thought to elevate themselves above God and think to change times and laws.

This make the SDA interpretation a gross falsehood in regard to the RCC and the Pope. The RCC and the Pope like so many others in human history were nothing but minor copycats. The RCC and the Pope are just another in a long list of humans who thought they are to trump God and decide what is sacred and what is not sacred.

The point is that the papacy and the Catholic Church were the ones who brought Sunday worship into the Christian Church. No one says that Sunday worship among pagans started with the pope. The papacy and the Emperor of Rome brought the pagan day of the Sun into the Christian Church. Ancient church historians agree that Sunday was the day of worship in Rome and Alexandria, whereas the Christians were worshipping on the Sabbath everywhere else. (By the fifth century, Christians in most parts of the world were worshipping on both the Sabbath and on the first day of the week.) The bishop of Rome passed Church laws that discouraged Sabbath-keeping and encouraged Sunday keeping. These are facts of history.

[jasd]

I’M BUNDLING THE NEXT THREE RESPONSES TO JOHN’S POSTS AS MY ‘PUTER IS SUFFERING THE PANGS OF AGE, CRIPPLInG PANGS....

Quote:

Quote:jasd

...That said, no one confesses Jesus Christ more than the Pope and his fellow Catholics even believing that the Eucharist transmutes to the body and blood of Jesus Christ.

>>But that is not a true confession, is it?<<

Perhaps not, but almost all of Jesus Christ’s disciples left Him believing that He meant it as true.

But I digress. The ‘bread and wine’ representing the body and blood of Jesus Christ is a metaphor. One may draw from it subjectively.

>>Do you believe that the human priest is able to create the body and blood of Christ in the Mass?<<

No I don’t; however, let’s remember that those who spoke the language Jesus Christ employed two millennia ago believed that that is the point to which Jesus Christ spoke. I daresay that they had a better grasp of the language then – than we do today.

Perhaps, we ought to remember that Jesus Christ simply employed a metaphor – one draws from it subjectively.

>>That Jesus is sacrificed in an "unbloody sacrifice" on the table?<<

You’ve recoursed to “unbloody sacrifice” often – as though it were truly significant. I also have read “unbloody sacrifice” in SDA commentaries – but fail to grasp the awful significance of its utilization.

>>This, of course, is the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.<<

It is their right to draw from a metaphor what they do – just as it is the right of the .Org to represent the ‘body and blood’ with tots of pasteurized grape juice and slivers of square crackers (unleavened of course) in their ‘communion’ services.

............

Quote:

Quote:jasd

...Which brings the next question: how is it established in Writ that the King of the North is the Papacy?

>>By a close comparison of the text with the events of history.<<

But then “texts” and “events of history” are often skewed, yes? 30,000+ Protesting .orgs – and climbing... all with their own ‘texts’ and ‘histories’.

>>The papacy is also the man of lawlessness, the sea-beast of Rev. 13, and the little-horn power of Daniel 7 & 8.<<

Okay, now you’re swinging at T-ball – and like, waayyy, missing.

>>Of course, the king of the North is not always the papacy. This identity changes in Daniel 11.<<

Well, you see, an ‘insignificant’ caveat.

>>Have you watched the 3 videos that ClubV12 posted earlier?<<

Regrettably, no. I live out here on EGW’s – errr, Gd’s two green acres – and have only dial-up. Slooowwww.

............

Quote:

Quote:jasd

...Y alls keep pinging upon false and true thems v us. Writ preaches unity, or in today's vernacular, ecumenicity and St Paul preaches, Christ and Him crucifiedthats IT!

>>But this unity must be brought about by the Holy Spirit and it must be unity on the basis of truth, not false doctrines.<<

All .orgs have their share of ‘false’ doctrines – and have since the earliest days of Xtianity. The church is the NT body of Jesus Christ – a nonperfect body – but one body, nevertheless.

>>For instance, we can't unite on the idea of Sunday keeping or in belief in the immortality of the soul.<<

And it seems that just you and the JWs share the concept of the Divinity of Michael, Archangel... etc.

>>Those things are opposed to the truth of Scripture<<

You can only hold to these by ignoring plain text.

>>and are based in church tradition.<<

Writ teaches the efficacy of tradition.

>>We couldn't expect God to bless such unity, could we?<<

Ours is not to reason why – but to obey.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:ClubV12

I kind of liked bringing the Muslims into this, the other issue (Sunday vs Sabbath) has been beat to death (including the whole calendar issue).

Hoo-ya!—bring it on. Anything and all – no Prima Donnas in my neck of the woods – just slack-jawed rednecks honkin’ on jugs, harpoons, 4-string guitars, and wha’ever else will make a joyful noise. And the lower the contents of the jugs – the more joyful the noise.

Quote:

Quote:ClubV12

the other issue (Sunday vs Sabbath) has been beat to death (including the whole calendar issue).

Don’t tell me, you got issues with truths, yes? You like your dogmatology to come from thems feather budgies along the Orinoco...?

[miz3]

I think you missed the point Miz3.

Pagan vs Christian. Pagans worshiped a sun god, lots of people did around the time the RCC church was coming into power. What better way to accomadate the "heathens" and bring them into christianity than by, essentially, accepting the obvious, Sunday, as the day of worship. For a "con man" it's a brilliant solution, it just doesn't square with the commandments, the fourth one. The pagans could care less WHY it was done or by whom, it met their needs at the time. They could have it all.

It is a factual statement. The RCC changed the former day of worship from Saturday to Sunday. They were the FIRST christian church to do so. Put what ever reason you want on it, that fact remains.

WRONG.

The first Christian Church to change Saturday to Sunday was those who changed it back in the early Genesis period before the flood and also those who changed it shortly after the flood. Pagan vs Christian even back then.

Noah was and his family that were in the ark during the flood were a Christian Church (even Ellen White believes this to be true). Shortly thereafter someone or somebodies "con'd others to join them in changing the true day, Saturday, to the false day, Sunday in honor of the Sun which did so much to help them survive as humans on the earth. Pagan vs Christian even back then.

Thus, the RCC and the Pope are just mediocre "johnny come lately copycats". That is historical FACT.

Put whatever reason you want on it but the FACT remains as I have stated it.

[miz3]

May be it is you, miz3, who is missing the point. I understand what you are saying but there is a difference. In Old Testament times the true Sabbath was never lost sight of. The "venerable day of the sun" did not take the place of the Sabbath in the minds of the Jews for centuries. True many in Israel at times apostatized and bowed the knee to Baal but the pagan day of worship never became the official day of worship for the professed people of God. At the time of the first coming of Christ it was still kept, at least outwardly.

Daniel 7:25 is a prophecy that was not fulfilled until the fourth century A.D. After Christ, the mystery of iniquity was already at work within the Early Church. After the death of the Apostles, this mystery deepened and it led to the establishment of the papal power. Then gradually, little by little, the sacredness of the Sabbath was transfered to Sunday until all Christendom kept it in the place of the Sabbath and that went on for many centuries until the light regarding the true Sabbath shone, coinciding with the rise of the Advent Movement in the 1840s. There were only a few through these centuries who kept the true Sabbath and they had to hide.

It was apostasy in the Early Church that led to the establishment of the papal power and Satan worked through the apostate leaders in his attempt to change the day of worship. The rest is history.

sky

Most of the world lost sight of the Sabbath from the end of the flood to Abraham's time. It was the Children of Israel after their slavery in Egypt that were supposed to bring the Law of God and the Sabbath back to its rightful place in the whole world. Doesn't Ellen White agree with that?

You correctly point out that the Children of Israel failed and thus the World remained in darkness regarding the Sabbath among other vital things. However, the changing of the the Sabbath to Sunday occurred and remained far before the RCC and the Pope. The RCC and the Pope just went along with whatever had already been established millennia before. Nothing new or unique in what the RCC and/or the Pope did. It had already been done before.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:ClubV12

Since it's inception the Papacy has setup laws demanding Sunday worship, particularly through out the dark ages, as has the United States! This is a simple matter of historic fact.

Did it not have authority to do so?

>>No, it didn't. No one has authority to demand that you disobey God's law.<<

The OT Covenant was abrogated. Gd, for the reason that the COI were polluting the Seventh-day Sabbath, removed its reckoning.

Gd did it – not you, not me, not the RCCs, nada, zip, zilch other – Gd did it. Period, full stop.

One cannot just merrily go on in arbitrary fashion – ignoring the word of Gd through His legitimate prophets.

Quote:

Quote:jasd

...the Jews having set aside the “true calendar” containing the reckoning of the Seventh-day Sabbath – how would that have made another day a “false day of worship” – there being an existing ‘void’, according to:

Hosea 2:11 2:11 I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts.

Hosea was prophet to the Northern Kingdom

Lam 2:6 ...the LORD hath caused the solemn feasts and sabbaths to be forgotten in Zion, and hath despised in the indignation of his anger the king and the priest.

Jeremiah was prophet to the Southern Kingdom.

Between the two prophets – Gd served notice upon the entirety of the COI that their Sabbaths (Seventh-day) were to cease and to be forgotten.

One, is constrained to thereafter Hosea and Jeremiah – to find the ONE text which reinstated the Seventh-day Sabbath to either of the Kingdoms – or to anyone...

Gd declared that He removed the Seventh-day Sabbaths because the COI were polluting the Sabbaths before the heathen.

So, in that the Seventh-day Sabbath was removed – what text in Holy Writ states that man cannot sanctify a day holy unto Gd?—which is what happened. What text?

>>We must obey God rather than man.<<

Indeed!—and in so doing we must not make Him a fool and a liar. [/respectfully]

>>Acts 4:18-19

So they called them and commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. [19] But Peter and John answered them, "Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge."<<

Gd did it – and He gave NOTICE.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

...You are missing the point.

Somebody already did that in the long ago.

.....The Pope did NOTHING NEW that had not already been done by someone else who thought to elevate themselves above God and think to change times and laws.

This make the SDA interpretation a gross falsehood in regard to the RCC and the Pope. The RCC and the Pope like so many others in human history were nothing but minor copycats. The RCC and the Pope are just another in a long list of humans who thought they are to trump God and decide what is sacred and what is not sacred.

The point is that the papacy and the Catholic Church were the ones who brought Sunday worship into the Christian Church. No one says that Sunday worship among pagans started with the pope. The papacy and the Emperor of Rome brought the pagan day of the Sun into the Christian Church. Ancient church historians agree that Sunday was the day of worship in Rome and Alexandria, whereas the Christians were worshipping on the Sabbath everywhere else. (By the fifth century, Christians in most parts of the world were worshipping on both the Sabbath and on the first day of the week.) The bishop of Rome passed Church laws that discouraged Sabbath-keeping and encouraged Sunday keeping. These are facts of history.

The point is John317 that someone and/or someones brought in Sunday worship into the Christian Church before the flood and shortly after the flood. Thus as I have pointed out before to others the RCC and/or the Pope did nothing new. What they did had already been done and was in place. All the RCC and/or the Pope did was join the group that had already been in place for millenia.

Thus, the RCC and/or the Pope are not unique nor did they do something that was startlingly new to the human experience. In fact what they did was minimal compared to the apostasy that had taken place at least shortly after the flood. That is where the damage was done.

SDA claim that the RCC and/or the Pope did something unique and startlingly new which is clearly not the case. Most of world at the time the RCC and/or the Pope apostatized were already settled in the apostasy that occurred millenia before.

The RCC's claim is thus bloated nothingness in regard to changing Saturday to Sunday. The RCC merely joined the "club of apostasy" that was already in place. They did not start something new.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Both Saturday and Sunday, though kept for different reasons &#150; are Biblically correct for they have been set aside that Gd may be worshipped.

>>Where does this come from?<<

Gd declared that He removed the Seventh-day Sabbaths because the COI were polluting the Sabbaths before the heathen. Ipso facto, there was then a lacuna, a void – that may then have been sanctified “as unto the LORD”. --Holy Writ

>>Where's the evidence that God sets aside Sunday for worship of God?<<

I specifically stated that man did it – that Gd may be worshipped in honor of the Jesus Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection. Gd did not set aside Sunday for worship. What He did do

was remove the reckoning (the OT calendar) of the Seventh-day Sabbath – that it might no longer be profaned before the heathen by the COI.

Take it up with two genuine prophets of Gd – who recorded what Gd told them to record.

>>Perhaps you are arguing that we should worship God every day, and of course we should, but that is different from saying Sunday was "set aside" for God's worship.<<

It was “set aside” – by man – who had full authority to do so – by Writ.

>>As far as God is concerned, Sunday is a work day. There are six work days in the week and only one day that is holy time. God calls it "my holy day" and "the holy day of the Lord."<<

That is why He removed it from its continued profanation and pollution. It was His to do – as He wished. What!?—some lettered guy with the BRI gainsays GD?—or some this or that pioneer of the .Org withstands Writ?

>>It's absurd to think that there was a time when suddenly all the Jews became confused as to which day is the Sabbath. Jesus wasn't confused about it, was He? Was Paul confused in Acts 13: 41, 44? Dr. Luke referred to it as "the Sabbath" both in the Gospel and in the book of Acts.<<

Of course the Jews lost their OT calendar, else Gd is made a fool and a liar. [/respectfullly]

Re the quibble texts: where the Jews controlled the cultural economy – their laws and traditions were expected to be abided by. You know that.

>>When Jesus said that the Sabbath was made for mankind, was He talking about a day that couldn't even be identified?<<

The Sabbath means the rest. When was "the Sabbath" made? Did nothing happen interim?

>>The writer of the book of Hebrews clearly did not think that no one knew which day of the week was the Sabbath. He said that God rested on the seventh-day Sabbath, which was the reason that God blessed it and made it holy.<<

He still does, and so will you in the millennium and thereafter. But now, unless Gd’s prophets lied, its calendrical reckoning is kaput!

The Jews admit that their calendar in unBiblical, a facsimile – and the .Org follows their calendar. Yet, you argue the point.

>>The readers of Hebrews obviously were well acquainted with the Sabbath,<<

Were not the “Hebrews” Jews? Of course they were well acquainted with the Sabbath – but where they were forced to, by circumstance, to adapt – they did. Throughout the Captivity and beyond – when Temple sacrifice was unavailable – they ‘sacrificed’ coins/money.

The Second Temple had no Ark of the Covenant in the Most Holy – yet, they managed. That said,

one can only accept the veracity of Gd’s word – without knowing the exact date the OT calendar was removed. However, be assured, it is now gone/lost/finito. Even the Jews will not argue the point – and it was/is their calendar.

>>because if they weren't, the Sabbath as a symbol of rest in Christ would have been completely meaningless to them. In Hebrews 4, there's absolutely no evidence that the Sabbath had ceased to exist.<<

The book of Hebrews was written to the Jews. They kept their Sabbath. Whatsoever they say, do it, for they sit in Moses’ seat. So, so what

if the true Sabbath continued until Jesus Christ’s crucifixion?—it no longer is recognizable by Writ.

>>The fact that the writer of Hebrews would use the Sabbath as a sign of something so wonderful as salvation shows that he didn't view the Sabbath as anything but a blessing.<<

Indeed. Read above.

[jasd]

>>If SDA view "Sunday Worship" as the "Mark of the Beast" then they need to realize that the "Mark of the Beast" (Sunday Worship) was around long, long, before the RCC was even a gleam in someone's eye. Thus, the "Mark of the Beast" cannot be the RCC<<

Rev 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark (#5480: charagma) in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

Strong’s

#5480 charagma –

[...] from root charasso: meaning is sharpened spike, as used in the timbers comprising defensive works; or as used to scratch, grave, etch. Microchips are photo-etched

The number of the sun and of gold is 666. After microchips have been photoetched – they are hung in a mist of gold particles, which adheres to the etching in the chips.

[jasd]

>>...we know that Sunday, "the venerable day of the Sun" was observed by the pagans before the existence of any Catholic pope just as the true Sabbath existed before the existence of any sunday worshiper.<<

Re the highlighted: unintentional?—or objectively pejorative?

Should I refer to and colorize Saturday as the “shameful day of Saturnine cannibalism’?

>>The papacy boasts of this so-called change as their mark of authority, as though they had acted in God's stead.<<

Indeed, as it is your Biblical authority – should you truly apprehend Writ – to worship Gd on Mondays or the lolly days of the moon, should you do so ‘as unto the Lord’.

Col 3:23 And whatsoever ye do, do [it] heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men;

>>had acted in God's stead.<<

As vicar – that is true in the loosest sense; however, a viceregent more appropriately acts “in stead”.

Merriam-Webster

Vicar

1 : one serving as a substitute or agent; specifically : an administrative deputy

2 : an ecclesiastical agent:

One subject to, serving, and representing a higher authority. Sounds like the good Xtian, yes?—as you? ..and as I should be.

And, on a heavenly level – Michael (one like Gd – not Gd, but like Gd) the Archangel is vicar of Gd.

>>The law of God remains unchanged no matter what the pretentions of the man of sin may be.<<

That is true, the law is unchanged except that it was part of the Covenant of Gd and Israel, which was abrogated; moreover, Gd specifically stated that He would cause it to be forgotten and to cease. To emphasize that fact, He, moreover, said that He would confound their calendar by which they kept their particular days.

Where there has been removal, man may replace and further – sanctify; unless, you have a specific text forbidding man to do so. I’d like to see it.

It is probable that “man of sin” is misappropriated.

[John317]

>>...we know that Sunday, "the venerable day of the Sun" was observed by the pagans before the existence of any Catholic pope just as the true Sabbath existed before the existence of any sunday worshiper.<<

Re the highlighted: unintentional or objectively pejorative?

It's the langauge that was used of it by Emporer Constantine the Great when he made laws regarding its obvservance. This was at the time that he made Christianity the state religion. Significantly, Constantine still held the position of high priest, Pontifex Maximus, in the pagan religion, a title and position that was later taken over by the bishop of Rome. (See below for evidence of this.)

Therefore the expression "Venerable Day of the sun" is simply an accurate historical reference to the day at the time it was replacing the 7th day Sabbath in the Christian church.

The wikipedia--

Quote:

The Pontifex Maximus (Latin, literally: "greatest bridge-maker") was the high priest of the College of Pontiffs (Collegium Pontificum) in ancient Rome. This was the most important position in the ancient Roman religion, open only to patricians until 254 BC, when a plebeian first occupied this post. A distinctly religious office under the early Roman Republic, it gradually became politicized until, beginning with Augustus, it was subsumed into the Imperial office. Its last use with reference to the emperors is in inscriptions of Gratian[1] (reigned 375–383) who, however, then decided to omit the words "pontifex maximus" from his title.[2][3]

The word "pontifex" later became a term used for Christian bishops,[4] including the Bishop of Rome,[5] and the title of "Pontifex Maximus" was applied within the Roman Catholic Church to the Pope as its chief bishop.

Quote:

Constantine decreed (March 7, 321) dies Solis—day of the sun, "Sunday"—as the Roman day of rest [CJ3.12.2]:

On the venerable day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed. In the country however persons engaged in agriculture may freely and lawfully continue their pursuits because it often happens that another day is not suitable for grain-sowing or vine planting; lest by neglecting the proper moment for such operations the bounty of heaven should be lost.

[jasd]

>>Therefore the expression "Venerable Day of the sun" is simply an accurate historical reference to the day<<

Indeed. Did he colorize it?

[John317]

>>As far as God is concerned, Sunday is a work day. There are six work days in the week and only one day that is holy time. God calls it "my holy day" and "the holy day of the Lord."<<

That is why He removed it from its continued profanation and pollution. It was His to do as He wished. What!? some lettered guy with the BRI gainsays GD? or some this or that pioneer of the .Org withstands Writ?

You've quoted the following verses as your evidence that no one today knows when the Sabbath is:

Originally Posted By: JASD

Hosea 2:11-- I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts.

Hosea was prophet to the Northern Kingdom

Lam 2:6 ...the LORD hath caused the solemn feasts and sabbaths to be forgotten in Zion, and hath despised in the indignation of his anger the king and the priest.

Jeremiah was prophet to the Southern Kingdom.

Between the two prophets – Gd served notice upon the entirety of the COI that their Sabbaths (Seventh-day) were to cease and to be forgotten.

The verses that you claim show that God made the Jews be unable to remember their calander, including the identity of the Sabbath day, are actually referring to the fact that God was going to punish Israel with exile in Babylon. After the exile, God's promise to them was that:

Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God, and David their king, and they shall come in fear to the Lord and to his goodness in the latter days.{Hosea 3: 5}

Jeremiah prophecied from 627 to 587 BC.

Hosea prophesied from 790 to 729 BC.

Let's put some other, related Bible verses with those:

Hosea 3:4

For the children of Israel shall dwell many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or pillar, without ephod or household gods.

Isaiah 1:13-14

Bring no more vain offerings;

incense is an abomination to me.

New moon and Sabbath and the calling of convocations—

I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly.

[14] Your new moons and your appointed feasts

my soul hates;

they have become a burden to me;

I am weary of bearing them.

Jeremiah 7:34

And I will silence in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem the voice of mirth and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, for the land shall become a waste.

Amos 5:21

"I hate, I despise your feasts,

and I take no delight in your solemn assemblies."

NOTE: All these verses reveal that the Sabbaths and the feasts would be "forgotten in Zion" and "all [israel's] mirth would cease" because Israel would be taken into exile so that there wouldn't be any Jews in Zion [Jerusalem]. As it says, "All the land shall become waste."

It wasn't a matter of Jews waking up one morning and not remembering what day of the week it was.

[John317]

>>Therefore the expression "Venerable Day of the sun" is simply an accurate historical reference to the day<<

Indeed. Did he colorize it?

I believe he colorized it simply to bring special attention to it. It seems to me that's warranted because even the people who helped bring it into the Christian Church acknowledged its pagan associations with Sun worship. I believe that association is significant and should be known to all Christians.