Showing posts with label Sabbath keeping. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sabbath keeping. Show all posts

Monday, June 21, 2021

Early Christianity: From Sabbath to Sunday: the Armstrongite narrative



Early Christianity: From Sabbath to Sunday



I recently penned a post for Banned by HWA that was published there under the banner “Quietly Dismissing Herbert Armstrong.” In reviewing some of the commentary which the post provoked, I was struck by how some folks have continued to accept Armstrong’s inaccurate/false narrative surrounding the early history of the Christian Church. According to the Pastor General of the old Worldwide Church of God, the First Century Church universally observed the Sabbath. Moreover, he taught that Emperor Constantine (in cooperation with the Roman Church) changed the day of Christian worship from the Sabbath to Sunday.

The reasoning behind this narrative is almost as interesting and entertaining as the narrative itself. It goes something like this: 1) Scripture clearly records that Christ, his apostles, and the early saints continued to observe the Sabbath; 2) The existence of Constantine’s famous decree recognizing Sunday as a day of rest (and, by implication, worship) throughout the territories of the Roman Empire; and 3) The existence of several statements by Roman Catholics claiming responsibility for changing the Christian day of worship. Admittedly, this reasoning appears reasonable at first glance. However, while I wouldn’t dispute any of the three points which they have employed to generate their narrative, we would be remiss not to point out that these folks have ignored/excluded a whole lot of history to arrive at their conclusions about Sabbath to Sunday observance within the early Church.

It still seems foreign and strange to many Christians, but a consensus has developed over time among Biblical scholars that there were two forms of Christianity extant in the First Century (a Gentile and a Jewish variety). Moreover, the evidence for this, both within the New Testament and among other writings from the period, is pretty compelling. In the New Testament, the account we find there of the Jerusalem Council in the fifteenth chapter of Acts (and in Paul’s epistle to the Galatians) makes plain that there were real differences and tensions between the Jewish and Gentile branches of the Church. Likewise, other early Christian writings like the Didache and some of the epistles of Ignatius of Antioch underscore these differences.

When confronted with the evidence of the Jerusalem Council, many Armstrongites insist that the only issue at stake in those discussions was the Jewish ritual of circumcision. Scripture, however, clearly refutes such a notion. Now, in fairness, it is true that the whole controversy began with the insistence of some Jewish Christians that “Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.” (Acts 15:1) However, when Paul and Barnabas were sent to Jerusalem to resolve the matter, we read: “But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.” (Acts 15:5) In other words, some of the Jewish Christians were insisting that Gentile converts to Christianity had to adopt and abide by the tenets of the Old Covenant outlined in the Torah.

After much discussion of the matter, Peter reminded the assembly that God had prompted him to share the gospel with the Gentiles. (Acts 15:7) A casual reading of this account could easily miss just how important this point was in comprehending the significance of what was happening. Unfortunately, as the first eleven chapters of the book of Acts make plain, the original twelve apostles had not fulfilled Christ’s instructions to take his message to all nations. In short, Peter and the other apostles had focused their evangelistic efforts almost exclusively on their Jewish brethren for the ten or so years following the end of Christ’s earthly ministry. Hence, it should not seem strange or incomprehensible to us that the earliest church was almost entirely Jewish in composition, nature, and ritual. As such, we can see that it was completely natural for these folks to continue to observe rituals that were familiar to them (like circumcision, the Sabbath, the Holy Days, clean and unclean meats, etc.).

It should also be remembered, though, that Gentiles had no such traditions, and that most of them were wholly unfamiliar with Jewish rituals and practices. In the account of the Jerusalem Council in the book of Acts, however, Peter points out that God had also chosen to give the Gentiles his Holy Spirit “even as he did unto us.” (Acts 15:8-9) He went on to point out that the insistence of these Jewish Christians that Gentiles adopt Jewish forms did not make sense in light of this fact. “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?” he asked. (Acts 15:10) The clear implication being that Christ had fulfilled the requirements of the law on their behalf, because NONE of them (the Jews) had ever been able to do it!

In the account, James agrees with the points that Peter has made. He affirms that it was God who decided to offer salvation to the Gentiles through Christ, and he went on to remind the assembly that this had been prophesied to happen long ago. (Acts 15:13-18) As a consequence of these facts, James concluded: “Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.” (Acts 15:19-21) Notice that James specifically delineates only four items from the entire Torah which Gentile Christians should be required to observe and goes on to suggest that Moses already has enough adherents among the Jews!

Moreover, once again, the summary of the account makes plain that the assembly was dealing with a much more comprehensive question regarding the relationship of Gentile Christians to the requirements of the Torah than the simple matter of circumcision. The opening to the letter which the assembly sent to the Gentile Christians informing them of their decision makes this plain. We read: “Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment…” (Acts 15:24) And the letter’s conclusion makes plain that the assembly has adopted James’ “sentence” regarding their obligations to the requirements of the Torah. We read: “For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.” (Acts 15:28-29)

Hence, for the author of Acts, the rather substantial question of whether or not Gentile converts would be required to observe the tenets of the Law, was settled amicably and in short order. From Paul’s perspective, however, the question had never been completely and finally resolved – there were still plenty of Jewish Christians out there who believed that their Gentile brethren should be required to follow the same observances which they had followed all of their lives (and which they continued to follow as Christians).

This is made very clear in Paul’s letter to the saints of Galatia. Nevertheless, in comparing Paul’s perspective on what had happened at the Jerusalem Council, it is important to remember the context of Paul’s remarks. In short, Paul was extremely angry that Jewish Christians had had the audacity to contradict his teachings to the Gentiles. He opens the epistle by claiming his incredulity at the thought that any of his Galatian Christian converts would fall for this message (that they were obligated to observe the tenets of the Torah). He wrote: “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.” (Galatians 1:6-7)

Remember, Paul saw himself as the “Apostle of the Gentiles.” (Romans 11:13) Moreover, he believed that the message which he had brought to the Galatians had been given to him via a special revelation from Jesus Christ, and he made clear that he did not appreciate those Jewish Christians invading his territory and imposing their brand of Christianity on his converts! (Galatians 1:8-12) Paul then proceeded to give the Galatians a brief summary of his personal history in the Jewish faith and his interactions with the pillars of the Jewish Church after his conversion to demonstrate that those contacts had not made any significant contributions to his message. (Galatians 1:13-24) Now, of course, those folks had made significant contributions to Paul’s knowledge about Christ and his teachings (the notion that they didn’t is frankly absurd), but we must remember that when he wrote these things Paul was extremely angry with those Jewish Christians who had interfered with his work among the Galatians.

After he had vented some of his anger and frustration, Paul proceeded to give his account of what had transpired at the Jerusalem Council. He wrote that those “who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person:) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me: But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:) And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.” (Galatians 2:6-10)

In this respect, the two accounts (Acts and Galatians) of what happened at the Jerusalem Council are the same: Both accounts suggest that some kind of accommodation between Jewish and Gentile Christians was reached as a consequence of that assembly – to live and let live. In other words, Paul understood that agreement to allow Jewish Christians to continue to observe the tenets of the Mosaic Law and to permit Gentile Christians to ignore them.

For Paul, however, the intrusion of those Jewish Christians among his sheep in Galatia had not only violated the understanding reached at the Jerusalem Council, it had also underscored the flawed premise of the theology of those Jewish Christians. He wrote: 

“Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid. For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless, I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.” (Galatians 2:16-21)

Thus, as Paul’s missionary work among the Gentiles resulted in more and more conversions, we can see that tensions grew between the two branches of the Christian faith. In short, Jewish Christians must have felt the pressure of those greater numbers of Gentile Christians within the Church – that the proportion of Christians observing the tenets of the Mosaic Law continued to shrink. And we have all seen the tensions which America’s changing demographics have produced within our own population – So, it shouldn’t be hard for us to imagine similar group dynamics playing out within the early Church!

Thanks to the writings of the First Century Jewish historian, Josephus, we know that Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed by the Romans in 70 CE. It would be hard to overestimate the devastating impact which those events would have had on the Jewish portion of the Church. As Jewish Christians continued to observe the tenets of the Mosaic Law and were in the habit of worshipping at the temple and in synagogues, it is highly unlikely that the conquering Romans would have made any distinction between those Christians and their Jewish brethren. In other words, Jewish Christians were scattered and persecuted by the Romans after those events in 70 CE (just like other Jews).

Hence, it is easy to see how Paul’s version of Christianity would have been in the ascendancy for the last thirty years of the First Century. In other words, by the close of that century, the vast majority of Christians were of the Gentile variety (not observing the tenets of the Mosaic Law). However, while it’s easy to imagine those circumstances, there is other evidence extant that the Gentile branch of Christianity had become the dominant variety by the close of this period. In short, there are other Christian writings from this period which support this narrative of what was happening within the Church. Unfortunately, many lay Christians are not only unfamiliar with the contents of these documents – they are completely unaware of the fact that they even exist!

There is a document known as The Didache (a Greek word for teaching or doctrine) which was probably written late in the First Century and was purported to represent the teachings of Christ’s apostles (see earlychristianwritings.com). The Didache opens with a discussion of the way of life in juxtaposition to the way of death, and it expounds upon Christ’s teaching regarding the two great commandments (love for God and neighbor). The document also discusses the early practices of the Christian Church regarding things like baptism, fasting, prayer, and the Eucharist. Moreover, the document’s commentary about the organization of the Church (or rather the lack of discussion of a well-defined structure/hierarchy) makes plain that it came from this primitive era of Christianity. For our present purposes, however, the most important feature of The Didache is its insistence that Christians assemble on the Lord’s Day (Sunday) for fellowship and worship. In other words, the document takes it for granted that this is the proper day for Christian worship – there is no mention of the Sabbath!

Likewise, we have the writings of Ignatius of Antioch from late in the First Century and early in the Second Century to support this historical narrative about the two versions of Christianity. In his epistle to the saints of Philadelphia, Ignatius wrote: “But if anyone preach the Jewish law unto you, listen not to him. For it is better to hearken to Christian doctrine from a man who has been circumcised, than to Judaism from one uncircumcised. But if either of such persons do not speak concerning Jesus Christ, they are in my judgment but as monuments and sepulchers of the dead, upon which are written only the names of men.” (See earlychristianwritings.com) For Ignatius, any Christians who were teaching the saints that they had to observe the Jewish law were clearly heretics.

In his epistle to the Magnesians, Ignatius wrote: “Be not deceived with strange doctrines, nor with old fables, which are unprofitable. For if we still live according to the Jewish law, we acknowledge that we have not received grace.” Later in the same epistle, he wrote: “It is absurd to profess Christ Jesus, and to Judaize. For Christianity did not embrace Judaism, but Judaism Christianity, that so every tongue which believeth might be gathered together to God.” (See earlychristianwritings.com)

Writing sometime in the middle part of the Second Century, Justin Martyr also provided us with evidence of what was happening within the Church during this early period. In his First Apology, Justin Martyr wrote this about Christian worship in his time: “And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succors the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead.” (See earlychristianwritings.com) In other words, by the middle of the Second Century, it was considered standard practice for Christians to gather for fellowship and worship on Sunday!

As we have seen from both the biblical and the historical narrative, the Armstrongite narrative regarding the history of Sabbath to Sunday observance is false. The reality is that the vast majority of Christians had been observing Sunday for hundreds of years by the time that Constantine made his famous decree. In effect, the emperor was merely offering official recognition of what was already the practice of most of his Christian and pagan subjects. Likewise, the observance of Sunday by most Christians was already well-entrenched by the time that the Roman Church had acquired the power to enforce its authority over other Christians. Hence, the narrative that Constantine and/or the Roman Catholic Church was responsible for the abandonment of the Sabbath and the adoption of Sunday is shown to be a fiction pure and simple!

**Although I do not wish to convey the impression that I agree with all of the conclusions reached by these biblical scholars, I think that the works of folks like Gerd Ludemann, Bart Ehrman and James Tabor offer some interesting and helpful insights into this period of Christian history (Sorry, I'm not in the habit of name dropping, but scholars do offer some helpful insights for those of us who are truly desirous of understanding this critical period).

Lonnie Hendrix

Sunday, April 4, 2021

The International Dateline and the Sabbath: Straining at a gant and swallowing the camel...


It is amazing to watch the lengths some COG "leaders" go to defend their beliefs and "prove" that the Sabbath is required. Never fully studying about the Sabbath requirement for New Covenant followers, they rely fully upon COG publications written by a myriad of so-called educated leaders. Even then, certain men have decided that COG "proofs" have not gone far enough to suit their hyper-legalistic minds so they come up with even more bizarre scenarios and teachings.

Case in point, the International Dateline, and Sabbath-keeping.

The problem the COG has as a whole is that they have to deal with that pesky International Dateline which causes some people to keep sabbath on one day while in other parts of the world have yet to keep it or may have already done so. This causes a conundrum to a lot of diehard Sabbath-keepers who think the entire world must stop at the same time.

Never fear though, COG members and some "leaders" have an answer for everything. OzWitness, an Australian COG site has determined that the International Dateline is WRONG and is causing "true" Christians to keep Sabbath on the wrong day. So, they have come up with a new "dateline" to ensure that the entire world keeps sabbath at the same time.

OzWitness states:

The International dateline is not something that most of us have considered. Most of us have just taken for granted that we keep the Sabbath on the seventh day, as scripture requires. Those who travel across it though and those who live East of Jerusalem but West of the present dateline, may have wondered if the Bible has anything to say on this subject, so let’s examine the biblical evidence, and then come to our own conclusion.

"Coming to our own conclusion" is the reason the COG is in such a horrendous mess. With hundreds and hundreds of bloviating men making all kinds of idiotic proclamations, no one, and mean NO ONE, has any idea what the COG even stands for anymore.

Yellow highlights are mine, colored word highlights are the original author's:

We know that God has provided the instruction and examples in the Bible for the month and the year and He would not fail to provide the needed information on the dateline, because the fact is that, though many people have not thought about this, there has to be one somewhere – a definite line on the earth where God’s day begins. Any conclusions drawn without including that vital dateline must be invalid!

No well-researched religious scholar, no Jewish rabbi or theologian, no mathematician, no scientist, and not even Arab geographer Abulfeda and explorer Magellan were/are as correct as a lay COG member.

This is simply because the earth rotates. If we travel East, against the rotation, the day is shorter as the sun seems to come towards us, and sunset is earlier. If we travel West, with the sun, the days are longer than 24 hours. Of course, without knowing where the true dateline is, those of us who live East of Jerusalem, but West of the present International Date Line, do not securely know when to keep the annual Holy Days which Jesus Christ kept.

But a COG member sure does!  

Also, we are concerned to make sure we keep the seventh day Holy. Genesis 2:3, ‘And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.’ We need to keep a tight check on the days, and we know that at the time of Jesus the Jews were keeping the correct day. Jesus vouched for that by His agreement of both the Sabbath and Holy Days back then. Since then, the Romans drove many Jews from the ‘Holy Land’ in a great diaspora, but, no matter where they went, East or West, they carried the same day with them, and no matter where they ended up, today most are in agreement about which day is the 7th, from Hong Kong, to Cape town, to San Francisco.

They did this without any reference to an international dateline, because travel back then was slow. They had no watches and they would not have noticed that the day was either a little longer or shorter, depending on whether they were moving West or East. Actually, the dateline had not been invented then anyway, it only came about after men began to circumnavigate the earth in ships, and depending on which way they went, they either seemed to ‘lose’ or ‘gain’ a day against the calendar they started out from. When the Sabbath was restored at Sinai, the Israelites began to keep it, though they were not in Israel, and later Daniel kept the Sabbath in Babylon, as did Ezekiel and Ezra, though they started it long before it commenced in Jerusalem. Paul travelled far to the West and kept the same Sabbath, but much later than those at Jerusalem. Obviously then, there is no rule that we should keep the identical time with Jerusalem.

So, the fact is that, no matter which way the Jews travelled from Jerusalem, even eventually as far as America, West, or China East, they retained the knowledge of the true Sabbath, even though much later, disagreements arose amongst their scholars, which have not changed the majority of Jewish practice, and to this day the vast majority of Jews worldwide keep the Sabbath on the same date. 

So if the knowledge of the "true" Sabbath and the fact that Jews all observe Sabbath, then what is ht issue?

Well, this is the Church of God and after all, it is ALL KNOWING on EVERYTHING imaginable.

So, why is it that among some Christian 7th Day Sabbath keepers, there is some confusion about which day is the seventh? Well, these days we travel by air and it is not uncommon to cross half the world in 24 hours. It then becomes very noticeable that you have ‘lost’ or ‘gained time’, and the world has had to agree on the dateline, the longitude East or West of the prime meridian which was placed at Greenwich, England, where a new calendar day begins. 

Because England was the dominant seafaring nation when this occurred, all longitudinal lines are based on Greenwich, as 0 degrees, and, as a result, the dateline was set at 180 degrees East, on a great longitudinal circle that encompasses the globe (there are 360 degrees in whole) exactly on the opposite side of the earth from Greenwich. That was where each new day would start, at twelve midnight, and the day would progress West around the earth.

This proved very convenient, because 180 degrees East, is over the Pacific Ocean, the largest and emptiest body of water on the planet. Although they bent the line a little to avoid one or two islands, it avoids all land, which is the third vital requirement to avoid confusion. Imagine if the dateline went over land. It could happen that people on one side of a street were keeping Friday, and those on the other, Saturday, an impossible situation, so the choice seemed logical enough.

This positioning of the start of the day in the Pacific Ocean, upsets some Christians though, because of the scriptural belief that Jerusalem is the centre of the world, Ezekiel 5:5, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD; This is Jerusalem: I have set it in the midst of the nations and countries that are round about her.’ And 38:12, ‘To take plunder, and to carry off spoil; to turn your hand upon the desolate places that are now inhabited, and upon the people that are gathered out of the nations, who have gotten cattle and goods, that dwell in the midst of the land.’ And that the law must go forth from Zion, Isaiah 2:3, ‘And many people shall go and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.’

This is quite true, for all our attention is centred on Jerusalem, and observations from there with regard to calendar issues, and the Biblical dateline must include this principle, but then, too early conclusions, such as, ‘those to the East cannot start the Sabbath until it has started in Jerusalem’, have been drawn, because certain scriptures are not recognised or considered.

Men have often felt the need to introduce their own ideas and traditions, without biblical confirmation; witness the disagreements of the obscure Jewish sages about the dateline. Jesus condemned that approach, and told us to look at scripture. Without those scriptures, some have suggested that Jerusalem should be the dateline. This is totally impossible because that would mean half the city keeping one day, and half the next. Others have suggested a boundary of Israel at Euphrates. That suggestion is equally impractical, as a look at the map will prove, for such a line would also cut through Africa and Asia, once again providing similar problems in many more areas of the world, and there are no dateline scriptures to back this suggestion. 

When the prime meridian is redrawn from Greenwich, and based upon Jerusalem, and then projected around the globe, it forms one great circle, and once past the poles becomes 180 degrees East or West of Jerusalem right over the waters of the Pacific, when Jerusalem is 0 degrees. This, I believe, is what God is describing in Job 26:10, as a statute, which actually determines the biblical International Date Line. Thus, that statute (a law which will be active in the millennium) directly links Jerusalem to the circle which now marks out the division between light and darkness, the beginning of God’s days, fulfilling the requirement in Isaiah 2:3, that the law will go forth from Zion, or Jerusalem. ‘And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.’

In fact, as we have seen, we are told that God created the dateline first, in Genesis 1:4, and then later positioned Jerusalem on that line (when it is extended around the globe). How wonderful and awesome are His far sighted powers! 

So what is the solution?

He ensured this by placing Jerusalem directly opposite what seems to be the biblical international dateline, on a great circle which goes right around the globe, actually appearing as the longitude 144.8 degrees West today, ( Jerusalem is now 35.2 degrees East of the prime meridian at Greenwich, so +180 degrees = 144.8 degrees West). 

The New COG dateline, conveniently skirting Alaska.
 

This line then lies 35.2167 degrees East of the present international dateline (which has been bent to avoid islands) right through the largely empty Pacific Ocean, but crosses Alaska unless, as a boundary, it is bent to skirt its shores.

In this way, even New Zealand and Australia share most of the Sabbath with Jerusalem, as does Europe and even the Americas, and the problem of the position of the true international dateline, which cannot be over land, could be solved (Genesis 1:4) while fulfilling the statute of Job 26:10. 

You can read the rest of this here: The Biblical International Date Line

There are hundreds of other sites by non-COG people who call the International Dateline, pagan, satanic, etc., so this is not really something new. Conspiracy theories keep religion alive, especially for Sabbath-Keepers/Messianic Jews/Yahwehists and others.

For all of these groups, the emphasis is upon days and never upon that inconvenient dude that beckons for them to follow him. Following the letter of the law is more important than walking in freedom.

Sunday, January 1, 2012

God and the International Date Line




Did you know that God deliberately did not create land masses and allow humans (particularly COG members) to live throughout most of the Pacific ocean because he knew that humans would create an international date line several thousand years down the road and he did not want a lot of people (COG members, of course) being confused about when to celebrate the Sabbath?  Just one more mind boggling fact that is necessary for our salvation...


We know when the Sabbath is in Jerusalem. The seven day cycle has never been lost. Christ kept the Sabbath, we know that. The Sabbath is 24 hours. This is not rocket science. "Knowledge is easy to him that is in the way". There's a decision to make near the date line, but there's a reason God created the vast pacific ocean and why there's so little out there. God knew what he was doing.

Thursday, August 11, 2011

Women Not Required To Keep Sabbath?




A while back I posted a comment from Yahoo about a man asking what he should do about his non submissive wife.

Today it was pointed out to him that

Exodus 20:10 says nothing about a wife keeping sabbath, just sons, daughters, servants, cattle, etc.  Armstrongites can find a way around any law!

Ok, your right, I need to be reminded of that, but I still have questions then.
Going back to Ex 20:10
 
...but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates.
 
I'm thinking, Wow, have I missed that?  A son, daughter, servants, cattle, etc. I can insist they don't work on the Sabbath, but if my wife wants to, the only thing I should do is set the right example?