Comparing Denominational Doctrines On The Sabbath

Editors Comment: I found the following information here and thought it was interesting to see what other denominations had to say about the Sabbath and its supposed transfer of authority to Sunday. The results are surprising indeed for those not aware. It makes for a great read.

—————————————————————-

Exodus 20:8-11 [The 4th Commandment]
“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor and do all thy work; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD thy God. In it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates. For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.”

http://www.cougarcanyon.us

Roman Catholic: “Sunday is a Catholic institution, and its claim to observance can be defended only on Catholic principles . . From beginning to end of Scripture there is not a single passage that warrants the transfer of weekly public worship from the last day of the week to the first.”-Catholic Press, Sydney, Australia, August, 1900.

“… you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.” The Faith of Our Fathers, by James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, 88th edition, page 89. Originally published in 1876, republished and Copyright 1980 by TAN Books and Publishers, Inc., pages 72-73.

“The Sabbath was Saturday, not Sunday. The Church altered the observance of the Sabbath to the observance of Sunday. Protestants must be rather puzzled by the keeping of Sunday when God distinctly said, ‘Keep holy the Sabbath Day.’ The word Sunday does not come anywhere in the Bible, so, without knowing it they are obeying the authority of the Catholic Church.” Canon Cafferata, The Catechism Explained, p. 89.

“Perhaps the boldest thing, the most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday. “The Day of the Lord” (dies Dominica) was chosen, not from any directions noted in the Scriptures, but from the Church’s sense of its own power. The day of resurrection, the day of Pentecost, fifty days later, came on the first day of the week. So this would be the new Sabbath. People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become 7th Day Adventists, and keep Saturday holy.” Sentinel, Pastor’s page, Saint Catherine Catholic Church, Algonac, Michigan, May 21, 1995

Baptist: “There was and is a command to keep holy the Sabbath day, but that Sabbath day was not Sunday. It will however be readily said, and with some show of triumph, that the Sabbath was transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week, with all its duties, privileges and sanctions. Earnestly desiring information on this subject, which I have studied for many years, I ask, where can the record of such a transaction be found: Not in the New Testament – absolutely not. There is no scriptural evidence of the change of the Sabbath institution from the seventh to the first day of the week.” Dr. E. T. Hiscox, author of the ‘Baptist Manual’.

“The Scriptures nowhere call the first day of the week the Sabbath. . .There is no Scriptural authority for so doing, nor of course, any Scriptural obligation.” The Watchman.

“We believe that the law of God is the eternal and unchangeable rule of His moral government.”-“Baptist Church Manual,” Art. 12.

Lutheran: “The observance of the Lord’s Day (Sunday) is founded not on any command of God, but on the authority of the Church.” Augsburg Confession of Faith.

“They [the Catholics] allege the Sabbath changed into Sunday, the Lord’s day, contrary to the Decalogue, as it appears, neither is there any example more boasted of than the changing of the Sabbath day. Great, say they, is the power and authority of the church, since it dispensed with one of the Ten Commandments.” –Augsburg Confession of Faith, Art. 28, par. 9.

Episcopal: “The day is now changed from the seventh to the first day . . but as we meet with no Scriptural direction for the change, we may conclude it was done by the authority of the church.”-“The Protestant Episcopal Explanation of the Catechism.

Presbyterian: “There is no word, no hint in the New Testament about abstaining from work on Sunday. The observance of Ash Wednesday, or Lent, stands exactly on the same footing as the observance of Sunday. Into the rest of Sunday no Divine Law enters.”-Canon Eyton, Ten Commandments.

“God instituted the Sabbath at the creation of man, setting apart the seventh day for the purpose, and imposed its observance as a universal and perpetual moral obligation upon the race.” ­American Presbyterian Board of Publication, Tract No. 175.

“The observance of the seventh-day Sabbath did not cease till it was abolished after the [Roman] empire became Christian,” ­American Presbyterian Board of Publication, Tract No. 118.

Methodist: “It is true that there is no positive command for infant baptism. Nor is there any for keeping holy the first day of the week. Many believe that Christ changed the Sabbath. But, from His own words, we see that He came for no such purpose. Those who believe that Jesus changed the Sabbath base it only on a supposition.”-Amos Binney, Theological Compendium, pp. 180-181.      

Southern Baptist: “The sacred name of the seventh day is Sabbath. This fact is too clear to require argument [Exodus 20:10, quoted] . . On this point the plain teaching of the Word has been admitted in all ages . . Not once did the disciples apply the Sabbath law to the first day of the week,-that folly was left for a later age, nor did they pretend that the first day supplanted the seventh.”-Joseph Judson Taylor, The Sabbatic Question, pp. 14-17,

Does Rom. 14:5-6 Do Away With The Sabbath?

timwalkerjr.com

Some have asked whether Romans 14:5-6, says that it makes no difference to God which days we keep holy. Actually, these verses do not concern ANY days which must be kept holy. This is proved by the context of the entire chapter.

Paul admonished the saints at Rome to receive the “weak in the faith” and not to sit in judgment of them (verse 1). Some of those recently converted, not yet having grown strong in the faith, refused to eat meat and subsisted mainly on vegetables.

Paul explains why in another one of his letters. Most of the available meat had been offered to idols. Some gentiles who had been converted and had come out of idolatry still held some superstitious beliefs. They thought that idols actually had power over their lives. Therefore, “some with conscience of the idol” ate meat “as a thing offered unto an idol” (I Cor. 8:7).

But why did Paul break into his dissertation about eating meat or refraining from eating it and mention “day”? Notice the answer in the New King James translation of this passage: “One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. 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” (Rom.
14:5-6, RAV).

Not only were there weak converts who were afraid of eating meat offered to idols, but there were others who customarily abstained from a particular food — they practiced a semifast or abstained from foods on certain days. Others regarded all days alike as far as eating was concerned.

The whole matter involved abstention on particular days. The question was, “To eat or not to eat!” It was merely a question of the days upon which many voluntarily abstained from certain foods. Paul was not referring to God’s Holy Days, and there is nothing here referring to the Sabbath.

Jesus said that we should fast before God and not be seen or let it be known by others unnecessarily (Matt. 6:16). But Jews and gentiles both practiced semifasts on particular days of each week or month. The Jews customarily fasted “twice in the week” (Luke 18:12). They also fasted during certain months (Zech. 7:4-7). The Jews were divided on the matter. The gentiles also were divided over when to abstain from certain foods. These things are mentioned in “Hasting’s Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics.”

In God’s sight, it does not matter when one abstains or fasts — but it does matter that we do it with a right heart.
Paul wanted the brethren to live at peace with one another and not argue or judge each other over their human opinions.

The Bible elsewhere teaches very plainly which days God made holy and commands us to KEEP holy.

Should A Minister Be Addressed By The Title "Reverend?"

anunveiledface.wordpress.com

When we look into the Bible, we find the word “Reverend” refers ONLY TO GOD — not once is it applied to man. In Psalm 111:9 we read: “He (God) hath commanded his covenant for ever: HOLY AND REVEREND IS HIS NAME.”  God alone has a NAME worthy of REVERENCE. No man, including any minister, has a name worthy of such respect or worship.

You will not find a single place in the New Testament where Peter, Paul, John, James or any other ministers were ever called “reverend.” The use of religious titles, such as “Reverend,” began when the great apostasy set in at the close of the first century. Ministers put themselves “IN THE PLACE OF CHRIST.” Hence they took upon themselves the attributes and titles of divinity. God’s true ministers (in His one true Church) throughout the ages have never done so.

Notice the instruction of Jesus Christ in Matt. 23:8-11: “But you [Christ’s disciples], do not be called ‘Rabbi’; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren. Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ. But he who is greatest among you shall be your servant.” Our Savior commands that those He calls to serve the brethren of the church should not take upon themselves titles that arrogate God and Christ’s own titles and positions, such as “Teacher” and “Father.” Instead, as servants and brothers, ministers should live and work in humility as servants of God.

However, it is proper for ministers to be called, “Elder,” “Pastor” “Evangelist,” etc., for these are titles used in the New Testament. See Matthew 23:8-10.

How Will The Beast & False Prophet Of Rev. 20:10 Die?

http://www.myspace.com

There has been some misunderstanding in the past of Revelation 20:10 resulting from a translation error in the King James Version of the Bible. You will notice that the word “are” is in italics. This means that the word was supplied by the translators and is not in the original Greek.

According to the chronology of Revelation itself, both the Beast and the false prophet will be cast alive into the lake of fire at the beginning of God’s thousand-year reign on the earth (Rev. 19:20). By merely using God’s explanation of what happens to human bodies when they are cast into fire, we find that they will be burned up (Ps. 37:20). Therefore, the phrase in Revelation 20:10 should be translated “where the beast and the false prophet WERE.”

In Matthew 25:41 Jesus said, “Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, YE CURSED, INTO
EVERLASTING FIRE, prepared for the devil and his angels.” Jesushere plainly shows that the everlasting fire was prepared for Satan and his angels. Yet He goes on to say that human beings who are ultimately judged unfit for eternal life are also to be cast into this very lake of fire. “And these shall go away into everlasting punishment” (verse 46).

When these people are cast into the lake of fire, it is by God’s definition “the second DEATH,” from which there is no

resurrection. “But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death” (Rev. 21:8).