Why did the Catholic Church change God's Word?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

The Roman Catholic church actually changed the wording in the version of the Ten Commandments found in the Catechism. They took the Tenth Commandment and split it into the Ninth AND Tenth Commandments (check it out in any Bible, Exodus 20). The reason is obvious -- the church wanted to better hide God's absolute and totally complete hatred for any and all idols, including "inspired images." But, does anyone believe that God made a mistake when He gave us the Ten Commandments the first time? Does anyone believe that the Roman Catholic church knew how to correct that mistake? And, does any Catholic care that he or she blasphemes against God every time they kneel before any image? (Yes, He tells us clearly that kneeling before any idol displays hatred for Him. It's also in Exodus 20. Check it out.) So, my question is, why did the Roman Catholic church change the word of God?

-- Len Lisenbee (lisenbee@frontiernet.net), February 27, 2003

Answers

Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

These are standard accusations (I don't know a nicer way to say it) that anti-Catholic apologists write. I'm glad that you came to us to ask about these claims. Before assuming the worst about the Catholic Church, I ask you to read below.

Before going to Catholic sources, it's funny that Moses Himself could be accused of idolotry by the same logic. Look at the "bronze snake statue" thing in the Old Testament. Wouldn't that be idolotry?

If Moses was guilty of idolotry, why are his writings in the Old Testament?

Also, in the Old Testament, the Ten Commandments are never explicitly numbered.

Anyway, here's some info from EWTN.com: Ten Commandments

Here's some info regarding statues and "Hiding the Second Commandment" from Catholic.com.

Here is a link for the Catechism discussion of the Ten Commandments. See Section two.

Enjoy,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), February 27, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Dear Len,

With your kind of logic about Catholic practices, you hadn't better kneel at your bedside before going to sleep, nor bow your head before eating a meal, or you will be doing the same as we Catholics do.

You see, we don't pray to the statue or picture or crucifix. We worship only God, and sometimes "pray"--or, in modern English, a better word would be "implore"--the Saints in heaven to intercede with God on our behalf, but we don't worship images. We use images as inspirational works of art.

If they are forbidden, then, so would the graven images on the ark of the covenant be forbidden. We would be rallying against the Statue of Liberty and various national monuments...(not to mention our currency!)

I can't figure how you think that the Catholic Church "changed the wording" of the Bible. The Catholic Church preserved the Bible and compiled the New Testament.

The Catholic Bible existed long before the first Protestant Bible was ever written, so doesn't it stand to reason that the second version,the Prostestant Bible, is the one with changed wording?

Pax Christi.

-- Anna <>< (flower@youknow.com), February 27, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

I always find debating with people who make claims like this as a complete waste of time, interms of trying to convince them that we do not worship statues. They just refuse to accept any reasonable explaination. It seems the more absurd the claim, the more difficult it is to convince them of the truth.

Good luck guys. At least any replies can be read by others, who are more open to the truth.

Now I'm going to go watch some TV. Read: worship an image! :)

-- Gordon (gvink@yahoo.com), February 27, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Len, you responded to my email personally. Currently, you have told the forum to send copies of all responses to your email address. If you would like to remove this feature, the bottom of each email gives you instructions to turn it off.

If you would like to respond to my post (or any of the others), please post on this thread.

You ask:

"Do you honestly believe that God changed His mind on idols?"

No, I do not. I believe that statues can be used licitly to worship God (as is done in the Bible and in the Catholic Church). I believe that worshiping an idol is sinful.

Len writes:

"Oh, and what happened to that bronze serpent when the Jews did attempt to worship it?"

Can we agree that before they worshiped it, they came before it as a licit act?

I ask you to read the links that I provided. In this way, you will be better educated on true Catholic teachings instead of basing your opinions on the vitriol of others. Remember, "Thou shalt not bear false witness." Calumny is a sin, too.

God bless you,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), February 27, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

I find it more than a tad ironic that no one has actually addressed the question of why the Roman Catholic church changed God's word. First of all, I used the text found in the Jewish Torah to insure the contents of all of the Commandments. The Tenth Commandment in that tomb tells us not to covet our neighbors house (goods), nor his wife, nor his servents, etc. The Catholic church split that verse, took out wife, and wrote another complete commandment around it. The church changed the word of God. Why?

God also tells us that anyone kneeling before any idols is demonstrating his hatred for God. That is His words, not mine. You can find it in Exodus 20:5. Furthermore, the third chapter of the Book of Daniel is a very interesting read on kneeling before idols. check it out.

As for the two cherubims and a brazen serpent that God commanded his people to make to suit His Holy purposes, that is entirely different than humans making images to suit their purposes such as kneeling before them. No one can compare, much less equate, these two situations. Oh, and by the way, what happened to the brazen serpent when the Jews attempted to worship it? A righteous Jew broke it into many pieces, that's what.

So, who can tell me why the Roman Catholic church changed God's words. Did He somehow make a mistake? Is the Roman Catholic church smarter than God?

-- Len Lisenbee (lisenbee@frontiernet.net), February 27, 2003.



Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Len writes:

Why did the Roman Catholic church change the word of God?

Len, one cannot answer a question based on a false premise. The Catholic Church did not change the word of God. Calumny is a sin.

God bless you,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), February 27, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Len,

Christ gave to the Church He founded the right to loosen or bind anything on earth, and promised that it would also be loosed or bound in heaven.

What the Church teaches, heaven supports.

Pax Christi.

-- Anna <>< (flower@youknow.com), February 27, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

First, Len, we did answer your question. If you were looking for answers instead of just trying to attack us, you would have visited the links that were given to you. Since you willfully refused to do so, and instead accuse us of dodging your question, I will quote the site directly:

"Hiding the Second Commandment?

Another charge sometimes made by Protestants is that the Catholic Church "hides" the second commandment. This is because in Catholic catechisms, the first commandment is often listed as "You shall have no other gods before me" (Ex. 20:3), and the second is listed as "You shall not take the name of the Lord in vain." (Ex. 20:7). From this, it is argued that Catholics have deleted the prohibition of idolatry to justify their use of religious statues. But this is false. Catholics simply group the commandments differently from most Protestants.

In Exodus 20:2–17, which gives the Ten Commandments, there are actually fourteen imperative statements. To arrive at Ten Commandments, some statements have to be grouped together, and there is more than one way of doing this. Since, in the ancient world, polytheism and idolatry were always united—idolatry being the outward expression of polytheism—the historic Jewish numbering of the Ten Commandments has always grouped together the imperatives "You shall have no other gods before me" (Ex. 20:3) and "You shall not make for yourself a graven image" (Ex. 20:4). The historic Catholic numbering follows the Jewish numbering on this point, as does the historic Lutheran numbering. Martin Luther recognized that the imperatives against polytheism and idolatry are two parts of a single command.

To make memorization of the Ten Commandments easier, Jews and Christians abbreviate the commandments so that they can be remembered using a summary, ten-point formula. For example, Jews, Catholics, and Protestants typically summarize the Sabbath commandment as, "Remember the Sabbath to keep it holy," though the commandment’s actual text takes four verses (Ex. 20:8–11).

When the prohibition of polytheism/idolatry is summarized, Jews, Catholics, and Lutherans abbreviate it as "You shall have no other gods before me." This is no attempt to "hide" the idolatry prohibition (Jews and Lutherans don’t even use statues of saints and angels). It is to make learning the Ten Commandments easier.

The Catholic Church is not dogmatic about how the Ten Commandments are to be numbered, however. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says, "The division and numbering of the Commandments have varied in the course of history. The present catechism follows the division of the Commandments established by Augustine, which has become traditional in the Catholic Church. It is also that of the Lutheran confession. The Greek Fathers worked out a slightly different division, which is found in the Orthodox Churches and Reformed communities" (CCC 2066).
-Source

Sorry to do that, but Len's charge that we didn't answer the question is so totally false and abusive, and I think he owes us an apology.

Second, There is no difference between the King James Version and the New American (Catholic) Bibles re: the verses Len speaks of.

King James Version New American Bible
1st (1) And God spake all these words, saying, (2) I [am] the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. (3) Thou shalt have no other gods before me. (4) Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water beneath the earth: (5) Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me; (6) And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. (1) Then God delivered all these commandments: (2) "I, the LORD, am your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. (3) You shall not have other gods besides me. (4) You shall not carve idols for yourselves in the shape of anything in the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth; (5) you shall not bow down before them or worship them. For I, the LORD, your God, am a jealous God, inflicting punishment for their fathers' wickedness on the children of those who hate me, down to the third and fourth generation; (6) but bestowing mercy down to the thousandth generation, on the children of those who love me and keep my commandments.
2nd (7) Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. (7) "You shall not take the name of the LORD, your God, in vain. For the LORD will not leave unpunished him who takes his name in vain.
3rd (8) Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. (9) Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work: (10) 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, not the maidservant, nor thy cattle, no thy stranger that [is] within thy gates: (11) For [in] six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them [is], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. (8) "Remember to keep holy the sabbath day. (9) Six days you may labor and do all your work, (10) but the seventh day is the sabbath day of the LORD, your God. No work may be done then either by you, or your son or daughter, or your male or female slave, or your beast, or by the alien who lives with you. (11) In six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them; but on the seventh day he rested. That is why the LORD has blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.
4th (12) Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee. (12) "Honor your father and your mother, that you may have a long life in the land which the LORD, your God, is giving you.
5th (13) Thou shalt not kill. (13) "You shall not kill.
6th (14) Thou shalt not commit adultery. (14) "You shall not commit adultery.
7th (7) Thou shalt not steal. (7) "You shall not steal.
8th (17) Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. (17) "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
9th & 10th (17) Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that [is] thy neighbor's. (17) "You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male or female slave, nor his ox or ass, nor anything else that belongs to him."


Another important point: All translations change the Word of God. The King James Version does this especially often. A great deal of meaning within the Bible is simply untranslatable. That's why I can't want until I get my ancient languages down. :)

And, Len, YOU haven't addressed any of our questions: what do you make of graven images endorsed and used by Moses and others in the Old Testament?

-- Skoobouy (skoobouy@hotmail.com), February 28, 2003.

Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Sorry, I goofed on the verse numbers. If you can count, you can figure them out.

-- Skoobouy (skoobouy@hotmail.com), February 28, 2003.

Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Len,

i think that Skoobouy has provided a response that is as compelling as it is comprehensive.

the only bit that continues to puzzle me is the imperative in Ex 20:4 which is translated/ portrayed differently in the King James as opoposed to American. My own NJB also has its own twist - all resproduced below:-

KJB: (4) "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water beneath the earth"

American:(4) "You shall not carve idols for yourselves in the shape of anything in the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth"

NJB: (4) "You shalt not make yourself a carved image or likeness of anything in heaven above or on earth beneath or in the waters under the earth"

your point, i think, is that KJB (and NJB) seems to contain a blanket veto on the making of any statues of, say Our Lady, who is of course in heaven, whereas the American (Catholic) bible talks about the sky and not heaven and would allow statues of those in heaven. however, my observation is that in all versions the prohibition applies also to things on "earth" and in the "sea". it seems to me, therfore, that "heaven" in my NJB and in the KJB is a reference to the final component part of the Natural World -- the "earth" and "sea" and "sky". this is definitely a proper eiusdem generis construction of all versions. seems to follow that, if you believe that the individual must rely upon the Bible alone as the correct guide, i take this as a straighforward proscription of traditional pagan worship of the sun, the moon, the sea, etc etc.

as far as the worship goes, i can assure you that in all my time in the RCC, i have never seen anyone worshipping or being taught to worship a statue or whatever. they are symbolic adornments that, IMHO, add great solemnity and sense of occasion. but they are certainly non-essential in Catholic worship: during the 1,000 year persection of the CAtholic Church in Ireland by the Normans and then the English, and during the post Reformation persecution of the Catholic Church in England, Mass was frequently held wherever it was safe, typically in a wood with no adornments whatsoever. the lack of fancy statues never got in our way. it was still a full and complete Mass.

you should know that i am a Catholic who has on occasion posted messages that have incurred the wrath of my fellow RCS, as my views are considered somewhat Protestant in outlook. but i have to say this isn't an issue that i will be losing any sleep over.

i am glad you posted your message, and i have learned bucket loads from your question and Skoobouy's excellent explanation above. so please, if you do apologise, can't speak for the rest but don't worry about me.

and, of course, if you want to test Catholic compliance with God's Commandments (however they should be organised or numbered), then what better way than to go to a Mass and observe for yourself. you don't have to contribute to the collection(!), and you might even find that you are welcomed there as a friend.

-- Derek Duval Jnr (derek.duval@virgin.net), February 28, 2003.



Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Hello, Len!

Check this out in a Protestant Bible -- the New Living Transaltion version: the third Commandment which speaks of graven images -- EX 20: 4 AND Deut. 5: 8 specifically states that those that are considered as "graven images" are ONLY in the form of birds, fishes and animals". How much more specific can you get? We Catholics do not have ANY statues in those forms.

-- Cynthia Trainque (cltrainque@yahoo.com), February 28, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

birds, fishes and animals - things you find in the sky, the sea and on earth. Amen.

-- Derek Duval Jnr (derek.duval@virgin.net), February 28, 2003.

Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Speaking of "changing God's Word", perhaps one of our Protestant brethren could explain how various Protestant traditions present all sorts of conflicting and contradictory teaching, yet all of them are faithful to the Word of God in everything they teach. Am I missing something here?

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), February 28, 2003.

Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

I have to laugh at the idea of a Protestant asking why CATHOLICS changed the Bible. Martin Luther tried to throw out the Epistle of St. James altogether - and added the word "alone" after the word "faith" in a verse in Romans.

Um, WHO changed the Bible?

-- Christine L. :-) (christine_lehman@hotmail.com), February 28, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Len,

i would urge you to continue with your point. ignore the anti- Protestant stuff. they don't really mean it.

-- Derek Duval Jnr (derek.duval@virgin.net), February 28, 2003.



Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Do too! ;-P

-- Christine L. :-) (christine_lehman@hotmail.com), February 28, 2003.

Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Actually, Len, Christine does make a very good point. Martin Luther wanted James, Hebrews, 2nd Peter and Revelations all taken out because they made much to do about "works" which of course was anathema to Martin Luther.

The Greek Septuagint, which is the biblical canon used by the apostles, had the deuterocanicals (or apochrypha) within it, and the Protestant Reformers deemed the books uncanonical, and indeed took them out. That is not anti-Protestant, but just a fact.

The New Testament that we all have in our Bibles was canonized WITH the apochrypha in the 300's early 400's at the councils of Hippo and Carthage.

This is an interesting thread even though I think the poster was trying to besmirch the Church. It at least gave Catholics an opportunity to respond to an age-old accusation -- and just one of MANY!

Love,

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), February 28, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Len,

And what if the apostles knelt before Jesus in the flesh to worship him, that is while he walked on earth? That would be kneeling before an image too.

So does any non-Catholic (Len) care if his attitude toward images causes him to think in a manner which leads him to deny the value of flesh and God's creation? An attitude like that of Buddhists and Albigensians and Fundamentalists which see the material world as evil and to be despised because they fear the possibility of sin or suffering. But OH that would mean you weren't a God also, to admit that you might sin or have a human weakness as you go through life in the world God created for you to live in.

Your attitude is flawed at its core. Read some Catholic literature and don't bias yourself before you criticize them.

Sincerely,

-- Mike H (michael.hitzelberger@vscc.cc.tn.us), March 01, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

You don't "kneel before an image". You kneel while you pray, and you may also use an image at that time, to direct your mind and your heart to the one you are speaking to and kneeling before. That is the sole purpose of an image. That's why I have pictures of my family on the living room wall - to remind me of the actual people they represent. I don't have a relationship with the images, but they do help to sustain and strenghthen my relationship with the people they represent. Likewise I do not have a relationship with a statue, and would not kneel before one for the sake of the statue itself. But I will kneel if the one I am speaking to is worthy of that level of respect, and if a statue or picture helps to direct my heart and mind to that person, then thank God for that blessed image.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), March 01, 2003.

Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Yes. I'm ok with the statues and images. I'm just wondering about the money boxes that are mounted between the person and the graven images.

-- Rod A. Rodriguez (elreyrod@yahoo.com), March 01, 2003.

Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Thanks Christine, no offence was meant and i am glad you took none. thank you!

-- derek duval jnr (derek.duval@virgin.net), March 01, 2003.

Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Rod writes:

"I'm just wondering about the money boxes that are mounted between the person and the graven images."

What graven images are you talking about?

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), March 01, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Dear Rod,

If you are referring to the old churches where a bank of small candles might be present between the altar rail where you might kneel, and the statuary within the sanctuary - and the small money box attached to the candle rack - wonder no more! The box was there so that those who wished to do so might contribute to the considerable expense of providing the candles.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), March 01, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Ok, I finally got around to reading your response.

It seems to me that those money boxes would best be placed outside of the church interiors. What would be so wrong about keeping those boxes in a designated area as to not confuse people into thinking that prayers have a price (alms)? (Yes I know that "alms" had a different application.)

Why not have a "donation room" seperate from the "prayer room"?

rod

-- Rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), March 06, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Hi, Rod!

Of course, there would be nothing "wrong" with having the donation box located elsewhere, but there also is really nothing wrong with having them right at the location where the candles are actually being lit. It may save people the confusion and inconvenience of searching around for the donations box.

I think that if someone was to stand near the donation box, and inquire of patrons why they are putting money into it, you would find that they are not confused and realize that they are not paying for prayers, but rather making a donation toward the expense of the candle they are lighting.

If you are referring to "how it looks to others," you do have a point, but hopefully, instead of jumping to false conclusions, such people would ask, just as you have!

Pax Christi from your sister in Christ,

-- Anna <>< (flower@youknow.com), March 07, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Hi Anna.

I understand your point. Things just don't look right from the spectator stands. It would be difficult to explain to the non- Catholic. (I am in a position that I would have to make those explanations, but first I have to understand it and accept it for what it really is.)

The shrine I refer to has a statue of Christ posed as if layed on his tomb dead. I don't understand the significants of this. People come to kneel and pray in front of this statue. Now, I understand that as humans we need to have those symbols in order make things easier. I can also see how a non-Catholic would interpret such a scene. Other than the "graven images" arguement, they would wonder why Jesus would be depicted as being dead rather than alive, which has always been their criticism. And to add to the confusion, the money box is attached to the display. Can you see how this looks to the non-Catholic?

This is why I would consider having the donations seperate from the act of prayer. I'm not saying that there is a charge for praying; I'm saying that it looks like that to the non-Catholic and I'm having a difficult time convincing important people in my life namely my WIFE and myself (sometimes).

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), March 07, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Dear Rod,

I do see your point regarding the figure of Christ in the tomb. It might lead non-Catholics to imagine that this is the typical way Catholics view Christ. Of course nothing could be farther from the truth. We rejoice in our risen Savior, and it is that risen Savior with Whom we relate, and Whom we receive in the Eucharist. Easter is the central feastday of the Catholic Church. Such shrines as you described are rather uncommon, though I have seen a few. It should be viewed as an essential event in the life of Christ, and many important events in His life are commemorated in artwork. In fact, in every Catholic Church you can find a series of fourteen depictions of important events in the passion and death of Our Lord. These are called "The Way of the Cross" or the "Stations of the Cross". In some modern churches they may just be represented by fourteen little crosses or small pictures on the wall. But in older churches especially the stations are often in the form of three dimensional sculptures. One of the scenes represented in the fourteen Stations of the Cross is "Jesus is laid in the tomb". Actually, I wonder if the "shrine" you refer to might actually be one of the Stations of the Cross? In any case, every event in the life of Jesus is worth commemorating, but his crucifixion and resurrection are and always have been central since they are the means of our salvation.

The "graven images" thing doesn't make a lot of sense to me for a lot of reasons, but one I might mention is the fact that most Protestant churches I have attended have a cross somewhere inside, and a cross is a graven image. My boss is a devout Baptist, and wears a small cross pinned to the collar of his shirt. He also carries a coin in his pocket with an image of Christ on it. These are both gravcen images. "Graven" of course means "carved", or "three dimensional", as opposed to a two-dimensional image like a painting.

As for "having the donations separate from the act of prayer", I can see your point. On the other hand, I have been at Protestant services where they pass the collection plate right in the middle of the service. I never assumed they were paying for anything. It was clearly a free will offering, which the Bible fully supports.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), March 07, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Hi Everyone:

I wonder if could just offer my 2 cents worth here. Coming from a Protestant background, and having crossed over, I may be able to interject something worthy here.

Protestants worship with robust singing, reading their bibles and praying -- which are all GREAT. They are outward in their worship. But Catholics are more contemplative. We contemplate during our worship services. We contemplate different scenes from Christ's life during the Rosary, during the Stations of the Cross. Even the mass is meant to transport you through time and space contemplating that heavenly scene depicted in Revelations. Contemplative worship is rather foreign to the Protestant. I think if we could somehow make our Protestant friends realize the value of contemplation, they could understand what we're doing when we "bow down to that statue."

Love,

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), March 07, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Ok you All.

I see what I've been missing in all of this. There are similarities that I have overlooked. That small lapel pin is just as significant as the statues in the shrine.

I am familiar with the Stations of The Cross. This particular shrine has the Stations of the Cross outdoors where people can walk and view at their leisure. I have taken my family to experience the message. I always get a lump in my throat and fight tears.

I think I shall point out to my close friends the similarity in having icons and images and little fish and crosses and statues and so on.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), March 07, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Hi Rod,

Here is a beautiful site about the Stations of the Cross. The meditations by St. Alphonsus Liguori are (in my opinion) the most moving all any meditations on Our Lord's sufferings and death.

You can even click to hear music, and the history of how the Stations came to be is the introduction.

Just out of curiosity, would the shrine you're describing be in Auriesville, New York? I know that they have outdoor Stations, and I think perhaps a shrine depicting Our Lord's burial, but I cannot really remember; it's been awhile since I've visited there.

It is an awesome place to visit, where Christian blood was spilled on our own soil, bringing the Faith to a pagan nation. There, the companions of St. Isaac Joques were martyred, and not far from there, St. Kateri Tekaquitha, the "Lily of the Mohawks," is also honored.

Peace! I'll be praying for you, your wife, and your family.

Your sis,

-- Anna <>< (Flower@youknow.com), March 07, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Hi Anna.

If you find a map of Texas and put your finger at the bottom near the tip of Texas, you'll find San Juan, Texas.

Back when I was just a kid, the original Shrine of La Virgen de San Juan was attacked by a man crashing his WWII bomber into it. The shrine was destroyed and the pilot killed. I really do not know the man's motives (protesting the shrine's money making issues?).

Today, the shrine is one of the biggest tourist sites for the people visiting from Mexico to see. And, of course, the local people also worship there. The shrine does have its beauty.

Please don't calculate my age....the shrine was destroyed circa 1967

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), March 07, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

What a coincidence, I finished reading about:

"...the companions of St. Isaac Joques were martyred, and not far from there, St. Kateri Tekaquitha, the "Lily of the Mohawks," is also honored. "

The book I'm reading has a paraphrased chapter on "The North American Martyrs". It also mentions six Jesuit priests who were martyrs.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), March 07, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Look at this website to see Catholic writes tell the truth about changing God's Holy Laws ::

http://www.biblesabbath.org/confessions.html

-- Larry Larry (Not@this.time), March 09, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

http://www.kensmen.com/catholic/stations.html

Eek! Sorry, Rod, I didn't post the link for the Stations of the Cross! You will truly appreciate this site, I think.

Not everyone here is a spring chicken, myself included!

-- Anna <>< (Flower@youknow.com), March 09, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Rod,

I was nine years old in 1967...So, does that mean I am your "little" sister? (hee hee) :)

Pax Christi.

-- Anna <>< (Flower@youknow.com), March 09, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

I was wondering about that link.

I didn't want to make you feel funny, but I am a little younger by 2 years.

My family and I visited the Stations of The Cross. My kids did all of the narration.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), March 10, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Wow, Rod, that's great.

I think the Stations of the Cross instill in all of us a horror of sin.

I would love to hear about your family! But I don't recommend posting much personal info on this public forum. If you are interested, there is a Catholic forum at www.phatmass.com which will lovingly welcome you with open arms. One has to be registered to post there, so I consider it to be more secure. We do not get the attacks and vulgarity, obscenity, and racist posts with people stealing our names and email addresses there as we do here.

Still, this site is full of beautiful people, and I am resolved to stay around here as long as I can!

That shrine must have made a big impression on you, if you remember it from when you were seven years old!

Pax Christi.

Your (slightly older) sis in Christ,

-- Anna <>< (flower@youknow.com), March 10, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

I'm not sure why there was no comment on the website that i contributed, maybe you all just do not know how to copy and paste it into your browsers or something.

So I decided to post the entirety of the article here, it addresses the change in bible text as relates to the Cathols as well as all organizations that have sprung from her loins. Enjoy! (I only hope the format is not all messed up as i prepare to hit the 'submit' button)

Roman Catholic and Protestant Confessions about Sunday

The vast majority of Christian churches today teach the observance of Sunday, the first day of the week, as a time for rest and worship. Yet it is generally known and freely admitted that the early Christians observed the seventh day as the Sabbath. How did this change come about?

History reveals that it was decades after the death of the apostles that a politico-religious system repudiated the Sabbath of Scripture and substituted the observance of the first day of the week. The following quotations, all from Roman Catholic sources, freely acknowledge that there is no Biblical authority for the observance of Sunday, that it was the Roman Church that changed the Sabbath to the first day of the week.

In the second portion of this booklet are quotations from Protestants. Undoubtedly all of these noted clergymen, scholars, and writers kept Sunday, but they all frankly admit that there is no Biblical authority for a first-day sabbath.

Roman Catholic Confessions

James Cardinal Gibbons, The Faith of our Fathers, 88th ed., pp. 89.

"But 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."

Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism 3rd ed., p. 174.

"Question: Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?

"Answer: Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her-she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday, the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday, the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority."

John Laux, A Course in Religion for Catholic High Schools and Academies (1 936), vol. 1, P. 51.

"Some theologians have held that God likewise directly determined the Sunday as the day of worship in the New Law, that He Himself has explicitly substituted the Sunday for the Sabbath. But this theory is now entirely abandoned. It is now commonly held that God simply gave His Church the power to set aside whatever day or days she would deem suitable as Holy Days. The Church chose Sunday, the first day of the week, and in the course of time added other days as holy days."

Daniel Ferres, ed., Manual of Christian Doctrine (1916), p.67.

"Question: How prove you that the Church hath power to command feasts and holy days?

"Answer. By the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of, and therefore they fondly contradict themselves, by keeping Sunday strictly, and breaking most other feasts commanded by the same Church.'

James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore (1877-1921), in a signed letter.

"Is Saturday the seventh day according to the Bible and the Ten Commandments? I answer yes. Is Sunday the first day of the week and did the Church change the seventh day -Saturday - for Sunday, the first day? I answer yes . Did Christ change the day'? I answer no!

"Faithfully yours, J. Card. Gibbons"

The Catholic Mirror, official publication of James Cardinal Gibbons, Sept. 23, 1893.

"The Catholic Church, . . . by virtue of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday."

Catholic Virginian Oct. 3, 1947, p. 9, art. "To Tell You the Truth."

"For example, nowhere in the Bible do we find that Christ or the Apostles ordered that the Sabbath be changed from Saturday to Sunday. We have the commandment of God given to Moses to keep holy the Sabbath day, that is the 7th day of the week, Saturday. Today most Christians keep Sunday because it has been revealed to us by the[Roman Catholic] church outside the Bible."

Peter Geiermann, C.S.S.R., The Converts Catechism of Catholic Doctrine (1957), p. 50.

"Question: Which is the Sabbath day?

"Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day.

"Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?

"Answer. We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday."

Martin J. Scott, Things Catholics Are Asked About (1927),p. 136.

"Nowhere in the Bible is it stated that worship should be changed from Saturday to Sunday .... Now the Church ... instituted, by God's authority, Sunday as the day of worship. This same Church, by the same divine authority, taught the doctrine of Purgatory long before the Bible was made. We have, therefore, the same authority for Purgatory as we have for Sunday."

Peter R. Kraemer, Catholic Church Extension Society (1975),Chicago, Illinois.

"Regarding the change from the observance of the Jewish Sabbath to the Christian Sunday, I wish to draw your attention to the facts:

"1) That Protestants, who accept the Bible as the only rule of faith and religion, should by all means go back to the observance of the Sabbath. The fact that they do not, but on the contrary observe the Sunday, stultifies them in the eyes of every thinking man.

"2) We Catholics do not accept the Bible as the only rule of faith. Besides the Bible we have the living Church, the authority of the Church, as a rule to guide us. We say, this Church, instituted by Christ to teach and guide man through life, has the right to change the ceremonial laws of the Old Testament and hence, we accept her change of the Sabbath to Sunday. We frankly say, yes, the Church made this change, made this law, as she made many other laws, for instance, the Friday abstinence, the unmarried priesthood, the laws concerning mixed marriages, the regulation of Catholic marriages and a thousand other laws.

"It is always somewhat laughable, to see the Protestant churches, in pulpit and legislation, demand the observance of Sunday, of which there is nothing in their Bible."

T. Enright, C.S.S.R., in a lecture at Hartford, Kansas, Feb. 18,1884.

"I have repeatedly offered $1,000 to anyone who can prove to me from the Bible alone that I am bound to keep Sunday holy. There is no such law in the Bible. It is a law of the holy Catholic Church alone. The Bible says, 'Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.' The Catholic Church says: 'No. By my divine power I abolish the Sabbath day and command you to keep holy the first day of the week.' And lo! The entire civilized world bows down in a reverent obedience to the command of the holy Catholic Church."

Protestant Confessions

Protestant theologians and preachers from a wide spectrum of denominations have been quite candid in admitting that there is no Biblical authority for observing Sunday as a sabbath.

Anglican/Episcopal

Isaac Williams, Plain Sermons on the Catechism , vol. 1, pp.334, 336.

"And where are we told in the Scriptures that we are to keep the first day at all? We are commanded to keep the seventh; but we are nowhere commanded to keep the first day .... The reason why we keep the first day of the week holy instead of the seventh is for the same reason that we observe many other things, not because the Bible, but because the church has enjoined it."

Canon Eyton, The Ten Commandments , pp. 52, 63, 65.

"There is no word, no hint, in the New Testament about abstaining from work on Sunday .... into the rest of Sunday no divine law enters.... The observance of Ash Wednesday or Lent stands exactly on the same footing as the observance of Sunday."

Bishop Seymour, Why We Keep Sunday .

We have made the change from the seventh day to the first day, from Saturday to Sunday, on the authority of the one holy Catholic Church."

Baptist

Dr. Edward T. Hiscox, a paper read before a New York ministers' conference, Nov. 13, 1893, reported in New York Examiner , Nov.16, 1893.

"There was and is a commandment to keep holy the Sabbath day, but that Sabbath day was not Sunday. It will be said, however, and with some show of triumph, that the Sabbath was transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week .... Where can the record of such a transaction be found? Not in the New Testament absolutely not.

"To me it seems unaccountable that Jesus, during three years' intercourse with His disciples, often conversing with them upon the Sabbath question . . . never alluded to any transference of the day; also, that during forty days of His resurrection life, no such thing was intimated.

"Of course, I quite well know that Sunday did come into use in early Christian history . . . . But what a pity it comes branded with the mark of paganism, and christened with the name of the sun god, adopted and sanctioned by the papal apostasy, and bequeathed as a sacred legacy to Protestantism!"

William Owen Carver, The Lord's Day in Our Day , p. 49.

"There was never any formal or authoritative change from the Jewish seventh-day Sabbath to the Christian first-day observance."

Congregationalist

Dr. R. W. Dale, The Ten Commandments (New York: Eaton &Mains), p. 127-129.

" . . . it is quite clear that however rigidly or devotedly we may spend Sunday, we are not keeping the Sabbath - . . 'Me Sabbath was founded on a specific Divine command. We can plead no such command for the obligation to observe Sunday .... There is not a single sentence in the New Testament to suggest that we incur any penalty by violating the supposed sanctity of Sunday."

Timothy Dwight, Theology: Explained and Defended (1823), Ser. 107, vol. 3, p. 258.

" . . . the Christian Sabbath [Sunday] is not in the Scriptures, and was not by the primitive Church called the Sabbath."

Disciples of Christ

Alexander Campbell, The Christian Baptist, Feb. 2, 1824,vol. 1. no. 7, p. 164.

"'But,' say some, 'it was changed from the seventh to the first day.' Where? when? and by whom? No man can tell. No; it never was changed, nor could it be, unless creation was to be gone through again: for the reason assigned must be changed before the observance, or respect to the reason, can be changed! It is all old wives' fables to talk of the change of the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day. If it be changed, it was that august personage changed it who changes times and laws ex officio - I think his name is Doctor Antichrist.'

First Day Observance , pp. 17, 19.

"The first day of the week is commonly called the Sabbath. This is a mistake. The Sabbath of the Bible was the day just preceding the first day of the week. The first day of the week is never called the Sabbath anywhere in the entire Scriptures. It is also an error to talk about the change of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. There is not in any place in the Bible any intimation of such a change."

Lutheran

The Sunday Problem , a study book of the United Lutheran Church (1923), p. 36.

"We have seen how gradually the impression of the Jewish sabbath faded from the mind of the Christian Church, and how completely the newer thought underlying the observance of the first day took possession of the church. We have seen that the Christians of the first three centuries never confused one with the other, but for a time celebrated both."

Augsburg Confession of Faith art. 28; written by Melanchthon, approved by Martin Luther, 1530; as published in The Book of Concord of the Evangelical Lutheran Church Henry Jacobs, ed. (1 91 1), p. 63.

"They [Roman Catholics] refer to the Sabbath Day, a shaving been changed into the Lord's Day, contrary to the Decalogue, as it seems. Neither is there any example whereof they make more than concerning the changing of the Sabbath Day. Great, say they, is the power of the Church, since it has dispensed with one of the Ten Commandments!"

Dr. Augustus Neander, The History of the Christian Religion and Church Henry John Rose, tr. (1843), p. 186.

"The festival of Sunday, like all other festivals, was always only a human ordinance, and it was far from the intentions of the apostles to establish a Divine command in this respect, far from them, and from the early apostolic Church, to transfer the laws of the Sabbath to Sunday."

John Theodore Mueller, Sabbath or Sunday , pp. 15, 16.

"But they err in teaching that Sunday has taken the place of the Old Testament Sabbath and therefore must be kept as the seventh day had to be kept by the children of Israel .... These churches err in their teaching, for Scripture has in no way ordained the first day of the week in place of the Sabbath. There is simply no law in the New Testament to that effect."

Methodist

Harris Franklin Rall, Christian Advocate, July 2, 1942, p.26.

"Take the matter of Sunday. There are indications in the New Testament as to how the church came to keep the first day of the week as its day of worship, but there is no passage telling Christians to keep that day, or to transfer the Jewish Sabbath to that day."

John Wesley, The Works of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M., John Emory, ed. (New York: Eaton & Mains), Sermon 25,vol. 1, p. 221.

"But, the moral law contained in the ten commandments, and enforced by the prophets, he [Christ] did not take away. It was not the design of his coming to revoke any part of this. This is a law which never can be broken .... Every part of this law must remain in force upon all mankind, and in all ages; as not depending either on time or place, or any other circumstances liable to change, but on the nature of God and the nature of man, and their unchangeable relation to each other."

Dwight L. Moody

D. L. Moody, Weighed and Wanting (Fleming H. Revell Co.: New York), pp. 47, 48.

The Sabbath was binding in Eden, and it has been in force ever since. This fourth commandment begins with the word 'remember,' showing that the Sabbath already existed when God Wrote the law on the tables of stone at Sinai. How can men claim that this one commandment has been done away with when they will admit that the other nine are still binding?"

Presbyterian

T. C. Blake, D.D., Theology Condensed, pp.474, 475.

"The Sabbath is a part of the decalogue - the Ten Commandments. This alone forever settles the question as to the perpetuity of the institution . . . . Until, therefore, it can be shown that the whole moral law has been repealed, the Sabbath will stand . . . . The teaching of Christ confirms the perpetuity of the Sabbath."

-- Larry (not@this.time), March 10, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

If the Jewish Sabbath was to be held in perpetuity, even by non-Jews, why did the early Christian Church (which was composed largely of ethnic Jews) worship on Sunday, as stated in Acts 20:7?? And please, don't say that Acts 20:7 simply refers to Sunday dinner. That simplistic interpretation makes no sense at all. "The breaking of the bread" is an obvious reference to the Last Supper, the institution of the Mass as the central act of Christian worship, and the direct command of Christ to "do THIS in remembrance of Me".

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), March 11, 2003.

Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Hi Paul,

Well I guess you did not read my post as the answers are all there. The cathols admit to changing the sabbath simply because they could. Simple enuff for you? The cathols admit there is NO biblical basis for sunday worship, and if you would dare to read my post you will find a few other organizations who are Sunday keepers that will say much the same thing. So much for hinging the destruction of the 4th commandment around one vague verse in Acts. Nice try, though!

Surely you would agree that we should keep the other 9 commandments, why in particular do you want to change the 4th commandment, unless that particular one has the name, territory, and title of the Creator in it, making it the official SEAL of the Lord. Bet you have never, ever considered that before.

-- Larry (not@this.time), March 11, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Dear Larry,

I just gave you a biblical account of Sunday worship. The apostles worshipped on Sunday. The early Church worshipped on Sunday. The Bible clearly says so. Could you provide me with a passage that says they met for the breaking of bread on Saturday? If not then I guess we'll just have to accept what the Word of God says - that they met for worship on Sunday. And that same Church still worships on Sunday. What manmade churches of the past couple of hundred years do is not my concern. They have designed their own doctrines, so they can also keep the Jewish Sabbath if they wish, or celebrate Christmas in April. That's their business. But the one Church founded by Jesus Christ worships on the day of His Resurrection. This is not a "change in the Sabbath". The Sabbath is still on Saturday, and Jews still honor it under the Old Covenant just as they did in Jesus' time. But the Christian day of worship, under the New Covenant, breaks with Jewish tradition and honors Jesus Christ, Lord and Savior of the world.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), March 11, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Hi Paul,

One more time: Well I guess you did not read my post as the answers are all there. The cathols admit to changing the sabbath simply because they could. Simple enuff for you? The cathols admit there is NO biblical basis for sunday worship, and if you would dare to read my post you will find a few other organizations who are Sunday keepers that will say much the same thing. So much for hinging the destruction of the 4th commandment around one vague verse in Acts. Nice try, though!

Surely you would agree that we should keep the other 9 commandments, why in particular do you want to change the 4th commandment, unless that particular one has the name, territory, and title of the Creator in it, making it the official SEAL of the Lord. Bet you have never, ever considered that before.

-- Larry (not@this.time), March 12, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Our 4th Commandment is: "Honor thy Father and thy Mother."

Pax Christi.

-- Anna <>< (flower@youknow.com), March 12, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Dear Larry,

Acts 20:7 specifically says the early church met for worship on SUNDAY. Acts is part of the scriptures, is it not?? That should satisfy even a fundamentalist Protestant who is chained to the Bible. Christians have ALWAYS worshipped on Sunday, and you can determine that directly from the Word of God, without even bothering to look at historical records! What more do you need?

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), March 12, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

To Paul and Anna,

I will present one authority at a time if you simply cannot be bothered to read a little historical fact. James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore (1877-1921), in a signed letter.

"Is Saturday the seventh day according to the Bible and the Ten Commandments? I answer yes. Is Sunday the first day of the week and did the Church change the seventh day -Saturday - for Sunday, the first day? I answer yes . Did Christ change the day'? I answer no!

"Faithfully yours, J. Card. Gibbons"

History has much to do with everything as the Cathols were not even organized for the first several hundred years. And before you spout that Peter was the first Pope, remember that Peter was married, something which the cathols are much against. Sunday, day of worship, was formalized at the council of Trent, around 365 AD.

Who first enjoined Sunday keeping by law? Constantine the Great. "The earliest recognition of the observance of Sunday as a legal duty is a constitution of Constantine in 321 A.D., enacting that all courts of justice, inhabitants of towns, and workshops were to be at rest on Sunday (venerabili die solis), with an exception in favor of those engaged in agricultural labor." Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed., art. "Sunday".

By what church council was the observance of the seventh day forbidden and Sunday observance enjoined? The Council of Laodicea, in Asia Minor, fourth century.

Want more?

From the Convert’s Catechism, we read: Question: Which is the Sabbath day? Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day. Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday? Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church, in the Council of Laodicea (A.D. 336). Transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.”

If you will not believe historical fact, you truely have a problem.

Does Acts 20:7 Teach Sunday Worship?

Was Paul really preaching on Sunday in Acts 20:7? A close look dispels this popular belief and discloses important days for observing today.

A most controversial and debated passage in the entire New Testament is found in Acts 20:7: "And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight."

Often cited as proof that the early disciples had been instructed by the Savior to observe Sunday, this verse supposedly shows that they were indeed now keeping the first day of the week instead of observing the day we know as Saturday.

Certain translations of this passage render it the same as the King James Version, namely, "the first day of the week." However, other translations render it Saturday night (New English Bible, Good News for Modern Man). How are we to understand this enigmatic passage?

Churchianity’s understanding of this passage is divided. Those who worship on Sunday insist this is a powerful passage in support of Sunday-keeping, and is a paramount verse used to show that the Apostle Paul was now keeping Sunday as a day of worship.

But Sabbath-keepers contend that it is indeed a Saturday evening message Paul preached that lasted into the night, into the first day of the week that begins at sunset (known to us as Sunday). They cite verses 8 and 9 to substantiate that it was evening and that there were many lights in the upper chamber. The evidence indicates that this latter understanding provides a clearer explanation. Biblical days end with sunset as well as start at sunset.

No Communion Happening Here

Believe it or not, Acts 20:7 was never inspired by God’s Spirit to support Sunday worship! It has been twisted to teach a counterfeit day of worship. These verses have nothing to do with observing Sunday, but actually show that Paul was keeping the same Holy Days given to Israel that will be kept in the Kingdom.

Neither does this verse teach us to partake each Sunday of the symbols of the body and blood of our beloved Savior by taking the cup and breaking of bread. The expression "breaking of bread" here simply means sharing a common meal such as in Acts 2:42; 46. Note especially Acts 27:35: "And when [Paul] had thus spoken, he took bread, and gave thanks to Yahweh in presence of them all: and when he had broken it, he began to eat."

Bread in those days was not sliced as today, but broken off in chunks, then often dipped in a sauce or broth before being eaten. Acts 20:11 shows that Paul, having revived Eutychus, went back up and ate bread, continuing his conversation until daybreak.

This Was 25 Years AFTER Christ **are you still reading Paul?**

Verse 6 tells us that Paul sailed away from Philippi after the Days of Unleavened Bread, arriving in Troas five days later where they stayed for seven days. Passover and the days of Unleavened Bread always come around the time of the spring barley harvest heralding the first of the seven annual Feast Days for Israel.

Why does Luke, in the year 57, make special mention of the Days of Unleavened Bread, which always follow the spring festival of Passover? This is some 25 years after the Messiah’s death and ascension to the heavens! If the Days of Unleavened Bread are now done away, as some erroneously teach, why does Luke call attention to them in Paul’s dealing with the Gentiles? Paul had evidently stayed in Philippi to observe these days with the non-Israelite Philippian brethren.

Notice that the cup or fruit of the vine is nowhere mentioned in Acts 20:7-11, as it is in 1Corinthians 10:16. The cup would be required had this been an observance of the Passover or the "Master’s Supper." Furthermore, verse 6 reveals that Paul had already kept this annual memorial service before his arrival in Troas.

It is quite clear that upon Paul’s planning to depart from Troas, the brethren came together for a common meal, a "farewell supper," and Paul preached a discourse unto them, continuing until midnight and beyond. Paul was not partaking of a "Communion" or "Master’s Supper." He ate later, verse 11. The cup or "fruit of the vine" are nowhere mentioned. This was a common meal.

This verse has a much more profound meaning for those who are searching for Yahweh’s truth and seeking His will. Understanding this verse will help us go on unto perfection.

Paul Observes An Annual Sabbath

In Green’s Interlinear Bible, where the English is translated directly under the Greek, Acts 20:7 reads, "on and the one of the Sabbaths."

In the King James the word "week" is the Greek plural of No. 4521 in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance and means the Sabbath. It is the equivalent of the Hebrew No. 7676 and means the Sabbath, the day of weekly repose, a rest from secular avocations.

Now notice that the word "day" in the authorized version is in italics. This means it is not found in the Greek manuscripts, but is a help-word added by the English translators. In most cases these help-words clarify and aid us in a better understanding of the Bible. But in this passage the added word "day" is quite misleading to the Bible student.

The key to the significance of verse 7 lies in a proper understanding of Yahweh’s seven Annual Holy Days that are listed in order in Leviticus 23. Acts 20:6 reveals that Paul arrived in Troas after the Days of Unleavened Bread. Our attention is called to these special days to emphasize that they were still being observed.

Special, Yearly Sabbaths Revealed

Leviticus 23 adds to our understanding of Yahweh’s overall plan for us. The Sabbath is the first of these special days He reveals in His grand plan for redeeming mankind (Lev. 23:1-3). Then follows Passover with seven Days of Unleavened Bread (verses 4-8).

Instructions are then given for counting to Pentecost (verses 9-15). This relates directly to our problem verse, bringing us back to Acts 20:6-7.

Note carefully, Pentecost is what Paul had in mind as we read in Acts 20:16, "For Paul had determined to sail by Ephesus, because he would not spend the time in Asia: for he hasted, if it were possible for him to be at Jerusalem the day of Pentecost."

In Acts 21:17 we learn Paul did indeed arrive at Jerusalem for Pentecost, and later he relates his worship in Jerusalem: "Because that you may understand, that there are yet but twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship. And they neither found me in the temple disputing with any man, neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogues nor in the city: Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me. But this I confess unto you, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the [Elohim] of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets," Acts 24:11-13.

Paul went to Jerusalem to worship and observe Pentecost more than 25 years after the death and resurrection of the Savior! He did not go to Jerusalem merely to evangelize the Jews who might be gathered there, as some erroneously contend. He went to worship and keep the Feast.

He emphasizes that he was not a rabble-rouser, but worshiped in complete harmony with the Old Testament law and the prophets. He continued observing the Feast Days. Because he did not continue with circumcision and offer animal sacrifices, the Jews called his way "heresy." Paul had accepted Yahshua’s death as the supreme sacrifice for his sins. He now sacrificed his old way of life to a new walk in Yahshua’s footsteps.

First of the Week

The verse under consideration deals with the first day of the week. As already mentioned, in the Greek the verse reads "first of the sabbaths." Dr. Bullinger notes in his Companion Bible that this was "the first day of the sabbaths, i.e., the first day for reckoning the seven sabbaths to Pentecost."

Paul continued preaching to the brethren in Troas quite late, for we note that many lamps or torches were in the upper chamber (Acts 20:8-9). As Paul continued speaking, likely the fumes from the lamps made Eutychus sleepy, causing him to fall three stories below.

While we have no record of Paul’s topic, his discourse very likely centered on an explanation of Pentecost, the next Annual Feast day, and how to count the seven Sabbaths. Upon counting the seven weekly Sabbaths (49 days), the next day would be the 50th day or Pentecost. Pentecost was clearly on Paul’s mind, for he was hastening to arrive in Jerusalem by then, verse 16.

See John 20:1, Luke 24:1, Matthew 28:1, and Mark 16:2. According to Dr. Bullinger and the Greek texts, these verses relate to the first weekly Sabbath which begins the counting of seven weekly Sabbaths toward Pentecost.

Yahshua the Wavesheaf

These verses are prove that the Savior Yahshua fulfilled Bible prophecy, literally becoming the actual wave sheaf offering, Leviticus 23:15, John 20:14-17 (John’s account is clearer when read from an interlinear.)

Notice the instructions in Leviticus 23:10-11, "When you...reap the harvest...then you shall bring the sheaf of the first-fruits of your harvest to the priest, and he shall wave the sheaf before Yahweh to be accepted for you on the day after the Sabbath the priest shall wave it." Counting fifty days from the wave-sheaf offering day brings us to Pentecost, Acts 2.

Upon the morrow after Yahshua arose He became our High Priest (Heb. 4:14) and took the place of the priest that waved the sheaf before Yahweh, John 20;14 and Leviticus 23:10-11.

Note Leviticus 23:15-16, "And you shall count from the day after the Sabbath, from the day that you brought the sheaf of the wave-offering; seven Sabbaths shall be complete, even to the day after the seventh Sabbath shall you number fifty days..."

At the same time He also became the firstfruits (1Cor. 15:23) by ascending to Yahweh and presenting Himself before Him, John 20:17, and also became our High Priest. One can find facets of Yahshua’s work in each of the seven Annual Holy Days. Many important events also happened on the Feast days Yahweh ordained to be observed by an ordinance "forever," Leviticus 23:14, 21, 31, 41.

This Was 25 Years After Yahshua

The account in Acts 20 took place over 25 years after Yahshua had ascended into heaven and Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles, is still observing these Holy Days. This clearly shows that the Annual Holy Days are important in this New Covenant era and are not done away, but will also be kept in the Kingdom.

Paul’s speech, lasting until midnight, more than likely was to show the Gentile brethren how to calculate the time for Pentecost where seven complete Sabbaths (weeks) are counted to arrive at the proper time to keep Pentecost, the day following the Sabbath.

I am always happy to explain to new believers all about Yahweh’s Holy Days, which will be kept in the Kingdom, and help us better understand His plan of redemption.

Gentiles Taught Annual Sabbaths

Acts 20:7 cannot be taken as evidence for a change of weekly worship from Sabbath (Saturday) to Sunday because Paul himself was a teacher to the Gentiles, Acts 9:15.

The Savior chose a strict observer of the letter of the law, a Pharisee of the Pharisees, to go to the Gentiles and teach them Yahweh’s way of life. Paul was this choice, and he continued to teach the Gentiles on the Saturday Sabbath (Acts 16:13; 13:42-46; 17:2; 18:4). The context of the passage shows that the center of attention is on Yahweh’s Holy Days.

Keep in mind that the early Greek manuscripts do not contain the Greek word meaning day ("hemera"). The word for "day" simply is not found in the Greek and has been added by translators. Acts 20:7 literally reads, "on And one of the Sabbaths, having been assembled the disciples to break bread, Paul reasoned to them, being about to depart on the morrow; he continued and the discourse until midnight" (J. P. Green).

What we find there is the spirit of truth through the Apostle Paul’s teaching Yahweh’s Word as found in Leviticus 23:15-16. He showed the Gentile brethren how to count the seven complete Sabbaths to arrive at the correct time to observe Pentecost.

Paul also taught the cosmopolitan, pagan Corinthians about Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread: "For even Messiah our Passover is sacrificed for us: therefore let us keep the Feast..." 1Corinthians 5:7-8. He explains that because Yahshua has become our Passover sacrifice, let us get cleaned up, be clean from our old ways, and feed on the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

Why write to the Gentile Corinthians and apply Old Testament principles of truth contained in the Feast days if these days are not to be kept by Gentile converts? Are they not to become spiritual Israelites, Romans 9:4-6?

Annual Sabbaths in the Millennium

We pray it is your goal to keep Yahweh’s Holy Days in spirit and in truth so that you will better understand the grand design He is working out with us even now. These Holy Days will be observed in the Millennium under the Messiah, Isaiah 65:23, Micah 4:1-4.

Ancient Israel kept these days under the Old Covenant as a timely reminder of Yahweh’s omnipotent power of creation and deliverance. He says these sabbaths are a sign between Him and His people, which He gave as a sign that He is the One Who sanctifies them (sets apart for a holy purpose), Ezekiel 20:12. Through verse 20 of this same chapter He repeats His demand for obedience and gives the promise that the obedient ones will know that He, Yahweh, is our Elohim.

Hebrews 8:8-10 reveals that these same laws will again be kept "after those days." Even now the "sanctified ones" (Heb. 10:14) are to have His laws "put in their hearts and will be written in their minds."

These are not some new or different laws that He refers to here. These are the same laws given to ancient Israel, but now to be observed in their full spiritual intent and obeyed from the heart. Not the lip-service of ancient Israel who did not have the heart to obey.

Acts 20:7: Keep Sabbath, Feast

Acts 20:7 cannot be used to show that worship on the Saturday Sabbath has been transferred to Sunday. Many interlinears show that the gathering was on "the first of the Sabbaths" and continued on after sundown into the first day of the week.

This verse actually recounts Paul’s dedication to keeping the weekly Sabbath we know as Saturday, and then goes on to show that Paul is determined to keep the coming Annual Sabbath of Pentecost.

Only the laws of circumcision and Temple sacrifices have been put in abeyance as we obey from the heart and offer up spiritual sacrifices: "You also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to Yahweh by Yahshua the Messiah."

He is calling a dedicated people like you to help rule under Yahshua, Revelation 5:10.



-- Larry (not@this.time), March 12, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Dear Larry,

We are Catholics, not Cathols.

We worship on Sunday, the day of Our Lord Jesus' Glorious Resurrection from the Dead. So do many other (a majority of) other Christians.

This is a Catholic forum. If you are interested in respectful dialog, then welcome.

If you're intention is bashing our Faith, I, for one am not interested.

If you don't get the name of our Faith name straight, nor order our commandments properly, how am I to give your other facts any credibility whatsoever?

Pax Christi.

-- Anna <>< (flower@youknow.com), March 13, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Anna, i will address your post item by item.

We are Catholics, not Cathols.

Larry: my use of cathol should not offend you as i consider it the root word of catholic. I always wondered where the word catholic came from, looked it up on the web, and now i know!

We worship on Sunday, the day of Our Lord Jesus' Glorious Resurrection from the Dead. So do many other (a majority of) other Christians.

Larry: Anna, are you going to be like Mr. Paul, and not read what the cathol historians and officials have recorded for *YOU* to read?? i have included many factual quotes in preceding posts, did you even read them?

This is a Catholic forum. If you are interested in respectful dialog, then welcome.

Larry: I suppose respect would be a two way street! Respect yourself enough to avail yourself to historical facts and statements by your leaders and then take time to do some reflecting about it. I posted them above, and did not tinker with the wording or order like some faiths do to the Bible.

If you're intention is bashing our Faith, I, for one am not interested.

Larry: Anna, I could put all my faith in a bleach bottle, but that would be sheer stupidity. To those given greater light, more is expected from them. I believe there is alot of misplaced faith in this old world of ours.

If you don't get the name of our Faith name straight, nor order our commandments properly, how am I to give your other facts any credibility whatsoever?

Larry: Anna, I did not make up these facts that i posted. Whether you regard them as credible or not is up to your honesty. Some come from your respected leaders and historians, they are not my quotes. Ever heard the expression "don't shoot the messenger" ??

It is truely ironic that you would mention "order our commandments properly". Want an interesting quick study of what this thread is about? Look at the 1994 Catechism 10 Commandments, now look for any mention of graven images, or carved images, etc. Not there right? Okay, now go to your bible and look at Exodus 20:4-6. See anything about graven images there? That happens to be exactly where the ten commandments are located, so brace yourself! Please do not get back to me unless you have done this simple exercise.

-- Larry (not@this.time), March 13, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Whatsa matter Paul, cat got your tongue?? I think he explained Acts for you, now what say you?

Christ never advocated persecution did he? So what makes you think your organization has anything in common with Christ? Even if the Roman system only killed 1 million instead of 50 million, that is still a million too many and very unChrist-like, would you not agree? Are you familiar with the interpretation for Daniel 7:25 ?? It points directly at the Catholic church... think to change *times* and *laws*

-- heretic (h@h.net), March 25, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

"Is Saturday the seventh day according to the Bible and the Ten Commandments? I answer yes. Is Sunday the first day of the week and did the Church change the seventh day -Saturday - for Sunday, the first day? I answer yes . Did Christ change the day'? I answer no! "Faithfully yours, J. Card. Gibbons"

Catholics do not deny any of this info. It’s all true. However, it doesn’t necessitate worship on Saturday. As Card. Gibbons answered, yes, the Church changed the seventh day for Sunday, Christ did not. But you fail to realize that 1) Christ gave His Authority to the Church (“Whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven”). 2) Christ was a Jew, and Jew’s observed the Mosaic Law – Sabbath. But he established the Christian, Universal (Catholic) Church, when He breathed upon His Apostles on Pentecost, AFTER His death and resurrection (On Sunday).

“History has much to do with everything as the Cathols were not even organized for the first several hundred years.”

If Catholics were not organized for the first several hundred years, then how do your reconcile Peter and Paul’s letters to the first Catholics? How do your reconcile the records of the Popes who succeeded Peter?

“And before you spout that Peter was the first Pope, remember that Peter was married, something which the cathols are much against.”

WAS married is correct. Unless you can prove that he WAS married at the time of his Apostleship, then you have no ground for anything. Even so, celibacy is a discipline and may change with time. It is not a doctrine of the faith, as there are rites within the Catholic Church, which do permit marriage.

“Sunday, day of worship, was formalized at the council of Trent, around 365 AD.”

Formalized is correct. Practiced is a different story. As evident in Acts, Sunday, day of worship, was practiced since the decent of the Holy Spirit.

“Who first enjoined Sunday keeping by law? Constantine the Great. "The earliest recognition of the observance of Sunday as a legal duty is a constitution of Constantine in 321 A.D., enacting that all courts of justice, inhabitants of towns, and workshops were to be at rest on Sunday (venerabili die solis), with an exception in favor of those engaged in agricultural labor." Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed., art. "Sunday".”

By “legal” duty you are correct. By moral duty, when the Apostles decided to bind the Church to Sundays it was the peoples moral duty to comply.

“By what church council was the observance of the seventh day forbidden and Sunday observance enjoined? The Council of Laodicea, in Asia Minor, fourth century.”

“Formally” once more… In practice, Sunday was the day.

In many cases, councils were formed and formally bound things based on the need to “bind” them. If everyone gives his or her ascent to a practice, what need is there to bind anything. When people begin to dissent, such as Protestants or those who would prefer their own Biblical interpretation over Christ’s Church, then there is a need to bind.

“From the Convert’s Catechism, we read: Question: Which is the Sabbath day? Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day. Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday? Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church, in the Council of Laodicea (A.D. 336). Transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.”

The Church formally transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday. The Church had always recognized Sunday as the day of worship.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14335a.htm

“Does Acts 20:7 Teach Sunday Worship?… Believe it or not, Acts 20:7 was never inspired by God’s Spirit to support Sunday worship! It has been twisted to teach a counterfeit day of worship…Neither does this verse teach us to partake each Sunday of the symbols of the body and blood of our beloved Savior…”

According to who? You? Who gave you the authority to determine what it meant and what it didn’t mean? Tell us, why is your interpretation of this passage any better than mine (or for that matter 30,000 protestant groups who vary on the issue also).

“It is quite clear that upon Paul’s planning to depart from Troas, the brethren came together for a common meal, a "farewell supper,"…

So, tell me once more. If it is so clear. Why has there been such a debate over it? If it is indeed “clear” why can’t we all see? And don’t say because we are blind to the truth. The reverse can equally be true, unless there is an authority to referee (say, a Church or something :)

Speaking of which: Can you tell us… Why do you accept the Bible? Did God magically drop it down from heaven? How can you be sure that the Scriptures in the Bible are inspired? There are no markings on them. And there were several other writings at the time. How were they compiled to be your “sole source” of the Word of God. Did the Spirit Guide the men who picked them for you? If not, how were the Books infallibly picked. And if they were infallibly picked, then how do you reconcile 7 books being taken out 1200 years later by Luther. Was he Spirit led? If so, by who’s authority was he “lead”. In other words, since he was self proclaimed, why take his word for it, when I could likewise claim to be led, etc.

Now, if indeed the books were infallibly picked by men, led by the Spirit, then did the Spirit stop leading men after them? If so, how do you explain Luther taking books out. If the Spirit could still lead after that, then why deny the Church that picked the books which make the Bible you read.

In sum: How do you reconcile using a book compiled by Catholics (Spirit led Catholics) to refute Catholic teaching? Bottom line, if the Catholics compiled the Bible, then hand copied it for nearly 1200 years, then how could the Church have made a mistake on the day of worship? Twelve hundred years of hand writing a bible! I mean, if the Church made a mistake, then those darn monks must have been blind!

-- jake Huether (jake_huether@yahoo.com), March 25, 2003.


Response to Why did the Catholic church change God's Word?

Dear Jake, the sabbath was made at creation, before there were any Jews or Catholics around. :) Only Adam and Eve. Catholics are never authorized to change Gods instructions, ever, ever, never. To say you can change Gods laws is total BLASPHEMY!! Dan7.25 surely applies even if applied loosely.

When and by whom was the Sabbath made? It’s in the Bible, Genesis 2:1-2, NIV. "By the seventh day God had finished the work He had been doing; so on the seventh day He rested from all His work. And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it He rested from all the work of creating that He had done."

What is the reason for keeping the Sabbath day holy? It is the memorial of creation. It’s in the Bible, Exodus 20:11, NIV. "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but He rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy."

For whom did Christ say the Sabbath was made? It’s in the Bible, Mark 2:27, NIV. "Then He said to them, ‘The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath."

What does the fourth commandment require? It’s in the Bible, Exodus 20:8-10, NIV. "Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates."

What has God designated as a sign between Himself and His people? It’s in the Bible, Ezekiel 20:20, NIV. "Keep My Sabbaths holy, that they may be a sign between us. Then you will know that I am the Lord your God."

The Sabbath is also a sign of sanctification. It’s in the Bible, Ezekiel 20:12, RSV. "Moreover I gave them my Sabbaths, as a sign between Me and them, that they might know that I the Lord sanctify them."

In the new heaven and earth, how often will the redeemed worship the Lord? It’s in the Bible, Isaiah 66:22-23, NIV. "As the new heavens and the new earth that I make will endure before Me," declares the Lord, "so will your name and descendants endure. From one New Moon to another and from one Sabbath to another, all mankind will come and bow down before Me," says the Lord."

While Christ was on earth, did He keep the Sabbath? It’s in the Bible, Luke 4:16, TLB. "When He came to the village of Nazareth, His boyhood home, He went as usual to the synagogue on Saturday, and stood up to read the Scriptures."

What day immediately precedes the first day of the week? It’s in the Bible, Matthew 28:1, NIV. "After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb."

After the crucifixion, what day was kept by the women who followed Jesus? It’s in the Bible, Luke 23:56, NIV. "Then they went home and prepared spices and perfumes. But they rested on the Sabbath in obedience to the commandment."

What day of the week is the Sabbath, "according to the commandment"? It’s in the Bible, Exodus 20:10, KJV. "But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God."

What was Paul’s custom concerning the Sabbath? It’s in the Bible, Acts 17:2, NIV. "As his custom was, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures."

What did Christ say about the law of God of which the Sabbath commandment is a part? It’s in the Bible, Matthew 5:17-19, NIV. "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven."

What kind of worship does the Savior call that which is not according to God’s commandments? It’s in the Bible, Matthew 15:9, NIV. "They worship Me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men."

What are the characteristics of God’s people at the end of time? It’s in the Bible, Revelation 14:12, NIV. "This calls for patient endurance on the part of the saints who obey God’s commandments and remain faithful to Jesus."

-- heretic (h@h.net), March 27, 2003.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ