Arghh!!!! This year, Christmas is on a Sunday. And we in the Churches of Christ can’t even contemplate canceling Sunday services. We take communion weekly. It’s not even worth discussing. Not going to happen.
We could change the time of service. We could cancel Bible classes. We might even let the preacher have the day off to visit family. But we’re going to have church.
And so, dear readers, how is your church handling Christmas on Sunday?
* A brief devo service, to avoid taking time from family?
* A full-fledged, special Christmas service?
* A change in time?
* No changes in time — we’re not going to let a worldly holiday keep us from doing what we do?
I’m looking for ideas here.
About Jay F Guin
My name is Jay Guin, and I’m a retired elder. I wrote The Holy Spirit and Revolutionary Grace about 18 years ago. I’ve spoken at the Pepperdine, Lipscomb, ACU, Harding, and Tulsa lectureships and at ElderLink.
My wife’s name is Denise, and I have four sons, Chris, Jonathan, Tyler, and Philip. I have two grandchildren. And I practice law.
Streaming video via Internet. Family Devo time. Staying in the Manger.
The Fairfax Church of Christ in Fairfax, VA is having a special service at midnight, and then a regular rescheduled worship service at 11a Christmas morning. No classes
We will be cancelling our early worship (a normal practice near major holidays), but also cancelling Bible class and evening service. We will have only an 11:00 a.m. worship.
It does seem a bit ironic to me that those who insist that Christmas has nothing to do with Jesus’ birth will be those mostly likely to keep all opportunities to corporately worship him intact, and those who celebrate Jesus’ birth on that day will be more inclined to cancel those opportunities for worship.
Central CofC, Athens Al. One service @ 10:00, no SS and no evening service.
We traditionally have a Christmas Eve service. This year, our Sunday instrumental service is being moved to Christmas Eve – seems to be a full hour service including communion. Sunday service will be later – 10 am – full hour, a Capella, and no Bible class.
My daughter and her family would be fine with Christmas Eve only, but my Dad and sister are very traditionalists and would shudder at anything other than a full hour, a Capella, Sunday service.
NO recognition at all. No mention of it at services, in sermons, with no mention of the wrong date holiday.
Anyone missing services because of it will have to walk the walk to get back in good graces. There will be close checking.
This is the very predominate treating of Christmas, around here.
One congregation I visit is canceling Bible classes for Christmas and New Year’s. My home congregation will have regular services, regular times – but there may be a “Christmas” sermon re the coming of Jesus. If so, it will probably also mention why “we do not celebrate Christmas.”
Beginning tomorrow will preach on the major players involved in Christ’s incarnation which will culminate in an acknowledgement of our greatest gifts on Christmas morning. Candlelight service the Wednesday night before. No Sunday PM service and will seriously discuss the “No Bible class” idea.
When I was a child I was taught that we in the CoC do not celebrate Christmas as a religious (Roman Catholic) holiday but do celebrate it as an American tradition. I explained this to my brother’s girlfriend and she told her her pastor said you could observe Christmas as a Christian or as a Pagan – take your choice. Different people have different opinions.
Hesed,
Randall
I find this whole discussion amazingly interesting. Not from a sense of right or wrong, for I feel we are all free in this regard. No, it’s the apparent conflict among the “new Sabbath rules” promulgated in Acts 20:7, with the observance or rejection of a secular/religious holiday honoring Jesus, with the family-centered traditions permeating that holilday.
I would be very refreshed if I saw believers and their local groups simply assembling or not… as they so desire. Not an attempt to meet some legal minimum requirement, or an effort to merge two traditions, or to try to balance our secular present-centered Christmas morning against a reverent and joyful focus on the birth of the Savior. I am prepared to set everyone free on this Sunday, to proclaim from my own little rooftop that God is not judging his people for how well they navigate this social conundrum.
Fly! Be free! And be blessed!
This is sort of an experiment, I confess. If we can do this at Christmas, maybe we can later expand such a liberty to other Sundays as well.
No idea what our church is doing. I can’t imagine canceling church services on…you know, Christ-mas.
But why cancel Sunday evening services? Why not cancel Sunday *morning* services, and have a great service on Sunday evening?
i wonder
does anyone remember what it was like to be under 10 years old!
see that tree and all those big presents.
celebrate that special day with a home church.
sometimes i think we all need to be reminded just what a church consists of, that should be the issue not one of guilt!
and taught correctly just might make family members hear the words of prayer , thanksgiving, and joy, that would otherwise would be just a same ol same ol day of football…
In Austria we share the presents on the eve ofthe 24th wqhich makes it a lot easier. On Sunday we have our traditional turkey diner, and house church will be alittle different therefore. We just come to eat and celebrate – and yes, we will break the bread ad share a cup of wine (most likely as a “starter”)
Alexander
Alexander
.” We just come to eat and celebrate – and yes, we will break the bread ad share a cup of wine (most likely as a “starter”)”
what a GREAT DAY
:-))))
blessings
to you and yours bro
Most of my life, congregations cancelled “Sunday School” to give everyone an extra hour in the morning.
Uh….there is no celebrating Christmas in the CofC. Surely you all know that. I’m not even sure why you brought it up. The congregation of my youth will take the opportunity to talk about Paul but no mention Jesus (maybe His death, but not His birth). NO.
We discussed having a Saturday evening service, but have opted for a Sunday morning service at 10am with a light breakfast for those who normally come to Bible classes.
The reasoning? We are family and it just seems unfortunate for family not to be gathered together on Christmas.
It has nothing to do with the LS which can be celebrated anytime and anywhere two or more believers gather.
It has nothing to do with style of worship. We are not yet certain whether to have the usual sort of assembly or something akin to what we are doing at our holiday dinner on the 11th. (We are celebrating Jesus – from cradle to cross – in narrative and song at our holiday dinner.)
It has little to do with tradition beyond the timing coinciding with our usual Sunday assembly. Why not take advantage of the public’s general lack of knowledge about the nativity story and reach out with some really good news on a day when everyone acknowledges a general appreciation for Jesus? When else will you have such a ‘free shot’ at engaging them about Jesus? Besides, we can all use a refresher about how God can take an impossible mission and bring it to fulfillment using regular people who are only special in the way they relate to Him.
Nancy, dear,
I cannot begin to tell you how wrong-minded avoiding the subject of Jesus is – especially among those who claim to be His followers. Paul would be ashamed, sister.
Blessings of a season of celebration and love for our Savior, no matter what your economic status is …
Grizz
Ah, Christmas… I am glad to see you all embracing this ECF tradition (ha ha ha).
The more I read the more I realize that the COC I attend is very different from these other places you all mention. Some judge others for changing service times, while some here are judging others for not changing service times — strange. Can we not agree that assembling on the Lord’s Day is inherent in Christianity, while respecting that the timing of that assembly is a matter of opinion? Caesar will detain some of our brothers, and several will simply choose to stay home, but we will remember and pray for them while looking forward to their participation in the future.
Jay,
We will gather on Sunday morning at the regular time to praise the resurrected Lord and encourage one another before returning to our homes to be with our individual families and feasts for the rest of the day. I pray that you and your family will have a very blessed Christmas. Are you buying me a new liturgical calender…. 🙂
Grizz;
I wonder what Paul would say about your idea of, “It has nothing to do with the LS which can be celebrated anytime and anywhere two or more believers gather.”
Why didn’t he just have a special meeting of the church called by the elders, instead of waiting until the church assembled on the first day of the week? According to the text he had arrived after the church had assembeled, a part of a day was considered as a whole number in determining time to the jews, therefore he stayed 7 days until they met again.
(Acts 20:6 NIV) But we sailed from Philippi after the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and five days later joined the others at Troas, where we stayed seven days.
(Acts 20:7 NIV) On the first day of the week we came together to break bread. Paul spoke to the people and, because he intended to leave the next day, kept on talking until midnight.
We also see his instructions.
(1 Cor 16:1 NIV) Now about the collection for God’s people: Do what I told the Galatian churches to do.
(1 Cor 16:2 NIV) On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will have to be made.
Can you find anyplace in the scriptures that identifies the early Christians oberveing the LS any other day? There is a large amount of information in the OT concerning the importance of the first day (or fruits) which is a shadow, or guide for the understanding for the future “church”.
Larry
Hi, Larry …
The apostles were given the LS when they assembled mid-week with Jesus to observe the Passover. That’s one.
In the earliest comments on the kinds of things that characterized the earliest Christians AFTER the Pentecost on which Peter addressed the crowds who were making a stir about the glossalia they encountered that morning after the HS fell on them, Luke says (a) they met daily in a variety of places, (b) gatherings in homes were most usual, (c) they discussed the apostles’ teachings and had them over to teach, (d) enjoyed a fellowship that was understood as being something special, and also (e) “broke bread” together – also daily. Some make a stir about whether breaking bread had anything to do with the Lord’s Supper in Acts 2 but think there is no question that Acts 20 is certainly doing so. Your comments seem to place you firmly in that inconsistent camp.
Personally, I find the “controversy” ridiculous. It is like the apostles arguing over who is greatest … which they did and which means we should not be surprised when others find equally silly things to argue about. To pretend, though, as some teachers do, that the LS must only be taken weekly and only on Sundays and only once by each Christian …. and go so far as to claim that this is one of the unique identifiers of the first century church – to do that is both ludicrous and arrogant at its very core. Jesus said His followers would be known by their love and yet some claim that we are to be known by any number of other idiosyncrasies we might imagine we see in the scriptures…all the while neglecting the one thing Jesus predicted. That is a bother, isn’t it? At least I hope that it bothers us.
I appreciate the thorough (and sometimes not so thorough) research that some have employed to make their case from the OT and all manner of other lines of reasoning. I find Jesus to be quite satisfactory at settling the issue. After all, He started the thing, taught the apostles what to teach about the thing, and did so on a mid-week evening during an annual feast observance. I would think Jesus knew what He meant by getting things going, don’t you?
Anyhow, the point of my statement is that we at the local assembly here in Merrillville, IN take a rather familial approach to meeting on the 25th of December when that falls on a Sunday, as it does this year. Even so, I do rather appreciate hearing how others view the question and the occasional controversies that may arise with those inclined to be contentious. I learn from it all.
Blessings,
Grizz
Grizz, I COMPLETELY agree, it is totally wrong minded to avoid the subject of Jesus. I’m sorry my post wasn’t more clearly sarcastic. Unfortunately, my experience(s) in the CofC was just that..void of any substantive teaching about Jesus. In fact, I never even understood the gospel until the Spirit led me out. Thank God.
Blessings to you too.
I don’t know what our congregation will do. We have only lived here three years. Holiday season is usually used as an opportunity for multiple congregations in town to join together for special joint services. This was true last year and again last Wednesday as well.
We always had normal services where we were when the children were young (all adults now). We would use the occasion to teach them it was best to modify our personal family schedule than to change God’s family schedule. It was all about showing that God is our number one priority.
Yes, I know the times are our convenience and can be changed. But doing what may be okay will often send the wrong message.
We’re having one worship service that morning at 11 am (instead of our usual 8:30 and 11 services with class in between). We’re not having any classes nor are we having a Sunday evening service.
Larry wrote: “I wonder what Paul would say about your idea of, ‘It has nothing to do with the LS which can be celebrated anytime and anywhere two or more believers gather.'”
>>>
I think Paul would say, “That’s true.” See Romans 14 for supporting details.
Folks who think that varying from the modern Sunday morning LS tradition would be an unbearable deviation should put themselves in the shoes of the early Jewish believers. The church changed a 1400 year old God-given tradition of annual Passover observance by celebrating the tradition as fulfilled by Jesus. On Sunday! And more than annually! And with Gentiles! Oy!
Compared to that, observing the LS on a Saturday is a minor alteration.
There are two things that come to mind.
First, it would be a bit of an irony for people who are CHRISTians to not celebrate his incarnation. To not even acknowledge that He was “God with us” is….crazy!
On the other hand, I am told “Let no man judge you regarding a special day…” So I am free to go to the assembly that day, or I am just as free to stay at home with my family and celebrate there.
What is pretty obvious to me is that most of the people who make a fuss about stores not saying “Merry Christmas”, or if or not we get to or have to go to church on Christmas probably don’t give Jesus as second thought except two or three times a week tops.
God can make an evil serve His purposes. Can’t we who are his children make a secular holiday a time of worship and praise because the God we serve became a man and give himself for our sins? The very idea that sincere Christians who celebrate Christmas are sinning is absurd in my view. Thanks, I’ll have mine without the condemnation of personal preferences and legalism.
Oh, by the way, at White’s Ferry Road we will have Christmas Eve Service – Saturday, December 24 at 5pm
Christmas Day Service – Sunday, December 25 at 10am
And we’ll likely attend both, not driven by guilt but by grace.
Verse 5: Parallel to Paul’s discussion of eating meat in the previous verses, he now introduces the subject of the observing of days. We must keep in mind again that the focus of this discussion in on matters of opinions/options, not matters of faith/obligation. These days are not days about which God has bound. Paul’s statement here, therefore, does not suggest that, if someone wanted to observe the Lord’s supper on a day other than the first day of the week or in addition to the first day of the week, such would be permissible. The observance of the Lord’s supper on the first day of the week and only on the first day of the week is a matters that God has legislated and clearly has not left in the realm of human judgment, opinion, or preference. (Acts 20:7;1 Cor. 16:2; et al.) “ The Lord has set apart the first day of the week for Christian worship and activities to be done therein (and these) are neither matters of opinion or indifference.
Neither is Paul allowing the observance of religious holy days which God has not authorized under the new covenant of Christ. Paul is not here allowing the carrying over the law of Moses the observance of the Sabbath,Pentecost,Passover, the Day of atonement, or any other religious holy day. Judaizing teachers were always condemned by the inspired pen. To the Galatians Paul wrote, “ Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain” (Gal. 4:10-11). In Galatian 5:3 we are told that keeping part of the Law required keeping the whole law (torah) Which such clear condemnation of observing the special days of the law of Moses it should be clear that Paul does not here contradict himself and permit what he has elsewhere condemned.
Paul is not allowing the creation of “holy days” and the binding of them on the church. This would be binding things that God has not bound, making ourselves, instead of Christ, the lawgivers. There is certainly a movement in this direction by some in the church today. The observance of Christmas (like angels and nativity scenes) and Easter as religious holidays. Christians can enjoy such national holidays without attaching to them any religious significance and without alter the Christian worship. Changing what has been bound in the church by the Lord, like the Lord’s day (Sunday) is a sin. The question here is : is a commandment to gather in the lord’s day? Yes, Heb. 10:25 says “not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching.” Is it good to meet for assembling? Of course, If we don’t do it. What will happened? We are sinning because we are not doing what is good. (James 4:17) The syncretistic nature of adapting cultural practices in the Christian faith is adding to what the Lord has spoken.
“Changing what has been bound in the church by the Lord, like the Lord’s day (Sunday) is a sin. ”
>>
Says who? Nowhere does the scripture refer to Sunday as “the Lord’s day”, GFT. Nope, just doesn’t. If the Lord bound this on us, when did he do so? Who did he tell? Why didn’t anyone note this rule in scripture? How do we know?
What other non-biblical ideas are we allowed to bind on other believers? Church traditions range far beyond the ones most evangelicals currently observe.
I can’t help but think that with indeed Christmas Day falling on a Sunday – The Lord’s Day, churches and Christian families will have to “choose that day” whom they are going to serve. Either we will cater to the traditions of a secular Christmas morning and forego church, or make worship on that day primary and our traditions secondary.
As for our congregation and as for me and my house, I suppose we will choose that day to do what we do when Easter falls on a Sunday:) And by the way, it will be a special day, not because its Christmas Sunday, but it’s the first day of the week, and therefore every first day is special. (cf. Acts 20:7; Rev. 1:10)
Everett Ferguson notes: “It is perhaps significant that the adjective “Lord’s” (kyriakos) occurs only twice in the New Testament–in reference to the Lord’s supper (1 Cor. 11:20) and to the Lord’s day (Rev. 1:10). [Ferguson footnotes a quote by Willy Rordort who gives the dictum: “No Lord’s Supper without Sunday, no Sunday without the Lord’s Supper.”]
Ferguson continues “Both are peculiarly the Lord’s and both belong together, united to each other by the resurrection. The day, as the day of resurrection, is the day for taking the supper, and the supper, in remembrance of the event of salvatio, gives significance to the day.” (In The Church of Christ: A Biblical Ecclesiology for Today, p.242-243)
Indeed it will be a special day for the church as is every first day of the week is for the people of God to gather in worship and unite around the body and blood of the risen Savior.
Can’t think of any other place I’d rather be.
So yes we’ll have to drag our kiddos away from their new toys and presents, so that we can get out the door in time. It won’t be usual Christmas morning spent relaxing with family.
Whatever plans we make for Christmas day will have to be made around worship with our church family. Christmas on Sunday will ask us to take the focus off ourselves and focus our attention where it belongs.
And hopefully my that will be a great “sermon” my wife and I will preaching to our children without words.
Sincerely,
Robert Prater
Robert,
off the topic of Christmas and just focusing on the Lord’s Day, that was a good a summary which I pray will call for reflection.
Charles,
off the topic of Christmas… your words about the Lord’s Day are a great example of my concern for the modern church’s interpretational approach and its disconnect from history. Such is not even being true to Sola Scriptura. The scriptures reveal an explicit change from Sabbath to Sunday, emphasize the “the Lord’s Day – 1st day of the week – Sunday,” and is confirmed by church history. Yet, a growing number today feel that Sunday was neither taught nor bound because the Bible does not explicitly say “Sunday is a special day among Christians, etc.” Sunday is as inherently special of a day to Christianity as the Sabbath was to Judaism. I am not saying that it is a day or rest, but rather it has a deep theological foundation and connection. The earliest Christians even called it the 8th day or day of recreation.
Some (not me) have branded Ferguson a legalist, if you are one of these, at least consider my thoughts worthy of study, given it’s also taught by many Reformation leaders, and those among the Restoration Movement of who are not called legalist, like Drs. John Mark Hicks and Jack Cottrell.
The Lord bound it on the apostles, who taught the 1st Christians, who passed it on, which is why there is such attention given to it in Scripture and the early church. It is in scripture, just not the way that you seem to think it should be.
The respected Protestant Bruce Shelley, says orthodoxy was either the raw material that became scripture or the explication of what was contained in scripture. Christians embraced the divine truths of the gospel, baptism, Eucharist, and liturgical song, among other doctrines, before the N.T. scriptures were written. The theory that controversy is discussed and accepted practices are assumed, certainly applies to sacraments, liturgy, and daily life in the New Testament.
Christians gathered daily, but Sunday (i.e. the Lord’s Day) was very special to them and carried deep theology. I pray with joy in my heart that you will find this topic worthy of future study and an encouragement to your faith.
Royce,
Thank you. Your comments are appreciated. I wish we could be there to celebrate both the eve and the day with you…not out of guilt, but for grace.
HistoryGuy,
I do not share your enthusiasm for RP’s over-the-top reflection. If this is the kind of thing that causes him to ‘choose this day’ whom to serve, I would only wish for 363 more such calendar-related encouragements for him. Why not, after all, make that choice every single day of every single year?
As for the rest of your comments, brother, I would suggest that it might be good for you to reconsider exactly what you think ‘sola scriptura’ means – within the context of historical interdenominational thought, of course. Is it just me or is that your preference – to consider things beyond the scope of just those groups known as SC-RM groups? (I, for one, applaud your acknowledgement that there are things to learn from those some may hesitate to call ‘brethren’.)
Your statement that “The Lord bound it on the apostles…” is so unfounded as to call into question the basis for rest of your comments in total. Where is this ‘binding’ you perceive? And why was Paul so left out of that ‘binding’ as to write to the Romans that holding any day as more special than another is NOT to be bound? How is it that you, 21 centuries later, have such access to a binding that an inspired first-century apostle did not have?
You do have me scratching my head over this one, but probably not in the way you intended.
Blessings of clarity that I may learn something about this ‘binding’ you find which scripture seems to have hidden so well,
Grizz
Charles,
God said that in his word. The first day of the week or Lord’s day is what we know today as Sunday in the Roman Gregorian Calendar. And Thanks brother Prater for citing Scripture. There are more passages that show the importance of worship in the first day of the week.
Guestfortruth
HistoryGuy opined: “The scriptures reveal an explicit change from Sabbath to Sunday,”
>>
Then why is there no “explicit” record of this “explicit change”? And what actually changed, and why did the change occur, and who told the church to make the change? You’ll have to pardon me if I remain skeptical of your categorical assertions until you unroll some actual scripture teaching them. I continue to be amazed at folks who insist upon BCV as proof of matters of faith and practive until they don’t find any to support their own practice, then they simply ignore the absence, or replace scripture with other sources. Sola scriptura goes by the wayside in short order in such cases.
HG also said: “The Lord bound it on the apostles, who taught the 1st Christians…”
>>>
Now, somebody’s just making stuff up. HG, you’re welcome to observe “one day as special”, but to teach that such a doctrine is bound on any of the rest of us is an addition to –and contrary to– scripture. You have to move beyond the “sola” in sola scriptura to prove that conclusion.
Speaking of sola scriptura, I don’t find that particular doctrine in the NT, either. A little BCV for a closed canon, please. In fact, the opposite is not only taught but modeled in the NT, as the NT is chock-full of new revelation from God and Paul encourages the church to actively pursue prophecy as part of that. Nowhere are we told to only follow only what is in the canon. That idea wasn’t from Paul or Peter or Jesus, but Luther. Jesus said there is indeed a way that he reveals to us what is His, but he did not tell us it was a book. In fact, He specifically named a Person who would have this task.
I personally think the Holy Spirit is doing a great job, but he has a tough audience, sometimes.
RP offered: “I can’t help but think that with indeed Christmas Day falling on a Sunday – The Lord’s Day, churches and Christian families will have to “choose that day” whom they are going to serve.”
>>>
I’m sorry you can’t help but think that, RP. Mainly because it is incorrect thinking. We all make mistakes, but it’s tough not to be able to escape them. Sometimes we cannot get past our own thinking because we have promoted certain of our own ideas to the level of holy writ without either solid reason or divine unction. Then we overlay our opinions with a few disparate verses cobbled together as proof texts, and proclaim, “Thus saith the Lord!”
I find ill-reasoned to the point of absurdity to assume that a family who chooses to honor Jesus in their own home this coming December 25 instead of attending the scheduled meeting of a local religion club has somehow chosen to serve someone besides Jesus. When singing “Oh, come, let us adore Him! Christ the Lord!” gets translated into following other gods, someone’s translating machinery is due for a major overhaul.
HistoryGuy,
Thank you for that reminder to all coC!
Jay,
Are those pages from the Letter “An Address To the Churches of Christ” by Barton W. Stone ? Or from Leroy Book and your commentaries about the letter? We coC recognize the good work done by our pioneers, but we don’t take as a written creed quotations from our pioneers. We always are going to the primary source to verify if the claims are not misquoted . We know that God wants us to hold fast what is true. They really were focus in restoring the New Testament church as accurate as they can be as revealed in the whole pages of the New Testament (1 Cor. 3:10-11). Thing that has been forgotten by some university professors , because the peer pressure (High Criticism) of the denominations . The influence of moderns Ecumenical thinking has erased our recall memory , Pattern Memory, and association memory . Our pledge is to the bible the word of God! Not to opinions and Tradition of Men. (Col. 2:8,9).
Charles,
God said that in his word. The first day of the week or Lord’s day is what we know today as Sunday in the Roman Gregorian Calendar. And Thanks brother Prater for citing Scripture. There are more passages that show the importance of worship in the first day of the week.
Grizz,
The word “example” means “ That which is to be followed, or imitated: a pattern.” I mention this definition to point out that an “example” is to be followed or imitated. An example is “binding”. Right at this point I should explain the sense in which I am using the word “binding” in relationship to examples.
For instance, I am commanded to observe the Lord’s Supper, 1 Cor. 11:25,25. I am instructed (by precept and by example) to observe it on the first day of every week, Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2. There is no option here. I am authorized by example.
Further, I am commanded to give – as I have been prospered. This is a must matter. I must not fall short of giving as I have been prospered. But, in 2 Cor 8:1-5, I am taught by example that I may exceed giving as I have been prospered. The Macedonian brethren gave” beyond their power” Did Paul refer to these brethren as an example for the brethren at Corinth? Is this an example for us today? Is this account of this action binding on me? If so, in what sense is it binding? Does it teach that I must upon every Lord’s day give beyond my power? Or, does it teach that I may give beyond my power? How does the example “fit in” with the command?
In the light of 1 Tim 1:3. I believe that it is binding (in the sense that it is authorized, and therefore may be imitated).
Whether an example is binding in the sense that it must be done, or in the sense that it may be done has to be determinate by due consideration of the totality of the Bible teaching on the point at hand, Also, we must be aware of negative “examples”. God records for us illustrations of things we ARE NOT TO DO AND THINGS WE ARE NO TO BE.
God in his word put all the examples that help us to get to heaven be faithful to the teachings of Christ and his apostles (Acts 2:47) imitating the faith of the first Christians that did the right things keepings his commandments “Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. 32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” (Jn. 8:31-32).
There secular history support the way and practices of the first century church (Christians) of Christ, we don’t accept as inspired those sources by they were also witnesses of the way of life of the new testament church.
In Christ,
Guestfortruth.
Charles,
While Grizz’s reply seemed to be on par for our dominant personalities, he showed a bit of respect as I enjoy showing him; however, your reply is a bit “snarky.” Did you not attempt to authenticate anything I said? A simple google search will yield hundreds of pages on the topic. Still, I appreciate the opportunity to respond to your myopic statements. Please see my response to Grizz below, which he was courteous enough to ask for, while expressing that my view, this time round, seems unbelievable.
Grizz,
In my post I specifically said Sunday is not a day of rest, Christians gathered daily, but held Sunday as a special day, while laying out 4 affirmations and 1 concern. (A) The rejection of Sunday as a special and inherent day of Christian worship is a deep concern. Such a view is (1) disconnected from historical reality (2) disconnected from Sola Scripture [i.e. the individual has become the sole authoritative interpreter] (3) disconnected from the theological connection to Christianity, and (4) ignores the explicit change, recorded in Scripture, from Sabbath to Sunday.
I am well aware of what Sola Scriptura is, and what it has come to mean. In its establishment it put the scriptures in the hands of the people, but also balanced what could and has become a chaotic situation, by reminding the people that interpretation must be weighed against the universal time spanning church. A google search can shed more light on this, as a defense will use more words than you care to read from me (though I am happy to talk further about it). Yes, I examine what all Christians through the ages and regions (long before COC), including what heretical, orthodox, and apocryphal groups have written on a given topic before making a conclusion I’ll defend. Thank you for noticing. My response will be in the next post as I struggled to give you something meaningful, yet concise.
— See Below
Grizz,
You asked me 3 questions and I’ll try to concisely address them considering my 4 affirmations.
In reply to, my insight — 21 centuries later — binding what the apostles did not have This question is really tied to the other two questions, and stems from your presupposition and misunderstanding of Paul’s statements in Romans, etc. I am essentially asking you the reverse, why, 21 centuries later, do you disregard what the scripture and church has taught on the subject for 2000 years. I appreciate the discussion on the matter.
In reply to Paul, days, and Romans: The context and scholarly consensus through the ages finds that Paul, in passages such as Romans 14 and Galatians, and the Jerusalem Council is contrasting personal Jew/Gentile issues about keeping days of the Old Covenant regulations and NOT Christian doctrine (i.e. Sunday, New Covenant teaching, etc). In a strict sense, the NT teaching is that the days don’t matter, but I’ll address that in the explicit scripture affirmation. Jews were welcome to keep ‘days’ as in feast days, new moons, and the Sabbath days, but were not to see them as a means of salvation or bind the Law on Gentiles. Also, Gentiles were not to judge the Jews for keeping these special days or food laws. Examples of such scholars are Theodoret of Cyrus – and many other ECFs –, CK Barrett, Stott, Dunn, Moo, Cottrell, and Bruce… even Al Maxey.
A historical reality… A google search of “history of the Lord’s day” will produce tens of pages full of great articles and books citing the scriptural defense and historical reality of a very clear succession of the Sunday-Lord’s Day worship and its inherency to Christianity, from the 1st century well into the 7th century, and today. This includes the Didache (80AD), Ignatius, Letter of Barnabas, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Cyprian, and pretty much everyone else who wrote in the subsequent centuries on the topic. These writes trace their authority and theology, not to culture, but to Scripture in that Christians don’t celebrate the Sabbath, but rather the 8th day, Sunday, since God not only chose this day, but also raised and glorified Jesus, the first fruits of the resurrection and eternal high priest. One can take a historiographical approach and arrive at the same conclusion. To add an interpretational element to it, the term Lord’s Day is only found in Scripture once, but it is many historical documents by Christians who knew the apostles and give insight to the proper interpretation. Pliny is told that it is a “fixed” day that Christians meet. Even apocryphal documents, such as the Acts of John and Acts of Peter, discuss the wide spread Lord’s Day – Sunday – worship.
In reply to where is this binding in Scripture… The Sabbath day applied only to Israel, never Gentiles, was a day of rest — not of creation — and was explicitly and implicitly removed (Exod. 20:8-11; 31:12-17; Col. 2:16; Heb. 8:13; 9:10; 10:8; 13:9-10). The apostles were the divinely authoritative teachers revealing the New Covenant, and its practices and nature throughout the decades of the 1st century — founded on Christ, apostles, and prophets — (Mt. 28:20; Jn. 14:26; 1 Cor. 14:36-38; 1 Th. 4:2; Heb 7:11-12; 8:13; 9:1, 9-10). Christians were devoted to the apostles teachings (Acts 2:42). In Acts 20:7, the Greek is passive, not active, “?????????? – they were gathered together,” meaning a force outside of themselves brought them together for a purpose, and that force was Paul – with divine authority – bringing them together on the 1st day of the week to commune, worship, and hear his teaching. This 1st day of the week worship was also an important day taught and kept by other congregations Paul established (Acts 20:7 Troas; 1 Cor. 14; 16:1-2 Corinth and Galatia). I am not using these verses to talk about the supper or the collection, but rather to show that Paul knew the Christians that he taught would be gathered on the 1st day of the week, and the continuance of this practiced has been highlighted in the historical evidence.
It is no mistake that Luke records the DAY and progression of these gatherings in Acts, but rather records them as a common occurrence. While the meeting is common, he highlights elements that are uncommon, such the resurrection of Eutychus. Furthermore, every gospel account records Jesus as raised from the dead on the 1st day of the week (Mt. 28:1; Mk. 16:1-2; Lk. 24:1, 30; Jn. 20:1, 19, 26) and the Spirit was poured out on the 1st day of the week (Acts 2:1, 4). The resurrection and the day are a significant choice of God, because he takes the original creation corrupted by death and sin (Rm. 4:17; 5:17, 8:20-22) and inaugurates a New creation and New Covenant (2 Cor. 5:7; Heb. 9:10, 15). He chose Sunday not as a day of rest, but rather a day symbolizing redemption and new creation, which came with and thus is inherent to Christianity (1 Cor. 15:4-5, 20-21; Ps. 118:22-24).
Finally, the Lord’s Day ?? ??????? ????? (Rev. 1:10) is a rare and pointed expression closely associated with Lord’s Supper ???????? ??????? (1 Cor. 11:20), while Lord’s Table ???????? ?????? and Lord’s Cup ???????? ?????? (1 Cor. 10:21) and are more common expressions, they all denote a possession of God. These are Gods elements revealed in the Christian age to his New Covenant people (a people of God’s possession – 1 Pet. 2:9) through the apostles with divine authority.
On the Lord’s Day, the 1st day of the week, Jesus was raised and exalted, established the church, poured out the Spirit, and created a kingdom community who lived a resurrected life of praise and worship very different Judaism and Paganism… As my space runs out, I can only say that it is unfounded to say Sunday is neither inherent to, nor a special day of Christianity, nor revealed and bound by God while faithfully passed down through the centuries. I am happy to discuss further.
Okay… my reply is waiting moderation. It is also all in bold, and the Greek created ???? instead of text. Once it is posted, please disregard these errors. Perhaps Jay can fix them?
Jay,
Fair warning … this is a lengthy response to HistoryGuy and you may want us to take it off-list or handle it separately. I do not want to take anything away from your post.
GuestForTruth,
Take a look at the following answers to HistoryGuy’s points in his comments for me. I do not address the fallacy of every example being an imperative (thinking of Ananias and Sapphira here) directly, but I do deal with some of the issues I find with your post. Let me know if you want something responding directly to the points you tried to make.
HistoryGuy … wait for it. The next post will be my sometimes verbose responses to each of your points.
As promised … and I begin with the post that had the three questions to which HistoryGuy was responding. I then include his comments with mine … as you will see – his preceded by ‘HG’ and mine by ‘GRIZZ-Reply’ …
1st post …
HistoryGuy,
I do not share your enthusiasm for RP’s over-the-top reflection. If this is the kind of thing that causes him to ‘choose this day’ whom to serve, I would only wish for 363 more such calendar-related encouragements for him. Why not, after all, make that choice every single day of every single year?
As for the rest of your comments, brother, I would suggest that it might be good for you to reconsider exactly what you think ‘sola scriptura’ means – within the context of historical interdenominational thought, of course. Is it just me or is that your preference – to consider things beyond the scope of just those groups known as SC-RM groups? (I, for one, applaud your acknowledgement that there are things to learn from those some may hesitate to call ‘brethren’.)
Your statement that “The Lord bound it on the apostles…” is so unfounded as to call into question the basis for rest of your comments in total.
(1) Where is this ‘binding’ you perceive?
(2) And why was Paul so left out of that ‘binding’ as to write to the Romans that holding any day as more special than another is NOT to be bound?
(3) How is it that you, 21 centuries later, have such access to a binding that an inspired first-century apostle did not have?
You do have me scratching my head over this one, but probably not in the way you intended.
Blessings of clarity that I may learn something about this ‘binding’ you find which scripture seems to have hidden so well,
Grizz
HG response and GRIZZ-Reply …
HistoryGuy,
My reply … interlinear and point-by-point/scripture-by-scripture … BELOW:
Author: HistoryGuy
Comment:
HG: Grizz,
You asked me 3 questions and I’ll try to concisely address them considering my 4 affirmations.
GRIZZ: How is it that you, 21 centuries later, have such access to a binding that an inspired first-century apostle did not have?
HG: In reply to, my insight — 21 centuries later — binding what the apostles did not have This question is really tied to the other two questions, and stems from your presupposition and misunderstanding of Paul’s statements in Romans, etc. I am essentially asking you the reverse, why, 21 centuries later, do you disregard what the scripture and church has taught on the subject for 2000 years. I appreciate the discussion on the matter.
GRIZZ-Reply: HG, I see you made NO ATTEMPT AT ALL to answer my question. Fascinating, that is. In your earlier post you asserted that (a) there is no explicit statement to ‘bind’ a first-day assembly, and (b) that you find in your research that the first day is ‘binding.’
Which is it? Or would you have us to believe that tradition is a good substitute when you have no explicit command? This seems a good example of Baconian CENI hermeneutics gone to seed. You may choose to use that fallacious hermeneutic, but you may NOT bind the use of it upon anyone else. Nor may you use such a hermeneutic to multiply the number of things you ‘bind’ on anyone else (c.f., Matthew 23:1-36). That is just the sort of thing which formed the crux of what Jesus criticized in the Pharisees in their general approach to scripture.
We may disagree on what Paul meant in Romans 14, and probably due to your reliance on CENI more than anything else, but that only serves to shine light on the fact that you did not even attempt to defend your previous assertions. I get it. Your assertions were indefensible, as I will show you in the following responses.
GRIZZ: why was Paul so left out of that ‘binding’ as to write to the Romans that holding any day as more special than another is NOT to be bound?
HG: A historical reality… A google search of “history of the Lord’s day” will produce tens of pages full of great articles and books citing the scriptural defense and historical reality of a very clear succession of the Sunday-Lord’s Day worship and its inherency to Christianity, from the 1st century well into the 7th century, and today. This includes the Didache (80AD), Ignatius, Letter of Barnabas, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Cyprian, and pretty much everyone else who wrote in the subsequent centuries on the topic. These writes trace their authority and theology, not to culture, but to Scripture in that Christians don’t celebrate the Sabbath, but rather the 8th day, Sunday, since God not only chose this day, but also raised and glorified Jesus, the first fruits of the resurrection and eternal high priest. One can take a historiographical approach and arrive at the same conclusion. To add an interpretational element to it, the term Lord’s Day is only found in Scripture once, but it is many historical documents by Christians who knew the apostles and give insight to the proper interpretation. Pliny is told that it is a “fixed” day that Christians meet. Even apocryphal documents, such as the Acts of John and Acts of Peter, discuss the wide spread Lord’s Day – Sunday – worship.
GRIZZ-Reply: HG, are you asking that we accept all of these resources external to the inspired scriptures as EQUAL TO the inspired scriptures? Are you asking that we consider their interpretations to carry the same force as the actual writings of the NT writers?
I have read the Didache. I have done some reading in the others but cannot claim to have read the ECF all the way ‘from-cover-to-cover’ (ECF = Early Church Fathers). And btw, where do you get the early date of 80AD for the Didache? Most scholars whom I have read would put it closer to 125-150AD.
Also in the for-what-it-is-worth column, Pliny was no authority on any of the reasons why Christians did what his spies reported to him that they did. After all, Pliny was convinced that Christians practiced a form of cannibalism – a totally erroneous conviction (as we know), but one which he still shared with the Emperor in his reports as an appointed Governor.
And … also for-what-it-is-worth … I noticed that you failed to deal with Paul at all in this answer, despite the fact that my question was how you got what he (Paul) did not. After all, you already admitted that there is no explicit command in scripture to assemble on Sundays – and I would imagine that you would consider Paul’s writings to be inspired scripture, right?
I did not ask what the ECF taught, and though I do occasionally read some passages to gain an early church perspective, I do NOT consider them on equal footing with the inspired scriptures. Nor do I place any more value on their interpretations than I do on those any student of the inspired scriptures might render – and as I do with my contemporaries, I agree more here and less there with any of them. After all, they do not stand between the Father and me. I am the Father’s servant and He alone is able to make me able to stand before His throne. The best of these others you listed, many distinguished brethren among them, is still only a fellow servant of Jesus Christ and His Father and NOT my judge nor my appointed interpreter of what Jesus and His apostles and inspired writers said and wrote and did.
GRIZZ: Where is this ‘binding’ you perceive?
HG: In reply to where is this binding in Scripture… The Sabbath day applied only to Israel, never Gentiles, was a day of rest — not of creation — and was explicitly and implicitly removed (Exod. 20:8-11; 31:12-17; Col. 2:16; Heb. 8:13; 9:10; 10:8; 13:9-10).
GRIZZ-Reply: My answer to this comes in 2 parts:
1st – Before you get too full of this ‘explicitly and implicitly removed’ argument, look at what Jesus said in Matthew 5:17-19.
2nd – Exodus 20:8-11 gives the command of God and its rationale; Exodus 31:12-17 sets the command in its historical context and builds its rationale upon that historical context – in regard to both importance and duration; Colossians 2:16 cuts both ways – disallowing condemnation of the ones who observe a special day and also disallowing condemnation of the ones who do not observe any special day; Hebrews 8:13 addresses the obsolescence of the letter-of-the-law observances which the Pharisees prized in favor of the spirit-of-the-law observance that Jesus advocated in situations like that which He found with the woman at the well in Samaria which is recorded in John 4; Hebrews 9:10 and context refer to how much better Christ has made it for those who would approach the mercy seat of God – with the sprinkling of His own holy blood instead of the continual bathing of the mercy seat every year by a high priest who uses the blood of bulls and goats; Hebrews 10:8 and its context explains how Christ has once and for all made a better and infinitely more enduring version of those sacrifices with infinitely more enduring access to God’s favor (i.e., grace); and Hebrews 13:9-10 goes on to assert that Jesus is so much better at mediating God’s covenant with mankind as to leave no room for continued animal sacrifices and no room for any Aaronic priests to crowd out any follower of Jesus at His table.
HG, none of those passages in any way contradicts what Jesus said in Matthew 5:17-19, which is why I began there. Jesus did not claim to destroy the Law, but rather came to fulfill it. We are no longer indicted before God with violations of the law, but are granted access to God’s throne by grace in covered-by-the-blood-of Jesus purity.
HG: The apostles were the divinely authoritative teachers revealing the New Covenant, and its practices and nature throughout the decades of the 1st century — founded on Christ, apostles, and prophets — (Mt. 28:20; Jn. 14:26; 1 Cor. 14:36-38; 1 Th. 4:2; Heb 7:11-12; 8:13; 9:1, 9-10).
GRIZZ-Reply: HG, your CENI rhetoric slip is showing when you use terms like ‘divinely authoritative teachers’ to describe what Paul describes much more accurately in 1 Corinthians 3:10-11. But let’s deal with the scriptures again, the ones that you seem to think support expanding the foundation …
Matthew 28:18-20 records the commission Jesus gave to the apostles, a commission dependent upon His authority and which gave the apostles certain responsibilities; John 14:26 is where Jesus promises to send the Holy Spirit to teach and remind the apostles of what Jesus taught them; 1 Corinthians 14:36-38 is where Paul asserts that he is writing in accordance with the Lord’s commands; 1 Thessalonians 4:2 again makes it clear that Paul’s writings are founded upon the teachings/commands of Jesus (which is made even more clear in that he needs to use no word for ‘authority’ in this verse beyond saying they had given commandments ‘by the Lord Jesus’); Hebrews 7:11-12 prepares the reader to learn how Jesus changed the law by telling that He did affect a change; Hebrews 8:13 has already been dealt with above, as has Hebrews 9:9-10; and Hebrews 9:1 only notes that under the law there were regulations given about worship and the place of worship, but does NOT go into how that has changed.
HG: Christians were devoted to the apostles teachings (Acts 2:42).
GRIZZ-Reply: HG, I would make two observations about this passage …
1st – what is recorded in Acts 2:42-47 is described as ‘continually’ happening and ‘day by day’ happening in a variety of places, including the Temple courts and from house to house; and
2nd – while you used a passive voice to describe how Christians ‘were devoted’, I would note that Acts 2:42 actually says they ‘devoted themselves’ to the apostles’ teaching (singular – a body of teaching) – this was their deliberate choice to do. This second point is significant because it was their choice to devote themselves to the teaching they were receiving from the teachers Jesus provided for them – and not any kind of rejection of the former teaching of Jesus (which we have recorded in the gospels) that some folks today (not necessarily you) would have us to believe was only relevant to Jews before the Cross (JBTC) and not intended to be authoritative today.
None of these passages supports your assertion that there is a command to be found in the NT(?) scriptures to regard the first day of the week (or the mythical 8th day) as a ‘special day’ for all Christians throughout all time. In fact we cannot even find here a reference to the earliest (Day of Pentecost converts) Christians regarding ANY day of the week as special in any way. They did what they did “continually” and “day to day” and did so wherever gathering was convenient – “in the Temple courts” and “from house to house.”
HG, you are making my case for me. Thank you.
HG: In Acts 20:7, the Greek is passive, not active, “?????????? – they were gathered together,” meaning a force outside of themselves brought them together for a purpose, and that force was Paul – with divine authority – bringing them together on the 1st day of the week to commune, worship, and hear his teaching.
HG, please take another look at Acts 20. You have assumed so much here that your rendition is barely recognizable as the same verse in v.7 ! WOW!
What you seemingly failed to notice is that Luke refers to Paul’s entire entourage (including Paul) with the pronoun “we…” in “on the first day of the week, as we were gathered together to break bread,”. You would have Paul commanding himself to gather … which is NOT what Luke records. Perhaps you should take a look at Isaiah 56:1-8 to see whom it is that is doing the gathering together of God’s people. (Hint: It is God doing the gathering.)
I would also note that while some assume that this reference (Acts 20:7) to gathering together ‘to break bread’ is necessarily the Lord’s Supper and that Acts 2:42-47 is talking about a common daily meal sharing, there is no internal evidence in these passages that this is necessarily so – nor that there is any difference between what they were doing in both passages. What we assume for one can be as easily assumed for the other. And perhaps it would be best not to assume anything, but rather that we should let Luke say what he actually did say in both parts of this record we call “Acts.”
HG: This 1st day of the week worship was also an important day taught and kept by other congregations Paul established (Acts 20:7 Troas; 1 Cor. 14; 16:1-2 Corinth and Galatia).
GRIZZ-Reply: Paul makes it clear that worship is NOT reserved for any particular day alone (c.f., Romans 12:1-2). Jesus made it pretty clear that worship is NOT reserved for any special place or number of people (John 4:21-24). And in fact, we have no record of what day of the week Jesus met with the woman at the well in Sychar in Samaria where Jacob’s well was located. We know the time of day (the 6th hour), but not what day of the week. This becomes significant because Jesus tells His disciples that when it comes to serving/worshipping God, there is no time like the present day to do so (c.f., John 4:31-38).
So when we try to assert that Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:1-2 are anything more than good/convenient times in those cultural settings to gather together to encourage and edify one another (fellow believers) and to take care of some needs among the saints – both locally and globally – we are assuming a lot and going well beyond what is written in those passages. We have done so for so long that we can hardly fail to imagine the specific words we want to see are there. We should, however, stick to what actually IS written in these passages – and let that which is written instruct us and edify us and illuminate God’s will for us.
HG: I am not using these verses to talk about the supper or the collection, but rather to show that Paul knew the Christians that he taught would be gathered on the 1st day of the week, and the continuance of this practiced has been highlighted in the historical evidence.
GRIZZ-Reply: HG, when I travel I try to make plans to gather with fellow believers wherever I go – and I have to tell you, it is important to plan ahead because there is a wide variety of times and places when believers gather. In the South of our nation we can practically just go find a nearby corner and there will be a meeting place with times and days of the week noted for the public and for any believers who wish to assemble for edification and encouragement. In the North of our nation it is not quite so easy to find the place, but one can usually find a time and place in the local phonebook. Out West it gets even crazier to find a time and place and one needs to be prepared to do some exploring. Out East it is usually pretty regimented and easier to count on regular times and days, but one still needs to plan ahead. Everything out there is scheduled, or so it seems to this mid-westerner, and so you are pretty much required to have a watch and a good GPS and some advance notice of where and when you can find a gathering. The nice thing is that there are a lot of choices one can make, depending on how determined you are to find a place or group ‘just-like-home.’
So, yeah, Paul knew that in Galatia and Corinth there was usually a Sunday gathering. One doesn’t need to be a Seventh Day Adventist to find a Saturday evening gathering in many communities all over our nation, since many COCs and other denominations now schedule Saturday evening services – some finding the need to justify it to themselves or others as being according to the Creation account reckoning of days as consisting of ‘evening and morning’, thus opening the doors (for them) to a Saturday evening gathering after sundown.
If Paul came around America, do you think he would hesitate to find a Wednesday evening or other mid-week Bible Study to attend? I sincerely doubt he would. In fact, I am pretty sure that Paul would gather any day or night to talk about Jesus.
After all, are we going to gather support for the saints in Jerusalem as Paul asked the Corinthians and Macedonian churches to do? Believe me, the saints in Jerusalem could use our assistance still today – even without a famine. I also doubt Paul would try to tell the Jerusalem saints how to use the monies and goods sent. It was not just for “church work” then (we rarely consider benevolence something for regular members – why? But perhaps that is changing, too…).
HG: It is no mistake that Luke records the DAY and progression of these gatherings in Acts, but rather records them as a common occurrence. While the meeting is common, he highlights elements that are uncommon, such the resurrection of Eutychus. Furthermore, every gospel account records Jesus as raised from the dead on the 1st day of the week (Mt. 28:1; Mk. 16:1-2; Lk. 24:1, 30; Jn. 20:1, 19, 26) and the Spirit was poured out on the 1st day of the week (Acts 2:1, 4).
GRIZZ-Reply: Are you forgetting the account in Acts 10:1-11:18 – when the Spirit was again poured out? What day of the week was that? And if it was so significant, why not note the day of the week? Luke was the same writer of these verses as he was in Acts 2 and Acts 20. Why was the Spirit being poured out on Cornelius’ household NOT noteworthy as to the day of the week?????
HG: The resurrection and the day are a significant choice of God, because he takes the original creation corrupted by death and sin (Rm. 4:17; 5:17, 8:20-22) and inaugurates a New creation and New Covenant (2 Cor. 5:7; Heb. 9:10, 15).
GRIZZ-Reply: HG, I enjoyed looking over the passages/verses you listed. NONE of them says anything about the first day of the week, though – and the most relevant thing is in Hebrews where the DEATH of Jesus is referenced … significantly NOT on the first day of the week, but rather on the day before the Sabbath (though perhaps NOT a Friday). You seem to want to emphasize the resurrection, but the writer to the Hebrews is noting the DEATH that accompanies the making of a covenant – particularly the death of Jesus in this case.
Be honest … did you just throw those in there out of habit? Are those just some favorite verses of yours? NONE of them referenced any day of the week. So…umm…what’s your point? (Especially since they do not seem to support your accompanying assertions above.)
HG: He (God) chose Sunday not as a day of rest, but rather a day symbolizing redemption and new creation, which came with and thus is inherent to Christianity (1 Cor. 15:4-5, 20-21; Ps. 118:22-24).
GRIZZ-Reply: HG, I really am enjoying the Bible study … but I am beginning to wonder of you just copied down some references in the side margin of a reference Bible?? There is NO mention, NOT even a little one, to any particular day of the week having special significance over any other day. What there IS in these passages is a reference to a special EVENT, NOT a special day. And I heartily share a belief that the EVENT is special and most significant.
HG: Finally, the Lord’s Day ?? ??????? ????? (Rev. 1:10) is a rare and pointed expression closely associated with Lord’s Supper ???????? ??????? (1 Cor. 11:20), while Lord’s Table ???????? ?????? and Lord’s Cup ???????? ?????? (1 Cor. 10:21) and are more common expressions, they all denote a possession of God. These are Gods elements revealed in the Christian age to his New Covenant people (a people of God’s possession – 1 Pet. 2:9) through the apostles with divine authority.
GRIZZ-Reply: The reference in Revelation 1:10 comes with NO specification of which day of the week it was. Was it Saturday evening, which a Jew like John would consider the beginning of the first day of the week? Or was it a Tuesday evening, which John might remember as the night Jesus celebrated their last shared supper in observance of the coming special Passover Sabbath that might have begun on a Wednesday evening after Jesus had been crucified and buried (and which a Jew like John would have considered the beginning of Thursday)? Do you have some special revelation that allows you to be certain whether Luke used Jewish reckoning of days (evening and morning) or the Roman reckoning of days (morning and evening) or our modern American reckoning of days (midnight to midnight)?
While you may assume that any mention of the Lord’s Supper or the Lord’s cup must be accompanied by the understanding that this happens on “the Lord’s day”, I make no such assumptions. Paul also references in this passage the Lord’s blood and His body, but does not refer to the bread as the Lord’s bread. Does that mean the bread is NOT the Lord’s? Or is the point of Paul’s references that it was the Lord who gave the bread and the cup significance on the midweek night when He was betrayed in the Garden? Isn’t Paul emphasizing that it was the Lord who gave us this meal and we should NOT mess with it by neglecting one another and glutting ourselves as though it was everyday bread or everyday wine? Of course, he is doing just that.
HG: On the Lord’s Day, the 1st day of the week, Jesus was raised and exalted, established the church, poured out the Spirit, and created a kingdom community who lived a resurrected life of praise and worship very different Judaism and Paganism… As my space runs out, I can only say that it is unfounded to say Sunday is neither inherent to, nor a special day of Christianity, nor revealed and bound by God while faithfully passed down through the centuries. I am happy to discuss further.
GRIZZ-Reply: HistoryGuy, I find your arguments appealing, but NOT compelling. I tend to have that reaction whenever someone begins proof-texting (or what I perceive as proof-texting) to build a case.
I have no objection to you practicing it however you like – and would consider it a privilege and an honor to join with you if the opportunity presents. I do have an issue with trying to bind any day of the week as more special on those who do not consider any day of the week more special. Paul very clearly and with great definition took the position I am also taking. We are to accept one another and submit to one another – no matter which of us is stronger or weaker in this matter.
Having come to this point, I believe we are back to the point Jay was making in his post … which we have long since left to go into this other field. Maybe it is best we get headed back home now.
Blessings,
Grizz
Maybe Jay should open up a new post on The Lord’s Day”.;)
Back when I was a teenager, our church would merely cancel Sunday Evening services(weather it fell on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day) because of our strong emphasis on family.
Sometimes we even did a candle-light service the Wednesday Night before Christmas.
RJ, I started to reply to HG on this, but you are correct. If Jay wants a thread on “Lord’s Day”, then he can start one. I’ve done enough hijacking for one thread.
Grizz,
Thank you for your response on December 2nd, 2011 at 11:17 am. Perhaps Jay will open a “Lord’s Day” thread. I think we could learn more from each other by taking one point at a time. Yet, I agree with you that we should not to highjack the thread, unless Jay says it’s okay. Regardless of whether or not we continue the conversation (though I want to), I must point out that, somehow, your response included statements that I NOT make. Please allow me to point out these issues, though I will refrain, for the moment, from further defending my position or answering your questions.
(1) I never said the Bible explicitly states we are commanded to gather on Sunday or any day. In my post – December 1st, 2011 at 1:03 am – 2nd paragraph I said “The scriptures reveal an explicit change from Sabbath to Sunday – comma – emphasize the “the Lord’s Day – 1st day of the week – Sunday” – comma – and is confirmed by church history. In the 4th paragraph I said “the Lord bound it [Sunday] on the apostles, who taught [it to] the 1st Christians, who passed it on, which is why there is such attention given to it [Sunday] in Scripture and the early church [history]. It is in scripture, just not the way that you seem to think it should be….” – end quote. On December 1st, 2011 at 11:06 pm I reaffirmed what I said and became even clearer with a summary sentence, which included that Christians gathered daily, and then “laying out 4 affirmations and [the major] 1 concern.” I then laid out an implicit defense with the cumulative points. On December 1st, 2011 at 11:15 pm, 5th paragraph, I did say the Sabbath day was both explicitly and implicitly removed in scripture.
(2) I don’t use the infamous CENI, and never said I do. Scholars from all ages and hermeneutics agree that there are explicit and implicit teachings in the Bible, and such is not reliant on CENI.
(3) I did answer you about Paul and what he meant in Romans 14:5-6, even Col. 2:16-17, about special days. I then followed it with scholars from the 3rd-21st centuries who utilize multiple hermeneutics (not CENI) and conclude that the days are of the Law and not Christian doctrine, such as Sunday. I am trying to make sure you see that I answered it, not give a response. You, know my response on this issue and other things you said would include a lot more information (ha ha ha).
—-
You asked many questions and made many statements in your response December 2nd, 2011 at 11:17 am. I would love to respond to them and pray that Jay will give us the green light. Please accept the 3 points in this post as a clarification of what I said and did not say. I don’t mind disagreement, as long as folks are clear about my words and position.
RJ — You asked for it; you got it!
Thanks, Jay!
Charles, GuestForTruth, HistoryGuy, anyone else interested,
I have opened the comments on the new thread…quoting HG’s latest comment to me here. Come on over and let’s continue the good discussion.
Blessings from the Giver whose Birthday many are celebrating this month,
Hallelujah!
Grizz
HG,
I fixed the bold (I think) but the Greek is hard to fix. I think your point is clearly made without the Greek characters, anyway.