Pinned Tweet
Friends, I can no longer remain silent:
Look around you. It is preached from the majority of modern pulpits. It is anticipated by millions of faithful believers. It is discussed on the news, analyzed by nearly every Christian YouTuber, and floods the algorithms of every social o TikTok.
Yes, I am talking about the secret, pre-tribulation rapture.
It has become an undisputed staple of modern Christianity. But what if the very doctrine designed to comfort you is actually the master strategy to leave you entirely unprepared?
Look past the popular videos and X posts and past the comforting sermons, and let lay this doctrine directly under the piercing light of Holy Scripture.
The concept of the "secret rapture", the popular evangelical belief that Jesus Christ will return invisibly to quietly snatch true believers away to heaven before a literal seven-year tribulation, is entirely UNSCRIPTURAL and was historically unknown to the Christian Church for the first 1,800 years of its existence.
When this doctrine is laid side-by-side with the text of the New Testament and the records of history, it collapses. It stands unmasked not as a biblical truth, but as a modern theological escape mechanism that directly serves the interests of the Roman Catholic Counter-Reformation.
To understand why the "secret rapture" exists, you must trace its family tree. The Protestant Reformers, practicing Historicism, had devastated the Roman Catholic Church by proving from Daniel 7, 2 Thessalonians 2, and Revelation 13 that the Papacy was the historical system of the Antichrist.
To break this theological siege, the Vatican commissioned the Jesuit order to create an alternative interpretation. As already revealed in my previous article on the identity of the antichrist, the Spanish Jesuit Francisco Ribera (1537–1591) invented Futurism, arguing that the entire Book of Revelation applies only to a literal 3.5 or 7-year period at the absolute end of time, featuring a single, future political Antichrist in a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem.
For centuries, Protestants rejected this Jesuit theology. However, in the 1830s, a wealthy Anglo-Irish theologian named John Nelson Darby (1800–1882) took Ribera's futurist foundation and added a brand-new invention to it: Dispationalism and the Secret Rapture.
But Darby faced a massive theological problem, he likely reasoned within himself: If the Antichrist is a future individual who rules during a final 7-year tribulation, what happens to the Christian Church during that time?
After a moment of serious reflection, he finally came up with the popular Invention: Darby created a "two-stage" return of Christ. He claimed Jesus would first come secretly and invisibly to rescue the Church (the Rapture), and then come openly 7 years later (the Second Coming).
Through the subsequent publication of the Scofield Reference Bible in 1909 and modern media like the Left Behind series, this Jesuit-originated, Darby-refined futurism swept through Protestant evangelicalism like hot flames through a dry bush.
Today, millions of Protestants look for a secret rapture, completely unaware that they are teaching a doctrine invented by 16th-century Catholic priests to shield the Pope from the spotlight of scripture.
A) The Bible Teaches One Second Coming, Not Two Phases
First and foremost, the Bible does not teach the two-phase second coming proposed by the secret rapture doctrine. Nowhere does Scripture describe Christ coming secretly to remove believers, only to return visibly years later. Instead, it presents ONE glorious and FINAL second coming.
1. Christ promise:
“And if I go and prepare a place for you I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.” (John 14:3).
2. The angels testimony:
“This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.” (Acts 1:11).
3. And concerning Christ’s second appearance Paul wrote:
“Unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.” (Hebrews 9:28).
These passages, together with Matthew 24:27–31, 1 Thessalonians 4:16–17, Jude 14, and Revelation 1:7, establish a SINGLE, visible, and FINAL glorious return of Christ. Scripture does not divide His second coming into the two phases required by the secret rapture theory.
B) The Bible Does Not Teach a Second Chance After the Second Coming
The secret rapture doctrine teaches that those left behind will have another opportunity to be saved during a seven-year tribulation, even as the Antichrist persecutes those who refuse to obey him.
But what does Scripture teach?
Carefully consider Christ's words:
“He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still. And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me.” (Revelation 22:11–12).
These words indicate that every person's destiny will have been settled before Christ returns. Probation will close, and Christ will come with His reward. There will be no further opportunity to repent after His coming.
Furthermore, Scripture describes the fate of the wicked at Christ’s return:
• “The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Thessalonians 1:7–8).
• “Then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming” (2 Thessalonians 2:8).
• “The slain of the LORD shall be at that day from one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth” (Jeremiah 25:33).
If human destinies are settled before Christ returns, and His coming brings judgment upon the wicked, where does the Bible place a second opportunity for salvation after that event?
God's mercy is abundant, but we must not turn His mercy into a promise He has not made. Today is the time to respond to His grace.
C) The Bible Clearly Teaches That God’s People Will Face End-Time Persecution
Contrary to the secret rapture teaching that believers will escape the final tribulation, Scripture warns that God's faithful people will face persecution before their deliverance (Revelation 13:11–17).
Christ's followers have never been promised immunity from suffering. Of the faithful apostles, most are traditionally understood to have died as martyrs. Hebrews 11:35–38 also records the torture and persecution endured by God's faithful people.
Jesus warned His followers:
“The servant is not greater than his Lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you.” (John 15:20).
Paul likewise declared:
“Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.” (2 Timothy 3:12).
Christ further warned:
“Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake… But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved” (Matthew 24:9, 13).
Peter encourages believers facing trials:
“Think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: but rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy” (1 Peter 4:12–13).
Finally, Revelation describes those who refused to worship the beast or receive its mark:
“And I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years” (Revelation 20:4).
Notice that these faithful believers endure persecution rather than escape it through a secret pre-tribulation rapture.
The biblical picture is clear: God's people are called to remain faithful through trials, persecution, and even death. They are not promised freedom from suffering, but deliverance through Christ.
By sharing in their Saviour's sufferings, the saints learn perseverance and faithfulness. And when the great controversy ends and the earth is restored to its Edenic glory, those who suffered with Christ will also share in His eternal joy.
The Christian's hope is not that faithfulness will always spare him suffering. It is that Christ will remain faithful to His people through suffering and deliver them at His appointed time.
The crucial question is not whether we believe in the Second Coming. It is whether we believe what the Bible actually says about it.
Another primary theological claim of the secret rapture is that it is a quiet, invisible, stealthy event. People vanish, cars crash, and the world is left wondering what happened. However, the exact New Testament texts used to defend the rapture describe the loudest, most cataclysmic, globally visible event in human history.
• The Primary Proof-Text: 1 Thessalonians 4:16–17
"For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air."
Observe the precise sensory details the Holy Spirit uses to describe this event: a shout, a voice, and the trumpet of God. There is absolutely nothing silent, hidden, or secret about this text. A trumpet blast and a commanding celestial shout are the exact opposite of an invisible vanishing act.
• The Global Visibility: Matthew 24:27, 30–31
When Jesus Himself describes the gathering of His elect, He explicitly rules out any secret or hidden mechanism:
"For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be... Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect..."
Lightning ripping across the horizon cannot be hidden. Jesus emphasizes that every eye will see Him and all the tribes of the earth will mourn.
The text explicitly ties the gathering of the elect to the highly visible, globally disruptive, noisy Second Coming not a secret pre-tribulation exit.
Proponents of the secret rapture heavily rely on Matthew 24:40–41 to depict people suddenly vanishing:
"Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left."
To a casual reader, this sounds like a rapture. But a serious student of Scripture must look at the immediate context. Just two verses prior, Jesus explicitly explains what He means by comparing His coming to the days of Noah:
"...and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be." (Matthew 24:39)
In the days of Noah, who were the ones "taken away"? It was the wicked who were taken away by the judgments of the flood. Who were the ones "left"? It was Noah and his family who were left behind to inherit the cleansed earth.
A) TAKEN means destroyed: "But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption" (2 Peter 2:12).
B) LEFT means saved: "2 In that day shall the branch of the LORD be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel. 3 And it shall come to pass, that he that is left in Zion, and he that remaineth in Jerusalem, shall be called holy, even every one that is written among the living in Jerusalem:" (Isaiah 4:2-3).
The secret rapture doctrine turns Jesus’s words completely upside down. It claims that being "taken" is a blessing and being "left behind" is a curse. But in the exact parallel passage of Luke 17:36–37, when the disciples ask Jesus where the people are taken, He responds bluntly:
"Wherever the body is, there the eagles (or vultures) will be gathered together."
Those who are "taken" are taken in immediate destruction and judgment; those "left" are the righteous who survive to inherit the kingdom.
The doctrine of the "secret rapture" acts as a massive theological sedative. By convincing millions of Christians that they will be quietly evacuated before any real trial or prophetic climax occurs, it blinds them to the active, historical operations of the Antichrist system right in front of them.
It fulfills the ultimate objective of the Jesuit Counter-Reformation: it shifts the eyes of the Church away from the unshifting baseline of history and projects the entire warfare of the saints into a futuristic, fictional timeline.
Ask yourself this foundational question:
If the enemy wanted to ensure that an entire generation of believers would succumb to the deceptions of the end times, what better way than to convince them they won't even be here to face it? By teaching that we will be secretly evacuated before the storm, modern theology has inadvertently created a Church that is sound asleep at the most critical hour in human history.
True biblical faith discards these modern escapist traditions. It prepares the soul to stand firm on Sola Scriptura, looking forward not to a secret, invisible vanishing act, but to the thunderous, glorious, and undeniable manifestation of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.
Look around you. It is preached from the majority of modern pulpits. It is anticipated by millions of faithful believers. It is discussed on the news, analyzed by nearly every Christian YouTuber, and floods the algorithms of every social o TikTok.
Yes, I am talking about the secret, pre-tribulation rapture.
It has become an undisputed staple of modern Christianity. But what if the very doctrine designed to comfort you is actually the master strategy to leave you entirely unprepared?
Look past the popular videos and X posts and past the comforting sermons, and let lay this doctrine directly under the piercing light of Holy Scripture.
The concept of the "secret rapture", the popular evangelical belief that Jesus Christ will return invisibly to quietly snatch true believers away to heaven before a literal seven-year tribulation, is entirely UNSCRIPTURAL and was historically unknown to the Christian Church for the first 1,800 years of its existence.
When this doctrine is laid side-by-side with the text of the New Testament and the records of history, it collapses. It stands unmasked not as a biblical truth, but as a modern theological escape mechanism that directly serves the interests of the Roman Catholic Counter-Reformation.
To understand why the "secret rapture" exists, you must trace its family tree. The Protestant Reformers, practicing Historicism, had devastated the Roman Catholic Church by proving from Daniel 7, 2 Thessalonians 2, and Revelation 13 that the Papacy was the historical system of the Antichrist.
To break this theological siege, the Vatican commissioned the Jesuit order to create an alternative interpretation. As already revealed in my previous article on the identity of the antichrist, the Spanish Jesuit Francisco Ribera (1537–1591) invented Futurism, arguing that the entire Book of Revelation applies only to a literal 3.5 or 7-year period at the absolute end of time, featuring a single, future political Antichrist in a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem.
For centuries, Protestants rejected this Jesuit theology. However, in the 1830s, a wealthy Anglo-Irish theologian named John Nelson Darby (1800–1882) took Ribera's futurist foundation and added a brand-new invention to it: Dispationalism and the Secret Rapture.
But Darby faced a massive theological problem, he likely reasoned within himself: If the Antichrist is a future individual who rules during a final 7-year tribulation, what happens to the Christian Church during that time?
After a moment of serious reflection, he finally came up with the popular Invention: Darby created a "two-stage" return of Christ. He claimed Jesus would first come secretly and invisibly to rescue the Church (the Rapture), and then come openly 7 years later (the Second Coming).
Through the subsequent publication of the Scofield Reference Bible in 1909 and modern media like the Left Behind series, this Jesuit-originated, Darby-refined futurism swept through Protestant evangelicalism like hot flames through a dry bush.
Today, millions of Protestants look for a secret rapture, completely unaware that they are teaching a doctrine invented by 16th-century Catholic priests to shield the Pope from the spotlight of scripture.
A) The Bible Teaches One Second Coming, Not Two Phases
First and foremost, the Bible does not teach the two-phase second coming proposed by the secret rapture doctrine. Nowhere does Scripture describe Christ coming secretly to remove believers, only to return visibly years later. Instead, it presents ONE glorious and FINAL second coming.
1. Christ promise:
“And if I go and prepare a place for you I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.” (John 14:3).
2. The angels testimony:
“This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.” (Acts 1:11).
3. And concerning Christ’s second appearance Paul wrote:
“Unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.” (Hebrews 9:28).
These passages, together with Matthew 24:27–31, 1 Thessalonians 4:16–17, Jude 14, and Revelation 1:7, establish a SINGLE, visible, and FINAL glorious return of Christ. Scripture does not divide His second coming into the two phases required by the secret rapture theory.
B) The Bible Does Not Teach a Second Chance After the Second Coming
The secret rapture doctrine teaches that those left behind will have another opportunity to be saved during a seven-year tribulation, even as the Antichrist persecutes those who refuse to obey him.
But what does Scripture teach?
Carefully consider Christ's words:
“He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still. And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me.” (Revelation 22:11–12).
These words indicate that every person's destiny will have been settled before Christ returns. Probation will close, and Christ will come with His reward. There will be no further opportunity to repent after His coming.
Furthermore, Scripture describes the fate of the wicked at Christ’s return:
• “The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Thessalonians 1:7–8).
• “Then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming” (2 Thessalonians 2:8).
• “The slain of the LORD shall be at that day from one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth” (Jeremiah 25:33).
If human destinies are settled before Christ returns, and His coming brings judgment upon the wicked, where does the Bible place a second opportunity for salvation after that event?
God's mercy is abundant, but we must not turn His mercy into a promise He has not made. Today is the time to respond to His grace.
C) The Bible Clearly Teaches That God’s People Will Face End-Time Persecution
Contrary to the secret rapture teaching that believers will escape the final tribulation, Scripture warns that God's faithful people will face persecution before their deliverance (Revelation 13:11–17).
Christ's followers have never been promised immunity from suffering. Of the faithful apostles, most are traditionally understood to have died as martyrs. Hebrews 11:35–38 also records the torture and persecution endured by God's faithful people.
Jesus warned His followers:
“The servant is not greater than his Lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you.” (John 15:20).
Paul likewise declared:
“Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.” (2 Timothy 3:12).
Christ further warned:
“Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake… But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved” (Matthew 24:9, 13).
Peter encourages believers facing trials:
“Think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: but rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy” (1 Peter 4:12–13).
Finally, Revelation describes those who refused to worship the beast or receive its mark:
“And I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years” (Revelation 20:4).
Notice that these faithful believers endure persecution rather than escape it through a secret pre-tribulation rapture.
The biblical picture is clear: God's people are called to remain faithful through trials, persecution, and even death. They are not promised freedom from suffering, but deliverance through Christ.
By sharing in their Saviour's sufferings, the saints learn perseverance and faithfulness. And when the great controversy ends and the earth is restored to its Edenic glory, those who suffered with Christ will also share in His eternal joy.
The Christian's hope is not that faithfulness will always spare him suffering. It is that Christ will remain faithful to His people through suffering and deliver them at His appointed time.
The crucial question is not whether we believe in the Second Coming. It is whether we believe what the Bible actually says about it.
Another primary theological claim of the secret rapture is that it is a quiet, invisible, stealthy event. People vanish, cars crash, and the world is left wondering what happened. However, the exact New Testament texts used to defend the rapture describe the loudest, most cataclysmic, globally visible event in human history.
• The Primary Proof-Text: 1 Thessalonians 4:16–17
"For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air."
Observe the precise sensory details the Holy Spirit uses to describe this event: a shout, a voice, and the trumpet of God. There is absolutely nothing silent, hidden, or secret about this text. A trumpet blast and a commanding celestial shout are the exact opposite of an invisible vanishing act.
• The Global Visibility: Matthew 24:27, 30–31
When Jesus Himself describes the gathering of His elect, He explicitly rules out any secret or hidden mechanism:
"For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be... Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect..."
Lightning ripping across the horizon cannot be hidden. Jesus emphasizes that every eye will see Him and all the tribes of the earth will mourn.
The text explicitly ties the gathering of the elect to the highly visible, globally disruptive, noisy Second Coming not a secret pre-tribulation exit.
Proponents of the secret rapture heavily rely on Matthew 24:40–41 to depict people suddenly vanishing:
"Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left."
To a casual reader, this sounds like a rapture. But a serious student of Scripture must look at the immediate context. Just two verses prior, Jesus explicitly explains what He means by comparing His coming to the days of Noah:
"...and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be." (Matthew 24:39)
In the days of Noah, who were the ones "taken away"? It was the wicked who were taken away by the judgments of the flood. Who were the ones "left"? It was Noah and his family who were left behind to inherit the cleansed earth.
A) TAKEN means destroyed: "But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption" (2 Peter 2:12).
B) LEFT means saved: "2 In that day shall the branch of the LORD be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel. 3 And it shall come to pass, that he that is left in Zion, and he that remaineth in Jerusalem, shall be called holy, even every one that is written among the living in Jerusalem:" (Isaiah 4:2-3).
The secret rapture doctrine turns Jesus’s words completely upside down. It claims that being "taken" is a blessing and being "left behind" is a curse. But in the exact parallel passage of Luke 17:36–37, when the disciples ask Jesus where the people are taken, He responds bluntly:
"Wherever the body is, there the eagles (or vultures) will be gathered together."
Those who are "taken" are taken in immediate destruction and judgment; those "left" are the righteous who survive to inherit the kingdom.
The doctrine of the "secret rapture" acts as a massive theological sedative. By convincing millions of Christians that they will be quietly evacuated before any real trial or prophetic climax occurs, it blinds them to the active, historical operations of the Antichrist system right in front of them.
It fulfills the ultimate objective of the Jesuit Counter-Reformation: it shifts the eyes of the Church away from the unshifting baseline of history and projects the entire warfare of the saints into a futuristic, fictional timeline.
Ask yourself this foundational question:
If the enemy wanted to ensure that an entire generation of believers would succumb to the deceptions of the end times, what better way than to convince them they won't even be here to face it? By teaching that we will be secretly evacuated before the storm, modern theology has inadvertently created a Church that is sound asleep at the most critical hour in human history.
True biblical faith discards these modern escapist traditions. It prepares the soul to stand firm on Sola Scriptura, looking forward not to a secret, invisible vanishing act, but to the thunderous, glorious, and undeniable manifestation of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.
64
28
94
19,596
"Reason and sense demand the acceptance of one or the other of these alternatives: either Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday, or Catholicity and the keeping holy of Sunday. Compromise is impossible."
(John Cardinal Gibbons, The Catholic Mirror, December 23, 1893.)
(John Cardinal Gibbons, The Catholic Mirror, December 23, 1893.)
The Logic Trap
You say: “Bible only!”
But you keep Sunday not in the Bible.
Rome says: “Then accept our other traditions too!”
You can’t have it both ways.
Either Scripture alone → Saturday
Or tradition + Scripture → Rome wins.
Choose this day whom you will serve.
1
0
5
212
Search the Scriptures retweeted
Catholic Bold Confessions on the Sabbath Change
Q. Have you any other proofs that they (Protestants) are not guided by the Scripture?
A. Yes; so many, that we cannot admit more than a mere specimen into this small work. They reject much that is clearly contained in Scripture, s nowhere discoverable in that Divine Book.
Q. Give some examples of both?
A. They should, if the Scripture were their only rule, wash the feet of one another, according to the command of Christ, in the 13th chap. of St. John; —they should keep, not the Sunday, but the Saturday, according to the commandment, "Remember thou keep holy the SABBATH-day;" for this commandment has not, in Scripture, been changed or abrogated;...
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 101 Imprimatuer
They assembled on Saturdays, not that they were infected with Judaism, but only to worship Jesus Christ the Lord of the sabbath —William Cave in his book entitled Primitive Christianity citing Athanasius bishop of Alexandria, pg. 125
It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who observe the day observe a commandment of the Catholic Church.
—Priest Brady, in an address, reported in the Elizabeth, NJ ‘News’ on March 18, 1903.
Protestants ... accept Sunday rather than Saturday as the day for public worship after the Catholic Church made the change... But the Protestant mind does not seem to realize that ... in observing Sunday, they are accepting the authority of the spokesman for the Church, the pope.
—Our Sunday Visitor, February 5th, 1950.
Of course these two old quotations are exactly correct. The Catholic Church designated Sunday as the day for corporate worship and gets full credit – or blame – for the change.
—This Rock, The Magazine of Catholic Apologetics and Evangelization, p.8, June 1997
Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
A. 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.
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174
Q. In what manner can we show a Protestant, that he speaks unreasonably against fasts and abstinences?
A. Ask him why he keeps Sunday, and not Saturday, as his day of rest, since he is unwilling either to fast or to abstain. If he reply, that the Scripture orders him to keep the Sunday, but says nothing as to fasting and abstinence, tell him the Scripture speaks of Saturday or the Sabbath, but gives no command anywhere regarding Sunday or the first day of the week.
If, then he neglects Saturday as a day of rest and holiness, and substitutes Sunday in its place, and this merely because such was the usage of the ancient Church, should he not, if he wishes to act consistently, observe fasting and abstinence, because the ancient Church so ordained?
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 181
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.
—Rev. Peter Geiermann C.SS.R., The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 50
Q. Must not a sensible Protestant doubt seriously, when he finds that even the Bible is not followed as a rule by his co-religionists?
A. Surely, when he sees them baptize infants, abrogate the Jewish Sabbath, and observe Sunday for which [pg. 7] there is no Scriptural authority; when he finds them neglect to wash one another's feet, which is expressly commanded, and eat blood and things strangled, which are expressly prohibited in Scripture. He must doubt, if he think at all. ...
Q. Should not the Protestant doubt when he finds that he himself holds tradition as a guide?
A. Yes, if he would but reflect that he has nothing but Catholic Tradition for keeping the Sunday holy; ...
—Controversial Catechism by Stephen Keenan, New Edition, revised by Rev. George Cormack, published in London by Burns & Oates, Limited - New York, Cincinnati, Chicago: Benzinger Brothers, 1896, pages 6, 7.
The Church, on the other hand, after changing the day of rest from the Jewish Sabbath, or seventh day of the week, to the first, made the Third Commandment refer to Sunday as the day to be kept holy as the Lord's Day.
The Council of Trent (Sess. VI, can. xix) condemns those who deny that the Ten Commandments are binding on Christians.
(The Catholic Encyclopedia, Commandments of God, Volume IV, © 1908 by Robert Appleton Company, Online Edition © 1999 by Kevin Knight, Nihil Obstat - Remy Lafort, Censor Imprimatur - +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York, page 153.)
The [Roman Catholic] Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by right of the divine, infallible authority given to her by her founder, Jesus Christ. The Protestant claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh-day Adventist is the only consistent Protestant.
—The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942, p. 4.
All of us believe many things in regard to religion that we do not find in the Bible. 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 Church outside the Bible.
—The Catholic Virginian, To Tell You The Truth,” Vol. 22, No. 49 (Oct. 3, 1947).
... you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.
—The Faith of Our Fathers, by James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, 88th edition, page 89. Originally published in 1876, republished and Copyright 1980 by TAN Books and Publishers, Inc., pages 72-73.
Deny the authority of the Church and you have no adequate or reasonable explanation or justification for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday in the Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God... The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.'
—Catholic Record, September 1, 1923.
But since Saturday, not Sunday, is specified in the Bible, isn't it curious that non-Catholics who profess to take their religion directly from the Bible and not the Church, observe Sunday instead of Saturday? Yes, of course, it is inconsistent; but this change was made about fifteen centuries before Protestantism was born, and by that time the custom was universally observed.
They have continued the custom, even though it rests upon the authority of the Catholic Church and not upon an explicit text in the Bible. That observance remains as a reminder of the Mother Church from which the non-Catholic sects broke away - like a boy running away from home but still carrying in his pocket a picture of his mother or a lock of her hair.
—The Faith of Millions
Perhaps the boldest thing, the most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday. "The Day of the Lord" (dies Dominica) was chosen, not from any directions noted in the Scriptures, but from the Church's sense of its own power. The day of resurrection, the day of Pentecost, fifty days later, came on the first day of the week. So this would be the new Sabbath. People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become 7th Day Adventists, and keep Saturday holy.
—Sentinel, Pastor's page, Saint Catherine Catholic Church, Algonac, Michigan, May 21, 1995
If Protestants would follow the Bible, they would worship God on the Sabbath Day. In keeping the Sunday they are following a law of the Catholic Church.
—Albert Smith, Chancellor of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, replying for the Cardinal, in a letter dated February 10, 1920.
The observance of Sunday by the Protestants is homage they pay, in spite of themselves, to the authority of the [Catholic] Church.
—Monsignor Louis Segur, ‘Plain Talk about the Protestantism of Today’, p. 213.
What Important Question Does the Papacy Ask Protestants?
Protestants have repeatedly asked the papacy, "How could you dare to change God's law?" But the question posed to Protestants by the Catholic church is even more penetrating.
Here it is officially: You will tell me that Saturday was the Jewish Sabbath, but that the Christian Sabbath has been changed to Sunday. Changed! but by whom? Who has authority to change an express commandment of Almighty God? When God has spoken and said, Thou shalt keep holy the seventh day, who shall dare to say, Nay, thou mayest work and do all manner of worldly business on the seventh day; but thou shalt keep holy the first day in its stead?
This is a most important question, which I know not how you can answer. You are a Protestant, and you profess to go by the Bible and the Bible only; and yet in so important a matter as the observance of one day in seven as a holy day, you go against the plain letter of the Bible, and put another day in the place of that day which the Bible has commanded.
The command to keep holy the seventh day is one of the ten commandments; you believe that the other nine are still binding; who gave you authority to tamper with the fourth? If you are consistent with your own principles, if you really follow the Bible and the Bible only, you ought to be able to produce some portion of the New Testament in which this fourth commandment is expressly altered.
—Library of Christian Doctrine: Why Don't You Keep Holy the Sabbath-Day? (London: Burns and Oates, Ltd.), pp. 3, 4.
There is but one church on the face of the earth which has the power, or claims power, to make laws binding on the conscience, binding before God, binding under penalty of hell-fire. For instance, the institution of Sunday. What right has any other church to keep this day? You answer by virtue of the third commandment (the papacy did away with the 2nd regarding the worship of graven images, and called the 4th the 3rd), which says 'Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day.'
But Sunday is not the Sabbath. Any schoolboy knows that Sunday is the first day of the week. I have repeatedly offered one thousand dollars to anyone who will prove by the Bible alone that Sunday is the day we are bound to keep, and no one has called for the money. It was the holy Catholic Church that changed the day of rest from Saturday, the seventh day, to Sunday, the first day of the week.
—T. Enright, C.S.S.R., in a lecture delivered in 1893.
Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act. And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters.
—C. F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons, in answer to a letter regarding the change of the Sabbath, November 11, 1895.
Tradition, not Scripture, is the rock on which the church of Jesus Christ is built.
—Adrien Nampon, Catholic Doctrine as Defined by the Council of Trent, p. 157
The Pope is of so great authority and power that he can modify, explain, or interpret even divine law". The pope can modify divine law, since his power is not of man, but of God, and he acts a vicegerent of God upon earth.
—Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca, art. Papa, II, Vol. VI, p. 29.
The leader of the Catholic church is defined by the faith as the Vicar of Jesus Christ (and is accepted as such by believers). The Pope is considered the man on earth who "takes the place" of the Second Person of the omnipotent God of the Trinity.
—John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, p. 3, 1994
...pastoral intuition suggested to the Church the christianization of the notion of Sunday as "the day of the sun", which was the Roman name for the day and which is retained in some modern languages.(29) This was in order to draw the faithful away from the seduction of cults which worshipped the sun, and to direct the celebration of the day to Christ, humanity's true 'sun'.
—John Paul II, Dies Domini, 27. The day of Christ-Light, 1998 (Prominent protestant leaders agree with this statement - See here for a statement by Dr. E. T. Hiscox, author of the ‘Baptist Manual’)
The Sun was a foremost god with heathen-dom…The sun has worshippers at this hour in Persia and other lands…. There is, in truth, something royal, kingly about the sun, making it a fit emblem of Jesus, the Sun of Justice. Hence the church in these countries would seem to have said, to 'Keep that old pagan name [Sunday]. It shall remain consecrated, sanctified.' And thus the pagan Sunday, dedicated to Balder, became the Christian Sunday, sacred to Jesus.
—William Gildea, Doctor of Divinity, The Catholic World, March, 1894, p. 809
The retention of the old pagan name of Dies Solis, for Sunday is, in a great measure, owing to the union of pagan and Christian sentiment with which the first day of the week was recommended by Constantine to his subjects - pagan and Christian alike - as the 'venerable' day of the sun.
—Arthur P. Stanley, History of the Eastern Church, p. 184
When St. Paul repudiated the works of the law, he was not thinking of the Ten Commandments, which are as unchangeable as God Himself is, which God could not change and still remain the infinitely holy God.
—Our Sunday Visitor, Oct. 7, I951.
Question: How prove you that the Church hath power to command feasts and holydays?
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.
—Henry Tuberville, An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine (1833 approbation), p.58 (Same statement in Manual of Christian Doctrine, ed. by Daniel Ferris [1916 ed.], p.67)
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 Sunday for the Sabbath. But this theory is 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.
—Vincent J. Kelly, Forbidden Sunday and Feast-Day Occupations, Washington, DC, Catholic University of America Press, Studies in Sacred Theology, No. 70.,1943, p. 2.
If we consulted the Bible only, we should still have to keep holy the Sabbath Day, that is, Saturday, with the Jews, instead of Sunday; ...
—A Course in Religion for Catholic High Schools and Academies, by Rev. John Laux M.A., Benzinger Brothers, 1936 edition, Part 1.
Sunday is a Catholic institution, and... can be defended only on Catholic principles.... From beginning to end of Scripture there is not a single passage that warrants the transfer of weekly public worship from the last day of the week to the first.
—Catholic Press, Aug. 25, 1900
The Sabbath was Saturday, not Sunday. The Church altered the observance of the Sabbath to the observance of Sunday. Protestants must be rather puzzled by the keeping of Sunday when God distinctly said, 'Keep holy the Sabbath Day.' The word Sunday does not come anywhere in the Bible, so, without knowing it they are obeying the authority of the Catholic Church.
—Canon Cafferata, The Catechism Explained, p. 89.
Reason and sense demand the acceptance of one or the other of these alternatives: either Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday, or Catholicity and the keeping holy of Sunday. Compromise is impossible.
—John Cardinal Gibbons, The Catholic Mirror, December 23, 1893.
Q. Have you any other proofs that they (Protestants) are not guided by the Scripture?
A. Yes; so many, that we cannot admit more than a mere specimen into this small work. They reject much that is clearly contained in Scripture, s nowhere discoverable in that Divine Book.
Q. Give some examples of both?
A. They should, if the Scripture were their only rule, wash the feet of one another, according to the command of Christ, in the 13th chap. of St. John; —they should keep, not the Sunday, but the Saturday, according to the commandment, "Remember thou keep holy the SABBATH-day;" for this commandment has not, in Scripture, been changed or abrogated;...
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 101 Imprimatuer
They assembled on Saturdays, not that they were infected with Judaism, but only to worship Jesus Christ the Lord of the sabbath —William Cave in his book entitled Primitive Christianity citing Athanasius bishop of Alexandria, pg. 125
It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who observe the day observe a commandment of the Catholic Church.
—Priest Brady, in an address, reported in the Elizabeth, NJ ‘News’ on March 18, 1903.
Protestants ... accept Sunday rather than Saturday as the day for public worship after the Catholic Church made the change... But the Protestant mind does not seem to realize that ... in observing Sunday, they are accepting the authority of the spokesman for the Church, the pope.
—Our Sunday Visitor, February 5th, 1950.
Of course these two old quotations are exactly correct. The Catholic Church designated Sunday as the day for corporate worship and gets full credit – or blame – for the change.
—This Rock, The Magazine of Catholic Apologetics and Evangelization, p.8, June 1997
Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
A. 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.
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174
Q. In what manner can we show a Protestant, that he speaks unreasonably against fasts and abstinences?
A. Ask him why he keeps Sunday, and not Saturday, as his day of rest, since he is unwilling either to fast or to abstain. If he reply, that the Scripture orders him to keep the Sunday, but says nothing as to fasting and abstinence, tell him the Scripture speaks of Saturday or the Sabbath, but gives no command anywhere regarding Sunday or the first day of the week.
If, then he neglects Saturday as a day of rest and holiness, and substitutes Sunday in its place, and this merely because such was the usage of the ancient Church, should he not, if he wishes to act consistently, observe fasting and abstinence, because the ancient Church so ordained?
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 181
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.
—Rev. Peter Geiermann C.SS.R., The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 50
Q. Must not a sensible Protestant doubt seriously, when he finds that even the Bible is not followed as a rule by his co-religionists?
A. Surely, when he sees them baptize infants, abrogate the Jewish Sabbath, and observe Sunday for which [pg. 7] there is no Scriptural authority; when he finds them neglect to wash one another's feet, which is expressly commanded, and eat blood and things strangled, which are expressly prohibited in Scripture. He must doubt, if he think at all. ...
Q. Should not the Protestant doubt when he finds that he himself holds tradition as a guide?
A. Yes, if he would but reflect that he has nothing but Catholic Tradition for keeping the Sunday holy; ...
—Controversial Catechism by Stephen Keenan, New Edition, revised by Rev. George Cormack, published in London by Burns & Oates, Limited - New York, Cincinnati, Chicago: Benzinger Brothers, 1896, pages 6, 7.
The Church, on the other hand, after changing the day of rest from the Jewish Sabbath, or seventh day of the week, to the first, made the Third Commandment refer to Sunday as the day to be kept holy as the Lord's Day.
The Council of Trent (Sess. VI, can. xix) condemns those who deny that the Ten Commandments are binding on Christians.
(The Catholic Encyclopedia, Commandments of God, Volume IV, © 1908 by Robert Appleton Company, Online Edition © 1999 by Kevin Knight, Nihil Obstat - Remy Lafort, Censor Imprimatur - +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York, page 153.)
The [Roman Catholic] Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by right of the divine, infallible authority given to her by her founder, Jesus Christ. The Protestant claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh-day Adventist is the only consistent Protestant.
—The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942, p. 4.
All of us believe many things in regard to religion that we do not find in the Bible. 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 Church outside the Bible.
—The Catholic Virginian, To Tell You The Truth,” Vol. 22, No. 49 (Oct. 3, 1947).
... you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.
—The Faith of Our Fathers, by James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, 88th edition, page 89. Originally published in 1876, republished and Copyright 1980 by TAN Books and Publishers, Inc., pages 72-73.
Deny the authority of the Church and you have no adequate or reasonable explanation or justification for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday in the Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God... The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.'
—Catholic Record, September 1, 1923.
But since Saturday, not Sunday, is specified in the Bible, isn't it curious that non-Catholics who profess to take their religion directly from the Bible and not the Church, observe Sunday instead of Saturday? Yes, of course, it is inconsistent; but this change was made about fifteen centuries before Protestantism was born, and by that time the custom was universally observed.
They have continued the custom, even though it rests upon the authority of the Catholic Church and not upon an explicit text in the Bible. That observance remains as a reminder of the Mother Church from which the non-Catholic sects broke away - like a boy running away from home but still carrying in his pocket a picture of his mother or a lock of her hair.
—The Faith of Millions
Perhaps the boldest thing, the most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday. "The Day of the Lord" (dies Dominica) was chosen, not from any directions noted in the Scriptures, but from the Church's sense of its own power. The day of resurrection, the day of Pentecost, fifty days later, came on the first day of the week. So this would be the new Sabbath. People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become 7th Day Adventists, and keep Saturday holy.
—Sentinel, Pastor's page, Saint Catherine Catholic Church, Algonac, Michigan, May 21, 1995
If Protestants would follow the Bible, they would worship God on the Sabbath Day. In keeping the Sunday they are following a law of the Catholic Church.
—Albert Smith, Chancellor of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, replying for the Cardinal, in a letter dated February 10, 1920.
The observance of Sunday by the Protestants is homage they pay, in spite of themselves, to the authority of the [Catholic] Church.
—Monsignor Louis Segur, ‘Plain Talk about the Protestantism of Today’, p. 213.
What Important Question Does the Papacy Ask Protestants?
Protestants have repeatedly asked the papacy, "How could you dare to change God's law?" But the question posed to Protestants by the Catholic church is even more penetrating.
Here it is officially: You will tell me that Saturday was the Jewish Sabbath, but that the Christian Sabbath has been changed to Sunday. Changed! but by whom? Who has authority to change an express commandment of Almighty God? When God has spoken and said, Thou shalt keep holy the seventh day, who shall dare to say, Nay, thou mayest work and do all manner of worldly business on the seventh day; but thou shalt keep holy the first day in its stead?
This is a most important question, which I know not how you can answer. You are a Protestant, and you profess to go by the Bible and the Bible only; and yet in so important a matter as the observance of one day in seven as a holy day, you go against the plain letter of the Bible, and put another day in the place of that day which the Bible has commanded.
The command to keep holy the seventh day is one of the ten commandments; you believe that the other nine are still binding; who gave you authority to tamper with the fourth? If you are consistent with your own principles, if you really follow the Bible and the Bible only, you ought to be able to produce some portion of the New Testament in which this fourth commandment is expressly altered.
—Library of Christian Doctrine: Why Don't You Keep Holy the Sabbath-Day? (London: Burns and Oates, Ltd.), pp. 3, 4.
There is but one church on the face of the earth which has the power, or claims power, to make laws binding on the conscience, binding before God, binding under penalty of hell-fire. For instance, the institution of Sunday. What right has any other church to keep this day? You answer by virtue of the third commandment (the papacy did away with the 2nd regarding the worship of graven images, and called the 4th the 3rd), which says 'Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day.'
But Sunday is not the Sabbath. Any schoolboy knows that Sunday is the first day of the week. I have repeatedly offered one thousand dollars to anyone who will prove by the Bible alone that Sunday is the day we are bound to keep, and no one has called for the money. It was the holy Catholic Church that changed the day of rest from Saturday, the seventh day, to Sunday, the first day of the week.
—T. Enright, C.S.S.R., in a lecture delivered in 1893.
Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act. And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters.
—C. F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons, in answer to a letter regarding the change of the Sabbath, November 11, 1895.
Tradition, not Scripture, is the rock on which the church of Jesus Christ is built.
—Adrien Nampon, Catholic Doctrine as Defined by the Council of Trent, p. 157
The Pope is of so great authority and power that he can modify, explain, or interpret even divine law". The pope can modify divine law, since his power is not of man, but of God, and he acts a vicegerent of God upon earth.
—Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca, art. Papa, II, Vol. VI, p. 29.
The leader of the Catholic church is defined by the faith as the Vicar of Jesus Christ (and is accepted as such by believers). The Pope is considered the man on earth who "takes the place" of the Second Person of the omnipotent God of the Trinity.
—John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, p. 3, 1994
...pastoral intuition suggested to the Church the christianization of the notion of Sunday as "the day of the sun", which was the Roman name for the day and which is retained in some modern languages.(29) This was in order to draw the faithful away from the seduction of cults which worshipped the sun, and to direct the celebration of the day to Christ, humanity's true 'sun'.
—John Paul II, Dies Domini, 27. The day of Christ-Light, 1998 (Prominent protestant leaders agree with this statement - See here for a statement by Dr. E. T. Hiscox, author of the ‘Baptist Manual’)
The Sun was a foremost god with heathen-dom…The sun has worshippers at this hour in Persia and other lands…. There is, in truth, something royal, kingly about the sun, making it a fit emblem of Jesus, the Sun of Justice. Hence the church in these countries would seem to have said, to 'Keep that old pagan name [Sunday]. It shall remain consecrated, sanctified.' And thus the pagan Sunday, dedicated to Balder, became the Christian Sunday, sacred to Jesus.
—William Gildea, Doctor of Divinity, The Catholic World, March, 1894, p. 809
The retention of the old pagan name of Dies Solis, for Sunday is, in a great measure, owing to the union of pagan and Christian sentiment with which the first day of the week was recommended by Constantine to his subjects - pagan and Christian alike - as the 'venerable' day of the sun.
—Arthur P. Stanley, History of the Eastern Church, p. 184
When St. Paul repudiated the works of the law, he was not thinking of the Ten Commandments, which are as unchangeable as God Himself is, which God could not change and still remain the infinitely holy God.
—Our Sunday Visitor, Oct. 7, I951.
Question: How prove you that the Church hath power to command feasts and holydays?
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.
—Henry Tuberville, An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine (1833 approbation), p.58 (Same statement in Manual of Christian Doctrine, ed. by Daniel Ferris [1916 ed.], p.67)
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 Sunday for the Sabbath. But this theory is 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.
—Vincent J. Kelly, Forbidden Sunday and Feast-Day Occupations, Washington, DC, Catholic University of America Press, Studies in Sacred Theology, No. 70.,1943, p. 2.
If we consulted the Bible only, we should still have to keep holy the Sabbath Day, that is, Saturday, with the Jews, instead of Sunday; ...
—A Course in Religion for Catholic High Schools and Academies, by Rev. John Laux M.A., Benzinger Brothers, 1936 edition, Part 1.
Sunday is a Catholic institution, and... can be defended only on Catholic principles.... From beginning to end of Scripture there is not a single passage that warrants the transfer of weekly public worship from the last day of the week to the first.
—Catholic Press, Aug. 25, 1900
The Sabbath was Saturday, not Sunday. The Church altered the observance of the Sabbath to the observance of Sunday. Protestants must be rather puzzled by the keeping of Sunday when God distinctly said, 'Keep holy the Sabbath Day.' The word Sunday does not come anywhere in the Bible, so, without knowing it they are obeying the authority of the Catholic Church.
—Canon Cafferata, The Catechism Explained, p. 89.
Reason and sense demand the acceptance of one or the other of these alternatives: either Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday, or Catholicity and the keeping holy of Sunday. Compromise is impossible.
—John Cardinal Gibbons, The Catholic Mirror, December 23, 1893.
9
9
22
1,850
Testing The Prophets (know your prophet today)
8 Biblical Tests of a True Prophet
"And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. And many false prophets shall rise, and there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." (Mathew 24:4,11, 24)
Scripture provides multiple tests for examining anyone who claims to speak for God. These tests must be applied together, because no single test is sufficient by itself. A person may perform signs, teach some truth, or appear religious and still be a false prophet (Deuteronomy 13:1–4; Matthew 7:21–23).
1. Their messages will be in harmony with Scripture
"To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." (Isaiah 8:20)
A true prophet will never contradict God's previously revealed Word. Their teaching must harmonize with established biblical truth and uphold all of God's commandments and testimonies.
--->Key principle: Scripture tests the prophet; the prophet does not become the standard by which Scripture is judged.
--->Important qualification: 2 Peter 1:20–21 primarily teaches that prophecy originates with God rather than merely being a product of human will or private invention. Isaiah 8:20 is the clearer direct test for whether a prophetic message agrees with Scripture.
2. Their genuine predictive prophecies will come to pass
"When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken." (Deuteronomy 18:22)
Jeremiah 28:9 likewise identifies fulfillment as a test of a prophet. When a prophet makes a genuine predictive statement in God's name, it must be fulfilled. An unfulfilled prediction presents a serious biblical problem. However, Scripture recognizes conditional prophecy. God's announced judgment or blessing may depend upon the response of the people involved:
• Jeremiah 18:7–10
• Jonah 3:4–10
Jonah announced Nineveh's destruction, yet Nineveh was spared when the people repented.
Therefore, every disputed prophecy must be examined carefully:
• Was it explicitly conditional?
• Was the condition clear from the immediate context?
• Was the condition established elsewhere beforehand?
• Or was a condition introduced only afterward to explain nonfulfillment?
At the same time, fulfilled prophecy alone does not prove a prophet genuine, because Deuteronomy 13:1–4 warns that a false prophet may give a sign or wonder that actually comes to pass. The decisive question is therefore not
merely "Did the prediction happen?", but whether the prophet's entire message remains faithful to God.
3. They will receive genuine messages from God through prophetic revelation
"I the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream." (Numbers 12:6)
God used visions, dreams, and direct supernatural communication in the biblical prophetic ministry. Angels also communicated messages to God's servants (Zechariah 4:1; Revelation 19:10; 22:8–9).
A genuine prophet therefore claims to receive revelation from God rather than merely presenting personal opinions as divine messages.
Conversely, Scripture strictly condemns occult and satanic methods:
Deuteronomy 18:9–12 condemns divination, astrology/"observers of times," enchantment, witchcraft, consulting familiar spirits, wizardry, and necromancy.
--->Key distinction: Genuine prophetic revelation comes from God; occult revelation comes through forbidden supernatural sources.
4. They will confess the biblical divine-human nature of Christ
"Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God." (1 John 4:1–3)
A genuine prophet must uphold the biblical Christ the divine Son who truly became human, came in the flesh, and gave Himself for the salvation of humanity.
Compare: Philippians 2:5–8, John 1:1, 14, 1 Timothy 3:16
The prophet's Christology must therefore be tested against Scripture, not merely by whether they frequently mention Jesus.
5. They will be holy people who bear good fruit
"Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." (2 Peter 1:21)
Jesus said: "Ye shall know them by their fruits." (Matthew 7:16)
A true prophet will seek, through the Holy Spirit, to live consistently with the message they proclaim. Their character, conduct, relationships, and influence should demonstrate the fruits of a life submitted to God.
Jesus also gives an important warning in
Matthew 7:21–23
Some people will claim to have prophesied, cast out devils, and performed wonderful works in His name, yet Christ will say: "I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
Therefore, supernatural experiences and religious works cannot substitute for godly character and obedience.
6. They will exalt Christ rather than themselves
John the Baptist provides the model: "He must increase, but I must decrease." (John 3:30)
And: "Behold the Lamb of God!" (John 1:36)
A genuine prophet directs attention toward Christ, not toward personal fame, authority, personality, or self-glorification. The prophet's ministry should ultimately cause people to follow the Master rather than become dependent upon the messenger.
--->Test: Does the messenger consistently point people to Christ, or does the messenger become the center of the movement?
7. They will edify, exhort, and comfort God's people
"He that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort." (1 Corinthians 14:3)
True prophetic ministry seeks the spiritual restoration and strengthening of God's people.
This does not mean a true prophet will always say pleasant things. Biblical prophets frequently delivered severe warnings and rebukes.
But even correction should serve God's purposes rather than personal hatred, manipulation, revenge, or needless division.
Nathan's confrontation of David provides an example of courageous but purposeful prophetic rebuke (2 Samuel 12:1–14).
--->Test: Does the prophetic ministry genuinely seek to build up, correct, strengthen, and restore God's people?
8. They will declare sin and call people to repentance
A genuine prophet does not merely promise blessings while ignoring rebellion.
Micah 3:5–8 describes the prophet as one who declares:
"Jacob his transgression, and to Israel his sin."
2 Chronicles 24:19–20 shows God sending prophets to call His people back to Him and confronting their disobedience to His commandments.
John the Baptist likewise confronted sin directly:
"Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance." (Matthew 3:7–8)
True prophets therefore: expose sin, rebuke rebellion, uphold God's commandments, warn of coming judgment, call people to repentance, and point them back to God.
A ministry that continually promises prosperity and blessing while refusing to confront sin and disobedience does not resemble the biblical prophetic model.
8 Biblical Tests of a True Prophet
"And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. And many false prophets shall rise, and there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." (Mathew 24:4,11, 24)
Scripture provides multiple tests for examining anyone who claims to speak for God. These tests must be applied together, because no single test is sufficient by itself. A person may perform signs, teach some truth, or appear religious and still be a false prophet (Deuteronomy 13:1–4; Matthew 7:21–23).
1. Their messages will be in harmony with Scripture
"To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." (Isaiah 8:20)
A true prophet will never contradict God's previously revealed Word. Their teaching must harmonize with established biblical truth and uphold all of God's commandments and testimonies.
--->Key principle: Scripture tests the prophet; the prophet does not become the standard by which Scripture is judged.
--->Important qualification: 2 Peter 1:20–21 primarily teaches that prophecy originates with God rather than merely being a product of human will or private invention. Isaiah 8:20 is the clearer direct test for whether a prophetic message agrees with Scripture.
2. Their genuine predictive prophecies will come to pass
"When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken." (Deuteronomy 18:22)
Jeremiah 28:9 likewise identifies fulfillment as a test of a prophet. When a prophet makes a genuine predictive statement in God's name, it must be fulfilled. An unfulfilled prediction presents a serious biblical problem. However, Scripture recognizes conditional prophecy. God's announced judgment or blessing may depend upon the response of the people involved:
• Jeremiah 18:7–10
• Jonah 3:4–10
Jonah announced Nineveh's destruction, yet Nineveh was spared when the people repented.
Therefore, every disputed prophecy must be examined carefully:
• Was it explicitly conditional?
• Was the condition clear from the immediate context?
• Was the condition established elsewhere beforehand?
• Or was a condition introduced only afterward to explain nonfulfillment?
At the same time, fulfilled prophecy alone does not prove a prophet genuine, because Deuteronomy 13:1–4 warns that a false prophet may give a sign or wonder that actually comes to pass. The decisive question is therefore not
merely "Did the prediction happen?", but whether the prophet's entire message remains faithful to God.
3. They will receive genuine messages from God through prophetic revelation
"I the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream." (Numbers 12:6)
God used visions, dreams, and direct supernatural communication in the biblical prophetic ministry. Angels also communicated messages to God's servants (Zechariah 4:1; Revelation 19:10; 22:8–9).
A genuine prophet therefore claims to receive revelation from God rather than merely presenting personal opinions as divine messages.
Conversely, Scripture strictly condemns occult and satanic methods:
Deuteronomy 18:9–12 condemns divination, astrology/"observers of times," enchantment, witchcraft, consulting familiar spirits, wizardry, and necromancy.
--->Key distinction: Genuine prophetic revelation comes from God; occult revelation comes through forbidden supernatural sources.
4. They will confess the biblical divine-human nature of Christ
"Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God." (1 John 4:1–3)
A genuine prophet must uphold the biblical Christ the divine Son who truly became human, came in the flesh, and gave Himself for the salvation of humanity.
Compare: Philippians 2:5–8, John 1:1, 14, 1 Timothy 3:16
The prophet's Christology must therefore be tested against Scripture, not merely by whether they frequently mention Jesus.
5. They will be holy people who bear good fruit
"Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." (2 Peter 1:21)
Jesus said: "Ye shall know them by their fruits." (Matthew 7:16)
A true prophet will seek, through the Holy Spirit, to live consistently with the message they proclaim. Their character, conduct, relationships, and influence should demonstrate the fruits of a life submitted to God.
Jesus also gives an important warning in
Matthew 7:21–23
Some people will claim to have prophesied, cast out devils, and performed wonderful works in His name, yet Christ will say: "I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
Therefore, supernatural experiences and religious works cannot substitute for godly character and obedience.
6. They will exalt Christ rather than themselves
John the Baptist provides the model: "He must increase, but I must decrease." (John 3:30)
And: "Behold the Lamb of God!" (John 1:36)
A genuine prophet directs attention toward Christ, not toward personal fame, authority, personality, or self-glorification. The prophet's ministry should ultimately cause people to follow the Master rather than become dependent upon the messenger.
--->Test: Does the messenger consistently point people to Christ, or does the messenger become the center of the movement?
7. They will edify, exhort, and comfort God's people
"He that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort." (1 Corinthians 14:3)
True prophetic ministry seeks the spiritual restoration and strengthening of God's people.
This does not mean a true prophet will always say pleasant things. Biblical prophets frequently delivered severe warnings and rebukes.
But even correction should serve God's purposes rather than personal hatred, manipulation, revenge, or needless division.
Nathan's confrontation of David provides an example of courageous but purposeful prophetic rebuke (2 Samuel 12:1–14).
--->Test: Does the prophetic ministry genuinely seek to build up, correct, strengthen, and restore God's people?
8. They will declare sin and call people to repentance
A genuine prophet does not merely promise blessings while ignoring rebellion.
Micah 3:5–8 describes the prophet as one who declares:
"Jacob his transgression, and to Israel his sin."
2 Chronicles 24:19–20 shows God sending prophets to call His people back to Him and confronting their disobedience to His commandments.
John the Baptist likewise confronted sin directly:
"Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance." (Matthew 3:7–8)
True prophets therefore: expose sin, rebuke rebellion, uphold God's commandments, warn of coming judgment, call people to repentance, and point them back to God.
A ministry that continually promises prosperity and blessing while refusing to confront sin and disobedience does not resemble the biblical prophetic model.
4
3
14
519
Search the Scriptures retweeted
The Logic Trap
You say: “Bible only!”
But you keep Sunday not in the Bible.
Rome says: “Then accept our other traditions too!”
You can’t have it both ways.
Either Scripture alone → Saturday
Or tradition + Scripture → Rome wins.
Choose this day whom you will serve.
You say: “Bible only!”
But you keep Sunday not in the Bible.
Rome says: “Then accept our other traditions too!”
You can’t have it both ways.
Either Scripture alone → Saturday
Or tradition + Scripture → Rome wins.
Choose this day whom you will serve.
28
7
37
2,827
Search the Scriptures retweeted
False teachers are God's judgment upon a church/people that hates His Word. When people continuously reject the sharp piercing truths of Scripture, God gives them exactly what their fallen hearts desire: a polished, popular teacher/leader who will gently guide them to destruction while making them feel secure. (Jeremiah 5:30:31)
There is a single, non-negotiable line that separates the true shepherd from the false teacher. The true shepherd anchors his entire ministry, his life, and his doctrine strictly to the unyielding, unchanging text of Scripture alone (Sola Scriptura). He speaks only because God has spoken in His Word.
The false teacher invariably seeks to add something to the text. They point you to their specific church authority, their unwritten traditions, their mandatory rituals, their personal visions, or their supernatural signs. They attempt to create a dependency where your salvation is bound to their system rather than directly to the nail-scarred hands of the Savior.
The warning of Scripture is an absolute alarm: look past the crowds, look past the gold, look past the beautiful cathedrals and the smooth words. If their message drifts even a fraction of an inch away from the pure Gospel of justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, turn away. Their judgment does not slumber, and those who follow them into compromise will share in their structural ruin.
4
7
14
680
If nine of the Ten Commandments remain morally binding but the fourth was abolished, where does Scripture say that one commandment was removed?
James calls the same law a “law of liberty” and warns against breaking it. (James 2:10–12).
The question is not why nine commandments remain. The question is: where did God abolish the fourth?
James calls the same law a “law of liberty” and warns against breaking it. (James 2:10–12).
The question is not why nine commandments remain. The question is: where did God abolish the fourth?
12
3
28
2,512
Catholic Bold Confessions on the Sabbath Change
Q. Have you any other proofs that they (Protestants) are not guided by the Scripture?
A. Yes; so many, that we cannot admit more than a mere specimen into this small work. They reject much that is clearly contained in Scripture, s nowhere discoverable in that Divine Book.
Q. Give some examples of both?
A. They should, if the Scripture were their only rule, wash the feet of one another, according to the command of Christ, in the 13th chap. of St. John; —they should keep, not the Sunday, but the Saturday, according to the commandment, "Remember thou keep holy the SABBATH-day;" for this commandment has not, in Scripture, been changed or abrogated;...
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 101 Imprimatuer
They assembled on Saturdays, not that they were infected with Judaism, but only to worship Jesus Christ the Lord of the sabbath —William Cave in his book entitled Primitive Christianity citing Athanasius bishop of Alexandria, pg. 125
It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who observe the day observe a commandment of the Catholic Church.
—Priest Brady, in an address, reported in the Elizabeth, NJ ‘News’ on March 18, 1903.
Protestants ... accept Sunday rather than Saturday as the day for public worship after the Catholic Church made the change... But the Protestant mind does not seem to realize that ... in observing Sunday, they are accepting the authority of the spokesman for the Church, the pope.
—Our Sunday Visitor, February 5th, 1950.
Of course these two old quotations are exactly correct. The Catholic Church designated Sunday as the day for corporate worship and gets full credit – or blame – for the change.
—This Rock, The Magazine of Catholic Apologetics and Evangelization, p.8, June 1997
Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
A. 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.
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174
Q. In what manner can we show a Protestant, that he speaks unreasonably against fasts and abstinences?
A. Ask him why he keeps Sunday, and not Saturday, as his day of rest, since he is unwilling either to fast or to abstain. If he reply, that the Scripture orders him to keep the Sunday, but says nothing as to fasting and abstinence, tell him the Scripture speaks of Saturday or the Sabbath, but gives no command anywhere regarding Sunday or the first day of the week.
If, then he neglects Saturday as a day of rest and holiness, and substitutes Sunday in its place, and this merely because such was the usage of the ancient Church, should he not, if he wishes to act consistently, observe fasting and abstinence, because the ancient Church so ordained?
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 181
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.
—Rev. Peter Geiermann C.SS.R., The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 50
Q. Must not a sensible Protestant doubt seriously, when he finds that even the Bible is not followed as a rule by his co-religionists?
A. Surely, when he sees them baptize infants, abrogate the Jewish Sabbath, and observe Sunday for which [pg. 7] there is no Scriptural authority; when he finds them neglect to wash one another's feet, which is expressly commanded, and eat blood and things strangled, which are expressly prohibited in Scripture. He must doubt, if he think at all. ...
Q. Should not the Protestant doubt when he finds that he himself holds tradition as a guide?
A. Yes, if he would but reflect that he has nothing but Catholic Tradition for keeping the Sunday holy; ...
—Controversial Catechism by Stephen Keenan, New Edition, revised by Rev. George Cormack, published in London by Burns & Oates, Limited - New York, Cincinnati, Chicago: Benzinger Brothers, 1896, pages 6, 7.
The Church, on the other hand, after changing the day of rest from the Jewish Sabbath, or seventh day of the week, to the first, made the Third Commandment refer to Sunday as the day to be kept holy as the Lord's Day.
The Council of Trent (Sess. VI, can. xix) condemns those who deny that the Ten Commandments are binding on Christians.
(The Catholic Encyclopedia, Commandments of God, Volume IV, © 1908 by Robert Appleton Company, Online Edition © 1999 by Kevin Knight, Nihil Obstat - Remy Lafort, Censor Imprimatur - +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York, page 153.)
The [Roman Catholic] Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by right of the divine, infallible authority given to her by her founder, Jesus Christ. The Protestant claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh-day Adventist is the only consistent Protestant.
—The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942, p. 4.
All of us believe many things in regard to religion that we do not find in the Bible. 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 Church outside the Bible.
—The Catholic Virginian, To Tell You The Truth,” Vol. 22, No. 49 (Oct. 3, 1947).
... you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.
—The Faith of Our Fathers, by James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, 88th edition, page 89. Originally published in 1876, republished and Copyright 1980 by TAN Books and Publishers, Inc., pages 72-73.
Deny the authority of the Church and you have no adequate or reasonable explanation or justification for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday in the Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God... The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.'
—Catholic Record, September 1, 1923.
But since Saturday, not Sunday, is specified in the Bible, isn't it curious that non-Catholics who profess to take their religion directly from the Bible and not the Church, observe Sunday instead of Saturday? Yes, of course, it is inconsistent; but this change was made about fifteen centuries before Protestantism was born, and by that time the custom was universally observed.
They have continued the custom, even though it rests upon the authority of the Catholic Church and not upon an explicit text in the Bible. That observance remains as a reminder of the Mother Church from which the non-Catholic sects broke away - like a boy running away from home but still carrying in his pocket a picture of his mother or a lock of her hair.
—The Faith of Millions
Perhaps the boldest thing, the most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday. "The Day of the Lord" (dies Dominica) was chosen, not from any directions noted in the Scriptures, but from the Church's sense of its own power. The day of resurrection, the day of Pentecost, fifty days later, came on the first day of the week. So this would be the new Sabbath. People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become 7th Day Adventists, and keep Saturday holy.
—Sentinel, Pastor's page, Saint Catherine Catholic Church, Algonac, Michigan, May 21, 1995
If Protestants would follow the Bible, they would worship God on the Sabbath Day. In keeping the Sunday they are following a law of the Catholic Church.
—Albert Smith, Chancellor of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, replying for the Cardinal, in a letter dated February 10, 1920.
The observance of Sunday by the Protestants is homage they pay, in spite of themselves, to the authority of the [Catholic] Church.
—Monsignor Louis Segur, ‘Plain Talk about the Protestantism of Today’, p. 213.
What Important Question Does the Papacy Ask Protestants?
Protestants have repeatedly asked the papacy, "How could you dare to change God's law?" But the question posed to Protestants by the Catholic church is even more penetrating.
Here it is officially: You will tell me that Saturday was the Jewish Sabbath, but that the Christian Sabbath has been changed to Sunday. Changed! but by whom? Who has authority to change an express commandment of Almighty God? When God has spoken and said, Thou shalt keep holy the seventh day, who shall dare to say, Nay, thou mayest work and do all manner of worldly business on the seventh day; but thou shalt keep holy the first day in its stead?
This is a most important question, which I know not how you can answer. You are a Protestant, and you profess to go by the Bible and the Bible only; and yet in so important a matter as the observance of one day in seven as a holy day, you go against the plain letter of the Bible, and put another day in the place of that day which the Bible has commanded.
The command to keep holy the seventh day is one of the ten commandments; you believe that the other nine are still binding; who gave you authority to tamper with the fourth? If you are consistent with your own principles, if you really follow the Bible and the Bible only, you ought to be able to produce some portion of the New Testament in which this fourth commandment is expressly altered.
—Library of Christian Doctrine: Why Don't You Keep Holy the Sabbath-Day? (London: Burns and Oates, Ltd.), pp. 3, 4.
There is but one church on the face of the earth which has the power, or claims power, to make laws binding on the conscience, binding before God, binding under penalty of hell-fire. For instance, the institution of Sunday. What right has any other church to keep this day? You answer by virtue of the third commandment (the papacy did away with the 2nd regarding the worship of graven images, and called the 4th the 3rd), which says 'Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day.'
But Sunday is not the Sabbath. Any schoolboy knows that Sunday is the first day of the week. I have repeatedly offered one thousand dollars to anyone who will prove by the Bible alone that Sunday is the day we are bound to keep, and no one has called for the money. It was the holy Catholic Church that changed the day of rest from Saturday, the seventh day, to Sunday, the first day of the week.
—T. Enright, C.S.S.R., in a lecture delivered in 1893.
Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act. And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters.
—C. F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons, in answer to a letter regarding the change of the Sabbath, November 11, 1895.
Tradition, not Scripture, is the rock on which the church of Jesus Christ is built.
—Adrien Nampon, Catholic Doctrine as Defined by the Council of Trent, p. 157
The Pope is of so great authority and power that he can modify, explain, or interpret even divine law". The pope can modify divine law, since his power is not of man, but of God, and he acts a vicegerent of God upon earth.
—Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca, art. Papa, II, Vol. VI, p. 29.
The leader of the Catholic church is defined by the faith as the Vicar of Jesus Christ (and is accepted as such by believers). The Pope is considered the man on earth who "takes the place" of the Second Person of the omnipotent God of the Trinity.
—John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, p. 3, 1994
...pastoral intuition suggested to the Church the christianization of the notion of Sunday as "the day of the sun", which was the Roman name for the day and which is retained in some modern languages.(29) This was in order to draw the faithful away from the seduction of cults which worshipped the sun, and to direct the celebration of the day to Christ, humanity's true 'sun'.
—John Paul II, Dies Domini, 27. The day of Christ-Light, 1998 (Prominent protestant leaders agree with this statement - See here for a statement by Dr. E. T. Hiscox, author of the ‘Baptist Manual’)
The Sun was a foremost god with heathen-dom…The sun has worshippers at this hour in Persia and other lands…. There is, in truth, something royal, kingly about the sun, making it a fit emblem of Jesus, the Sun of Justice. Hence the church in these countries would seem to have said, to 'Keep that old pagan name [Sunday]. It shall remain consecrated, sanctified.' And thus the pagan Sunday, dedicated to Balder, became the Christian Sunday, sacred to Jesus.
—William Gildea, Doctor of Divinity, The Catholic World, March, 1894, p. 809
The retention of the old pagan name of Dies Solis, for Sunday is, in a great measure, owing to the union of pagan and Christian sentiment with which the first day of the week was recommended by Constantine to his subjects - pagan and Christian alike - as the 'venerable' day of the sun.
—Arthur P. Stanley, History of the Eastern Church, p. 184
When St. Paul repudiated the works of the law, he was not thinking of the Ten Commandments, which are as unchangeable as God Himself is, which God could not change and still remain the infinitely holy God.
—Our Sunday Visitor, Oct. 7, I951.
Question: How prove you that the Church hath power to command feasts and holydays?
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.
—Henry Tuberville, An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine (1833 approbation), p.58 (Same statement in Manual of Christian Doctrine, ed. by Daniel Ferris [1916 ed.], p.67)
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 Sunday for the Sabbath. But this theory is 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.
—Vincent J. Kelly, Forbidden Sunday and Feast-Day Occupations, Washington, DC, Catholic University of America Press, Studies in Sacred Theology, No. 70.,1943, p. 2.
If we consulted the Bible only, we should still have to keep holy the Sabbath Day, that is, Saturday, with the Jews, instead of Sunday; ...
—A Course in Religion for Catholic High Schools and Academies, by Rev. John Laux M.A., Benzinger Brothers, 1936 edition, Part 1.
Sunday is a Catholic institution, and... can be defended only on Catholic principles.... From beginning to end of Scripture there is not a single passage that warrants the transfer of weekly public worship from the last day of the week to the first.
—Catholic Press, Aug. 25, 1900
The Sabbath was Saturday, not Sunday. The Church altered the observance of the Sabbath to the observance of Sunday. Protestants must be rather puzzled by the keeping of Sunday when God distinctly said, 'Keep holy the Sabbath Day.' The word Sunday does not come anywhere in the Bible, so, without knowing it they are obeying the authority of the Catholic Church.
—Canon Cafferata, The Catechism Explained, p. 89.
Reason and sense demand the acceptance of one or the other of these alternatives: either Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday, or Catholicity and the keeping holy of Sunday. Compromise is impossible.
—John Cardinal Gibbons, The Catholic Mirror, December 23, 1893.
Q. Have you any other proofs that they (Protestants) are not guided by the Scripture?
A. Yes; so many, that we cannot admit more than a mere specimen into this small work. They reject much that is clearly contained in Scripture, s nowhere discoverable in that Divine Book.
Q. Give some examples of both?
A. They should, if the Scripture were their only rule, wash the feet of one another, according to the command of Christ, in the 13th chap. of St. John; —they should keep, not the Sunday, but the Saturday, according to the commandment, "Remember thou keep holy the SABBATH-day;" for this commandment has not, in Scripture, been changed or abrogated;...
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 101 Imprimatuer
They assembled on Saturdays, not that they were infected with Judaism, but only to worship Jesus Christ the Lord of the sabbath —William Cave in his book entitled Primitive Christianity citing Athanasius bishop of Alexandria, pg. 125
It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who observe the day observe a commandment of the Catholic Church.
—Priest Brady, in an address, reported in the Elizabeth, NJ ‘News’ on March 18, 1903.
Protestants ... accept Sunday rather than Saturday as the day for public worship after the Catholic Church made the change... But the Protestant mind does not seem to realize that ... in observing Sunday, they are accepting the authority of the spokesman for the Church, the pope.
—Our Sunday Visitor, February 5th, 1950.
Of course these two old quotations are exactly correct. The Catholic Church designated Sunday as the day for corporate worship and gets full credit – or blame – for the change.
—This Rock, The Magazine of Catholic Apologetics and Evangelization, p.8, June 1997
Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
A. 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.
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174
Q. In what manner can we show a Protestant, that he speaks unreasonably against fasts and abstinences?
A. Ask him why he keeps Sunday, and not Saturday, as his day of rest, since he is unwilling either to fast or to abstain. If he reply, that the Scripture orders him to keep the Sunday, but says nothing as to fasting and abstinence, tell him the Scripture speaks of Saturday or the Sabbath, but gives no command anywhere regarding Sunday or the first day of the week.
If, then he neglects Saturday as a day of rest and holiness, and substitutes Sunday in its place, and this merely because such was the usage of the ancient Church, should he not, if he wishes to act consistently, observe fasting and abstinence, because the ancient Church so ordained?
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 181
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.
—Rev. Peter Geiermann C.SS.R., The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 50
Q. Must not a sensible Protestant doubt seriously, when he finds that even the Bible is not followed as a rule by his co-religionists?
A. Surely, when he sees them baptize infants, abrogate the Jewish Sabbath, and observe Sunday for which [pg. 7] there is no Scriptural authority; when he finds them neglect to wash one another's feet, which is expressly commanded, and eat blood and things strangled, which are expressly prohibited in Scripture. He must doubt, if he think at all. ...
Q. Should not the Protestant doubt when he finds that he himself holds tradition as a guide?
A. Yes, if he would but reflect that he has nothing but Catholic Tradition for keeping the Sunday holy; ...
—Controversial Catechism by Stephen Keenan, New Edition, revised by Rev. George Cormack, published in London by Burns & Oates, Limited - New York, Cincinnati, Chicago: Benzinger Brothers, 1896, pages 6, 7.
The Church, on the other hand, after changing the day of rest from the Jewish Sabbath, or seventh day of the week, to the first, made the Third Commandment refer to Sunday as the day to be kept holy as the Lord's Day.
The Council of Trent (Sess. VI, can. xix) condemns those who deny that the Ten Commandments are binding on Christians.
(The Catholic Encyclopedia, Commandments of God, Volume IV, © 1908 by Robert Appleton Company, Online Edition © 1999 by Kevin Knight, Nihil Obstat - Remy Lafort, Censor Imprimatur - +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York, page 153.)
The [Roman Catholic] Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by right of the divine, infallible authority given to her by her founder, Jesus Christ. The Protestant claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh-day Adventist is the only consistent Protestant.
—The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942, p. 4.
All of us believe many things in regard to religion that we do not find in the Bible. 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 Church outside the Bible.
—The Catholic Virginian, To Tell You The Truth,” Vol. 22, No. 49 (Oct. 3, 1947).
... you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.
—The Faith of Our Fathers, by James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, 88th edition, page 89. Originally published in 1876, republished and Copyright 1980 by TAN Books and Publishers, Inc., pages 72-73.
Deny the authority of the Church and you have no adequate or reasonable explanation or justification for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday in the Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God... The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.'
—Catholic Record, September 1, 1923.
But since Saturday, not Sunday, is specified in the Bible, isn't it curious that non-Catholics who profess to take their religion directly from the Bible and not the Church, observe Sunday instead of Saturday? Yes, of course, it is inconsistent; but this change was made about fifteen centuries before Protestantism was born, and by that time the custom was universally observed.
They have continued the custom, even though it rests upon the authority of the Catholic Church and not upon an explicit text in the Bible. That observance remains as a reminder of the Mother Church from which the non-Catholic sects broke away - like a boy running away from home but still carrying in his pocket a picture of his mother or a lock of her hair.
—The Faith of Millions
Perhaps the boldest thing, the most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday. "The Day of the Lord" (dies Dominica) was chosen, not from any directions noted in the Scriptures, but from the Church's sense of its own power. The day of resurrection, the day of Pentecost, fifty days later, came on the first day of the week. So this would be the new Sabbath. People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become 7th Day Adventists, and keep Saturday holy.
—Sentinel, Pastor's page, Saint Catherine Catholic Church, Algonac, Michigan, May 21, 1995
If Protestants would follow the Bible, they would worship God on the Sabbath Day. In keeping the Sunday they are following a law of the Catholic Church.
—Albert Smith, Chancellor of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, replying for the Cardinal, in a letter dated February 10, 1920.
The observance of Sunday by the Protestants is homage they pay, in spite of themselves, to the authority of the [Catholic] Church.
—Monsignor Louis Segur, ‘Plain Talk about the Protestantism of Today’, p. 213.
What Important Question Does the Papacy Ask Protestants?
Protestants have repeatedly asked the papacy, "How could you dare to change God's law?" But the question posed to Protestants by the Catholic church is even more penetrating.
Here it is officially: You will tell me that Saturday was the Jewish Sabbath, but that the Christian Sabbath has been changed to Sunday. Changed! but by whom? Who has authority to change an express commandment of Almighty God? When God has spoken and said, Thou shalt keep holy the seventh day, who shall dare to say, Nay, thou mayest work and do all manner of worldly business on the seventh day; but thou shalt keep holy the first day in its stead?
This is a most important question, which I know not how you can answer. You are a Protestant, and you profess to go by the Bible and the Bible only; and yet in so important a matter as the observance of one day in seven as a holy day, you go against the plain letter of the Bible, and put another day in the place of that day which the Bible has commanded.
The command to keep holy the seventh day is one of the ten commandments; you believe that the other nine are still binding; who gave you authority to tamper with the fourth? If you are consistent with your own principles, if you really follow the Bible and the Bible only, you ought to be able to produce some portion of the New Testament in which this fourth commandment is expressly altered.
—Library of Christian Doctrine: Why Don't You Keep Holy the Sabbath-Day? (London: Burns and Oates, Ltd.), pp. 3, 4.
There is but one church on the face of the earth which has the power, or claims power, to make laws binding on the conscience, binding before God, binding under penalty of hell-fire. For instance, the institution of Sunday. What right has any other church to keep this day? You answer by virtue of the third commandment (the papacy did away with the 2nd regarding the worship of graven images, and called the 4th the 3rd), which says 'Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day.'
But Sunday is not the Sabbath. Any schoolboy knows that Sunday is the first day of the week. I have repeatedly offered one thousand dollars to anyone who will prove by the Bible alone that Sunday is the day we are bound to keep, and no one has called for the money. It was the holy Catholic Church that changed the day of rest from Saturday, the seventh day, to Sunday, the first day of the week.
—T. Enright, C.S.S.R., in a lecture delivered in 1893.
Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act. And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters.
—C. F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons, in answer to a letter regarding the change of the Sabbath, November 11, 1895.
Tradition, not Scripture, is the rock on which the church of Jesus Christ is built.
—Adrien Nampon, Catholic Doctrine as Defined by the Council of Trent, p. 157
The Pope is of so great authority and power that he can modify, explain, or interpret even divine law". The pope can modify divine law, since his power is not of man, but of God, and he acts a vicegerent of God upon earth.
—Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca, art. Papa, II, Vol. VI, p. 29.
The leader of the Catholic church is defined by the faith as the Vicar of Jesus Christ (and is accepted as such by believers). The Pope is considered the man on earth who "takes the place" of the Second Person of the omnipotent God of the Trinity.
—John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, p. 3, 1994
...pastoral intuition suggested to the Church the christianization of the notion of Sunday as "the day of the sun", which was the Roman name for the day and which is retained in some modern languages.(29) This was in order to draw the faithful away from the seduction of cults which worshipped the sun, and to direct the celebration of the day to Christ, humanity's true 'sun'.
—John Paul II, Dies Domini, 27. The day of Christ-Light, 1998 (Prominent protestant leaders agree with this statement - See here for a statement by Dr. E. T. Hiscox, author of the ‘Baptist Manual’)
The Sun was a foremost god with heathen-dom…The sun has worshippers at this hour in Persia and other lands…. There is, in truth, something royal, kingly about the sun, making it a fit emblem of Jesus, the Sun of Justice. Hence the church in these countries would seem to have said, to 'Keep that old pagan name [Sunday]. It shall remain consecrated, sanctified.' And thus the pagan Sunday, dedicated to Balder, became the Christian Sunday, sacred to Jesus.
—William Gildea, Doctor of Divinity, The Catholic World, March, 1894, p. 809
The retention of the old pagan name of Dies Solis, for Sunday is, in a great measure, owing to the union of pagan and Christian sentiment with which the first day of the week was recommended by Constantine to his subjects - pagan and Christian alike - as the 'venerable' day of the sun.
—Arthur P. Stanley, History of the Eastern Church, p. 184
When St. Paul repudiated the works of the law, he was not thinking of the Ten Commandments, which are as unchangeable as God Himself is, which God could not change and still remain the infinitely holy God.
—Our Sunday Visitor, Oct. 7, I951.
Question: How prove you that the Church hath power to command feasts and holydays?
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.
—Henry Tuberville, An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine (1833 approbation), p.58 (Same statement in Manual of Christian Doctrine, ed. by Daniel Ferris [1916 ed.], p.67)
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 Sunday for the Sabbath. But this theory is 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.
—Vincent J. Kelly, Forbidden Sunday and Feast-Day Occupations, Washington, DC, Catholic University of America Press, Studies in Sacred Theology, No. 70.,1943, p. 2.
If we consulted the Bible only, we should still have to keep holy the Sabbath Day, that is, Saturday, with the Jews, instead of Sunday; ...
—A Course in Religion for Catholic High Schools and Academies, by Rev. John Laux M.A., Benzinger Brothers, 1936 edition, Part 1.
Sunday is a Catholic institution, and... can be defended only on Catholic principles.... From beginning to end of Scripture there is not a single passage that warrants the transfer of weekly public worship from the last day of the week to the first.
—Catholic Press, Aug. 25, 1900
The Sabbath was Saturday, not Sunday. The Church altered the observance of the Sabbath to the observance of Sunday. Protestants must be rather puzzled by the keeping of Sunday when God distinctly said, 'Keep holy the Sabbath Day.' The word Sunday does not come anywhere in the Bible, so, without knowing it they are obeying the authority of the Catholic Church.
—Canon Cafferata, The Catechism Explained, p. 89.
Reason and sense demand the acceptance of one or the other of these alternatives: either Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday, or Catholicity and the keeping holy of Sunday. Compromise is impossible.
—John Cardinal Gibbons, The Catholic Mirror, December 23, 1893.
9
9
22
1,850
Historical step by step on how the Sabbath change took place.
x.com/i/status/21101…
x.com/i/status/21101…
The Shocking History of the Sabbath change
If the Bible records an unbroken chain of Sabbath Observance from Eden In Genesis all the way to the apostles in the new testament, how did Sunday finds it's way into the gates of Christendom?
The transition of the weekly day of al Seventh-day Sabbath (Saturday) to Sunday is one of the most thoroughly documented shifts in religious history. It did not happen overnight, nor was it authorized by an apostle or a divine decree. Instead, it was implemented through a series of political maneuvers, imperial edicts, and ecclesiastical canons designed to blend pagan culture with a transforming church.
Here are the critical historical records and human decrees that officially executed the shift.
• The Geopolitical Catalyst: Anti-Semitism (1st – 3rd Century):
Following the death of the apostles, major geopolitical shifts rocked the Roman Empire. The Jews launched multiple bloody rebellions against Rome (such as the Bar Kokhba revolt). In response, the Roman Emperors systematically criminalized Jewish practices, explicitly targeting circumcision and seventh-day Sabbath keeping.
To avoid brutal persecution and execution, many early Christians in the capital city of Rome began to distance themselves from anything that looked "Jewish." They gradually minimized the Sabbath and elevated Sunday a day already popularized by Roman sun worship as a political shield to prove they were not part of the Jewish rebellions.
• The First Civil Sunday Law: Constantine’s Edict (March 7, 321 AD):
The official legal pivot occurred under Emperor Constantine the Great. Constantine was a lifelong devotee of the pagan sun god, Sol Invictus (the Unconquered Sun). When he nominally converted to Christianity, he sought a way to politically unify his fractured empire, which was deeply split between pagans and Christians.
On March 7, 321 AD, Constantine issued the first civil law mandating Sunday rest. The original Latin text reveals his true motive:
"On the venerable Day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed." Edict of Constantine, Codex Justinianus, lib. 3, tit.
Constantine did not call it the "Lord's Day" or the "Christian Sabbath." He legally enforced rest on the Dies Solis (Day of the Sun). This clever decree allowed pagans to continue honoring their sun god while compromised Christians used it to celebrate the resurrection, merging the two groups into a single imperial religion.
• The Ecclesiastical Lock: The Council of Laodicea (circa 363–364 AD):
While Constantine made Sunday rest a civil requirement, the seventh-day Sabbath was still widely kept by faithful Christians throughout the empire. The Roman church needed an official ecclesiastical decree to completely crush biblical Sabbath keeping. This happened at the Council of Laodicea, a regional synod of clerics assembled in Phrygia (modern-day Turkey). The council passed 60 religious laws (canons). Canon 29 explicitly outlawed the biblical Sabbath and attached a spiritual curse to anyone who kept it:
"Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord’s Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema [accursed/excommunicated] from Christ." (Council of Laodicea, Canon XXIX)
This single human decree did three things:
1. It turned the fourth commandment into a sin labeled "Judaizing".
2. It legally ordered Christians to violate God’s holy day by working on Saturday.
3. It weaponized excommunication against anyone who chose to obey God rather than men.
• The Audacious Historical Admission:
The Roman Catholic Church does not deny this history. In fact, it openly claims the transfer of the Sabbath as a monument of its own human, ecclesiastical authority over the plain text of Scripture.
The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine):
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.
Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae:
"The observance of the Lord's day took the place of the observance of the Sabbath, not by virtue of the precept of the law, but by the institution of the Church."
Cardinal James Gibbons (The Faith of Our Fathers, 110th ed., p. 89):
"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."
Bishop Thomas Enright (President of Redemptorist College, Kansas City, MO, Feb. 18, 1884):
"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 Catholic Church alone. The Catholic Church says, '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 reverent obedience to the command of the Holy Catholic Church."
Monsignor Louis de Ségur (Plain Talk About the Protestantism of Today, 1868, p. 213):
"It was the Catholic Church which, by the authority of Jesus Christ, has transferred this rest to the Sunday in remembrance of the resurrection of our Lord. Thus the observance of Sunday by the Protestants is an homage they pay, in spite of themselves, to the authority of the Church."
While early church councils (like Laodicea) set the theological trap, it lacked global civil teeth until the rise of Emperor Justinian. The year 538 AD stands as the definitive legal pivot point where church dogma became enforced by imperial blood.
533 AD: Justinian issues Decree ───► 538 AD: Siege of Rome Lifts ───► Enforced Uniformity
(Pope named Head of All Churches) (Ostrogoths defeated; Code alive) (Sabbath-keepers persecuted)
In 533 AD, Justinian issued a series of legal letters (later compiled into the Codex Justinianus) officially recognizing the Bishop of Rome as the "Head of all the holy churches". However, this decree was legally dead on arrival in the West because Rome was occupied and ruled by the Ostrogoths, an Arian Christian kingdom that championed religious tolerance and refused to bow to papal decrees.
That changed in February 538 AD. Justinian’s general, Belisarius, shattered the Gothic siege of Rome, routing the Ostrogoths out of the capital.
With the primary civil obstacle eradicated, the Justinian Code became the active supreme law of the Western world. Religious dissent was stripped of all legal protection.
In that very same year (538 AD), the Third Council of Orléans assembled. Canon 29 of this council expanded Constantine's original Sunday legislation. It decreed that while heavy field labor was permitted on Sunday, all other regular labor, travel, and personal domestic work were strictly banned so people could attend church.
Through Justinian’s Novellae CXLIV (New Constitutions), severe civil penalties and property confiscation were officially unleashed against heretics, Jews, and any private assemblies who persisted in keeping the Seventh-day Sabbath. Church and State had welded into an absolute entity.
• The Blood of the Faithful: Waldensians and Celtic Christians:
When the smoke cleared from the Justinian alignment, the vast majority of the civilized world bowed. Yet, on the fringes of the empire, pockets of apostolic believers refused to trade the law of the Creator for the law of the Roman Emperor. They paid for their fidelity in blood.
• The Celtic Christians (Great Britain & Ireland):
Centuries before Rome ever successfully sent missionaries to England, the early British and Scottish churches operated completely independently of papal authority. Planted by early missionaries using the apostolic blueprint, these Celtic believers clung tightly to the Bible.
The Historical Witness: The historic record reveals that the early Culdees of Scotland, under the leadership of the missionary St. Columba, kept the seventh-day Saturday Sabbath as their sacred day of rest.
The early church historian T. Ratcliffe Barnett wrote in Margaret of Scotland: Queen and Saint:
"They held that Saturday was the Sabbath... They worked on Sunday, but kept Saturday holy."
At the Synod of Whitby (664 AD), the Roman church successfully cornered the Celtic leaders. Using the pressure of the Anglo-Saxon kings, Rome forced the Celtic church to abandon its independent customs, including its calendar and Sabbath-keeping, driving the remaining faithful into the rugged, isolated hills of Scotland and Ireland to escape papal oversight.
• The Waldensians (The Alpine Valleys):
Deep within the jagged, snow-capped peaks of the Cottian Alps, a community of ancient believers known as the Waldenses preserved the unfiltered Word of God throughout the entirety of the Dark Ages.
▲ Waldensian Valley Sanctuaries (Preserved Scripture)
▲▲
▲▲▲ ◄── Papal Armies Sent via Crusades
══════════════════════════════════════════ Inquisition & Confiscation across the Empire
Long before Martin Luther, the Waldensians possessed the Bible in their native tongue. They memorized entire books of Scripture and hand-copied them in secret underground caves.
Because they rejected the traditions of Rome, Catholic inquisitors tracked them ruthlessly. The medieval Roman Catholic historian and inquisitor Gretser wrote of them:
"They do not accept the decrees of the Church... They observe the Seventh-day Sabbath."
Because they refused to give up the Sabbath and buy into papal supremacy, the Papacy declared full-scale crusades against them. In 1487, Pope Innocent VIII issued a papal bull commanding the total extermination of the Waldensians.
Imperial armies marched into their peaceful mountain valleys, trapping men, women, and children in caves, suffocating them with smoke, throwing them off sheer cliffs, and burning them alive at the stake. Despite centuries of literal genocide, the surviving line of these mountain missionaries never yielded their loyalty to the biblical Commandments.
The historical record leaves no room for ambiguity. The shift from Saturday to Sunday was entirely a work of human creation, constructed by a pagan emperor seeking political unity and finalized by a compromised church council that went so far as to curse those who kept the commandments of God.
The critical question that remains is entirely foundational:
If the change was instituted by human decree, whose authority do we recognize when we worship - the Word of the Creator, or the law of the Emperor?
0
0
2
53
The Logic Trap
You say: “Bible only!”
But you keep Sunday not in the Bible.
Rome says: “Then accept our other traditions too!”
You can’t have it both ways.
Either Scripture alone → Saturday
Or tradition + Scripture → Rome wins.
Choose this day whom you will serve.
You say: “Bible only!”
But you keep Sunday not in the Bible.
Rome says: “Then accept our other traditions too!”
You can’t have it both ways.
Either Scripture alone → Saturday
Or tradition + Scripture → Rome wins.
Choose this day whom you will serve.
28
7
37
2,827
Tackling Sabbath major objections
x.com/renewingprotes…
x.com/renewingprotes…
Overcoming every major objection to the Seventh-day Sabbath Observance.
Objection 1: “We keep Sunday in honor of the Resurrection. Sunday is the new New Testament ‘Lord’s Day.’”
This is the most common emotional defense. It argues that because Jesus rose on the first day of the aturday was automatically transferred to Sunday to celebrate the New Covenant.
You can read the New Testament from the first verse of Matthew to the last verse of Revelation, and you will find not a single syllable stating that the holiness of the Sabbath was transferred to Sunday, nor will you find a single command to keep Sunday holy.
Human beings do not have the authority to alter God’s signature. God explicitly blessed and sanctified the Seventh day at Creation [Genesis 2:3]. For Sunday to become holy, God would have to explicitly speak, remove His blessing from Saturday, and place it on Sunday. He never did.
Furthermore, Jesus Himself explicitly defined what the true "Lord's Day" actually is. He declared,
“The Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath” (Mark 2:28).
If Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath day, then the Seventh-day Saturday is the only literal "Lord’s Day" recognized by Heaven. We honor the resurrection through biblical baptism (Romans 6:3-4), not by breaking the Fourth Commandment.
Objection 2: “The Sabbath was a temporary Jewish ritual given only at Mount Sinai.”
Most believers claim that the Sabbath belongs to the Old Covenant legal system meant only for ethnic Israel, and has no relevance for modern Gentile Christians.
However, the Devastating Reality is this: The Sabbath was instituted at the close of Creation week, 2,500 years before the first Jewish person ever existed [Genesis 2:2-3]. God blessed and set the day apart in a sinless Eden when Adam stood as the representative for all of humanity.
• ⏸️ Pause and read again: In Exodus 16 before Israel ever reached Mount Sinai or received the stone tablets, God rained manna from heaven to test if the people would keep His Sabbath [Exodus 16:4, 26].
You cannot "forget" a law that hasn't been given yet, nor can you be accused of "refusing to keep My commandments" [Exodus 16:28] if the commandments don't exist. Jesus definitively closed this argument:
“The Sabbath was made for man” (Mark 2:27).
He used the Greek word Anthropos meaning humanity, not just the Jew.
Objection 3: “Paul said the Sabbath was nailed to the cross in Colossians 2:16.”
This is the most commonly butchered scripture against Sabbath Observance claiming: Paul writes, "Let no one judge you... regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths," proving Christians are free from Sabbath-keeping.
This objection completely conflates the Moral Law (the Ten Commandments written by God on stone) with the Ceremonial Law (the sacrificial system written by Moses in a book).
Look at the original Greek text. Paul frames his sentence using a precise Old Testament blueprint: "a festival [ἑορτῆς - yearly feasts], a new moon [νουμηνίας - monthly celebrations], or sabbaths [σαββάτων - yearly ceremonial rest days]." This exact three-part phrasing is used repeatedly in the Old Testament (e.g., Ezekiel 45:17, Hosea 2:11) to specify the shadow rituals of the Levitical sanctuary.
Paul explicitly states these sabbaths were a "shadow of things to come" (Colossians 2:17). The weekly Seventh-day Sabbath cannot be a shadow pointing forward to the cross, because it was created before sin ever entered the universe (Genesis 2:2-3). It points backward to a perfect Creation. The ceremonial sabbaths (like Passover) ceased at Calvary; the moral Seventh-day Sabbath stands eternal.
Objection 4: “Romans 14 proves that day-keeping is entirely optional for a Christian. We can choose any day we want.”
Romans 14:5 states, "One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind."
Sadly, this is also used to claim day-worship is entirely optional.
• The Scriptural Reality: The word "Sabbath" does not appear anywhere in the entire book of Romans.
---> Context is key: Romans 14 is a discussion entirely focused on food, fasting, and Jewish ceremonial fast days.
• The Devastating Proof: The early church was experiencing bitter disputes between Jewish and Gentile converts regarding "doubtful disputations" (v. 1), specifically eating meat vs. vegetarianism (v. 2) and fasting. Jewish tradition demanded fasting on specific days of the week (such as Tuesdays and Thursdays). Paul is telling the church not to break fellowship over humanly appointed fast days.
To stretch a passage about fasting to mean that a Christian has the authority to abolish one of the literal Ten Commandments spoken by the voice of Almighty God is an absolute distortion of the text.
Objection 5: “Hebrews 4 teaches that the Sabbath is now just a spiritual rest in Christ.”
The Protestant Claim that the Sabbath has been spiritualized away; we no longer keep a literal 24-hour day because Jesus is our continuous rest.
The Devastating Reality is that Hebrews 4 is actually the most bulletproof New Testament proof text for literal Seventh-day Sabbath keeping.
In Hebrews 4:4, the author anchors his definition of rest directly to the literal Seventh day of Creation week (Hebrews 4:4). Then, in Hebrews 4:9, the Holy Spirit abruptly introduces a highly technical Greek noun found nowhere else in the New Testament: σαββατισμός (Sabbatismos).
While the rest of the chapter uses katapausis (general rest), verse 9 declares: “There remains therefore a rest [σαββατισμός - Sabbatismos] for the people of God.” In first-century Greek literature, Sabbatismos had only one definition: the physical, literal keeping of the Seventh-day Sabbath. Verse 10 seals the mandate:
“For he who has entered His rest has himself also ceased from his works as God did from His.”
How did God cease? He physically stopped His labor on the Seventh day.
Objection 6: “The early church officially met on Sunday in Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2.”
Protestant Claim that the New Testament records the apostles systematically gathering for worship, breaking bread, and collecting tithes on the first day of the week.
But Neither of these verses describes a Sunday morning worship service, nor do they contain a command to alter God's law.
• Acts 20:7 describes a meeting where Paul preached until midnight. In biblical timekeeping, a day begins at sunset (Genesis 1:5). Therefore, this "first day of the week" meeting occurred on Saturday night. When the sun came up on Sunday morning, what did Paul do? He packed his bags and walked a brutal 19 miles from Troas to Assos (Acts 20:13-14). If Sunday was holy, Paul flagrantly violated it by spending the entire day engaged in hard physical travel.
• 1 Corinthians 16:2 commands believers to "lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper" on the first day of the week. The original Greek text uses the phrase par’ heautō tithetō, which literally means "let him place by himself at home." Paul was not passing a collection plate at a church service; he was telling believers to do their private household accounting and budgeting on Sunday morning so that a localized famine relief fund would be ready when he arrived.
Objection 7: “The New Testament never explicitly re-commands the Sabbath.”
Many Protestants claim that because the New Testament does not feature an explicit, repetitive command enforcing Saturday rest for Christians, it is no longer binding.
• The Devastating Reality:
You only command a law that is being widely broken, forgotten, or changed. Every single author of the New Testament, and every early convert, was a strict Sabbath-keeper who met systematically on Saturday (Acts 13:42-44)
There was zero debate about the day of worship in the early church (Acts 15)
If a law is only valid if it is explicitly re-commanded in the New Testament, then Christians are free to practice bestiality, incest, and use pejorative nicknames, as none of these are explicitly detailed in New Testament lists.
Furthermore, Jesus did command its preservation. Prophesying about the destruction of Jerusalem which occurred in 70 AD, decades after the cross, Jesus explicitly ordered His followers:
“And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath” (Matthew 24:20). He fiercely protected its physical sanctity decades into the Christian dispensation.
Objection 8: “We are under grace, not the law. The Old Testament commandments are done away with.”
This is the ultimate catch-all argument. It claims that because Christians are saved by faith in Christ, the literal keeping of the Decalogue is an act of legalism that denies the finished work of grace.
Grace is not a license to violate God’s moral boundaries; grace is the supernatural power to finally fulfill them.
Scripture defines sin with absolute precision: “Sin is the transgression of the law” (1 John 3:4).
If the Ten Commandments were abolished at the cross, then sin no longer exists on earth. And if sin no longer exists, then no one is a sinner, no one needs a Savior, and Christ died for nothing. When asked this exact question, Paul wrote with absolute clarity:
“Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law” (Romans 3:31).
No Sunday-keeping Christian would ever argue that being "under grace" means they are now free to steal, murder, lie, or commit adultery.
Why then do we instantly switch our logic and claim that grace gives us a divine hall pass to violate the one commandment God explicitly screamed at us to “Remember”?
By whose authority do you stand on Sunday?
You claim Sola Scriptura, the Bible and the Bible alone. Yet, you willingly abandon a commandment written by the finger of God (Exodus 31:18) to observe a day that exists only because of the imperial edicts of a pagan emperor (Constantine) and the human canons of the Roman Catholic Church.
By keeping Sunday, Protestants reject their own foundational principle of the Bible alone, subconsciously bowing to the ecclesiastical authority of church tradition over the immutable Word of the Living God.
Protestantism stands at an uncomfortable theological crossroad.
If you cling to Sunday, you are abandoning Sola Scriptura. You are choosing to recognize the civil edicts of a pagan emperor (Constantine's Sunday Law of 321 AD) and the ecclesiastical decrees of a church council (the Council of Laodicea, which cursed Sabbath-keepers) over the immutable, finger-written Law of Almighty God.
The question is no longer about a day of the week. It is about a throne of authority. Are you following the Word of your Creator, or the traditions of men?
1
0
1
139
Search the Scriptures retweeted
If love replaces God's commandments, why did Jesus say, “If ye love me, keep my commandments”? (John 14:15).
Biblical love does not abolish obedience.
Love is the motive. Obedience is the evidence.
Biblical love does not abolish obedience.
Love is the motive. Obedience is the evidence.
4
6
20
418
If judgment begins only after Christ returns, why does Daniel see the heavenly court sit before the Son of man receives the kingdom? (Daniel 7:9–14).
The sequence matters.
Judgment → kingdom → Christ's coming.
Read the prophecy before importing the timeline.
The sequence matters.
Judgment → kingdom → Christ's coming.
Read the prophecy before importing the timeline.
1
1
8
321
David could say,
“O how love I thy law!” (Psalm 119:97)
Why?
Because he loved the God behind it. People who know God’s character don’t see His law as a burden. They see it as the expression of His goodness. That’s why Revelation’s final conflict centers on obedience. Not through keeping the law. It doesn’t. But because obedience reveals where our loyalty rests.
Satan has never needed to erase God’s law. He only has to change how people think about it. Convince them it’s outdated. Convince them it’s impossible. Convince them that grace makes it unnecessary. The result is always the same. A kingdom without a King. A faith without submission. A religion without holiness. It’s the first rebellion all over again. renewingprotest.substack.com/p/the-characte…
“O how love I thy law!” (Psalm 119:97)
Why?
Because he loved the God behind it. People who know God’s character don’t see His law as a burden. They see it as the expression of His goodness. That’s why Revelation’s final conflict centers on obedience. Not through keeping the law. It doesn’t. But because obedience reveals where our loyalty rests.
Satan has never needed to erase God’s law. He only has to change how people think about it. Convince them it’s outdated. Convince them it’s impossible. Convince them that grace makes it unnecessary. The result is always the same. A kingdom without a King. A faith without submission. A religion without holiness. It’s the first rebellion all over again. renewingprotest.substack.com/p/the-characte…
5
2
21
494
God has placed every human being on a trial, as were Adam and Eve in Eden. As the tree of knowledge was placed in the midst of the garden of Eden, so the Sabbath command is placed in the midst of the Decalogue.
In regard to the fruit of the tree of knowledge, the restriction eat of it, ... lest ye die.’ Of the Sabbath, God said, Ye shall not defile it, but keep it holy. ‘Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.’
As the tree of knowledge was the test of Adam’s obedience, so the fourth command is the test that God has given to prove the loyalty of all His people. The experience of Adam is to be a warning to us so long as time shall last. It warns us not to receive any assurance from the mouth of mortals or of angels that will detract one jot or tittle from the sacred law of Jehovah.
In regard to the fruit of the tree of knowledge, the restriction eat of it, ... lest ye die.’ Of the Sabbath, God said, Ye shall not defile it, but keep it holy. ‘Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.’
As the tree of knowledge was the test of Adam’s obedience, so the fourth command is the test that God has given to prove the loyalty of all His people. The experience of Adam is to be a warning to us so long as time shall last. It warns us not to receive any assurance from the mouth of mortals or of angels that will detract one jot or tittle from the sacred law of Jehovah.
8
6
31
1,601
Search the Scriptures retweeted
Overcoming every major objection to the Seventh-day Sabbath Observance.
Objection 1: “We keep Sunday in honor of the Resurrection. Sunday is the new New Testament ‘Lord’s Day.’”
This is the most common emotional defense. It argues that because Jesus rose on the first day of the aturday was automatically transferred to Sunday to celebrate the New Covenant.
You can read the New Testament from the first verse of Matthew to the last verse of Revelation, and you will find not a single syllable stating that the holiness of the Sabbath was transferred to Sunday, nor will you find a single command to keep Sunday holy.
Human beings do not have the authority to alter God’s signature. God explicitly blessed and sanctified the Seventh day at Creation [Genesis 2:3]. For Sunday to become holy, God would have to explicitly speak, remove His blessing from Saturday, and place it on Sunday. He never did.
Furthermore, Jesus Himself explicitly defined what the true "Lord's Day" actually is. He declared,
“The Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath” (Mark 2:28).
If Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath day, then the Seventh-day Saturday is the only literal "Lord’s Day" recognized by Heaven. We honor the resurrection through biblical baptism (Romans 6:3-4), not by breaking the Fourth Commandment.
Objection 2: “The Sabbath was a temporary Jewish ritual given only at Mount Sinai.”
Most believers claim that the Sabbath belongs to the Old Covenant legal system meant only for ethnic Israel, and has no relevance for modern Gentile Christians.
However, the Devastating Reality is this: The Sabbath was instituted at the close of Creation week, 2,500 years before the first Jewish person ever existed [Genesis 2:2-3]. God blessed and set the day apart in a sinless Eden when Adam stood as the representative for all of humanity.
• ⏸️ Pause and read again: In Exodus 16 before Israel ever reached Mount Sinai or received the stone tablets, God rained manna from heaven to test if the people would keep His Sabbath [Exodus 16:4, 26].
You cannot "forget" a law that hasn't been given yet, nor can you be accused of "refusing to keep My commandments" [Exodus 16:28] if the commandments don't exist. Jesus definitively closed this argument:
“The Sabbath was made for man” (Mark 2:27).
He used the Greek word Anthropos meaning humanity, not just the Jew.
Objection 3: “Paul said the Sabbath was nailed to the cross in Colossians 2:16.”
This is the most commonly butchered scripture against Sabbath Observance claiming: Paul writes, "Let no one judge you... regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths," proving Christians are free from Sabbath-keeping.
This objection completely conflates the Moral Law (the Ten Commandments written by God on stone) with the Ceremonial Law (the sacrificial system written by Moses in a book).
Look at the original Greek text. Paul frames his sentence using a precise Old Testament blueprint: "a festival [ἑορτῆς - yearly feasts], a new moon [νουμηνίας - monthly celebrations], or sabbaths [σαββάτων - yearly ceremonial rest days]." This exact three-part phrasing is used repeatedly in the Old Testament (e.g., Ezekiel 45:17, Hosea 2:11) to specify the shadow rituals of the Levitical sanctuary.
Paul explicitly states these sabbaths were a "shadow of things to come" (Colossians 2:17). The weekly Seventh-day Sabbath cannot be a shadow pointing forward to the cross, because it was created before sin ever entered the universe (Genesis 2:2-3). It points backward to a perfect Creation. The ceremonial sabbaths (like Passover) ceased at Calvary; the moral Seventh-day Sabbath stands eternal.
Objection 4: “Romans 14 proves that day-keeping is entirely optional for a Christian. We can choose any day we want.”
Romans 14:5 states, "One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind."
Sadly, this is also used to claim day-worship is entirely optional.
• The Scriptural Reality: The word "Sabbath" does not appear anywhere in the entire book of Romans.
---> Context is key: Romans 14 is a discussion entirely focused on food, fasting, and Jewish ceremonial fast days.
• The Devastating Proof: The early church was experiencing bitter disputes between Jewish and Gentile converts regarding "doubtful disputations" (v. 1), specifically eating meat vs. vegetarianism (v. 2) and fasting. Jewish tradition demanded fasting on specific days of the week (such as Tuesdays and Thursdays). Paul is telling the church not to break fellowship over humanly appointed fast days.
To stretch a passage about fasting to mean that a Christian has the authority to abolish one of the literal Ten Commandments spoken by the voice of Almighty God is an absolute distortion of the text.
Objection 5: “Hebrews 4 teaches that the Sabbath is now just a spiritual rest in Christ.”
The Protestant Claim that the Sabbath has been spiritualized away; we no longer keep a literal 24-hour day because Jesus is our continuous rest.
The Devastating Reality is that Hebrews 4 is actually the most bulletproof New Testament proof text for literal Seventh-day Sabbath keeping.
In Hebrews 4:4, the author anchors his definition of rest directly to the literal Seventh day of Creation week (Hebrews 4:4). Then, in Hebrews 4:9, the Holy Spirit abruptly introduces a highly technical Greek noun found nowhere else in the New Testament: σαββατισμός (Sabbatismos).
While the rest of the chapter uses katapausis (general rest), verse 9 declares: “There remains therefore a rest [σαββατισμός - Sabbatismos] for the people of God.” In first-century Greek literature, Sabbatismos had only one definition: the physical, literal keeping of the Seventh-day Sabbath. Verse 10 seals the mandate:
“For he who has entered His rest has himself also ceased from his works as God did from His.”
How did God cease? He physically stopped His labor on the Seventh day.
Objection 6: “The early church officially met on Sunday in Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2.”
Protestant Claim that the New Testament records the apostles systematically gathering for worship, breaking bread, and collecting tithes on the first day of the week.
But Neither of these verses describes a Sunday morning worship service, nor do they contain a command to alter God's law.
• Acts 20:7 describes a meeting where Paul preached until midnight. In biblical timekeeping, a day begins at sunset (Genesis 1:5). Therefore, this "first day of the week" meeting occurred on Saturday night. When the sun came up on Sunday morning, what did Paul do? He packed his bags and walked a brutal 19 miles from Troas to Assos (Acts 20:13-14). If Sunday was holy, Paul flagrantly violated it by spending the entire day engaged in hard physical travel.
• 1 Corinthians 16:2 commands believers to "lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper" on the first day of the week. The original Greek text uses the phrase par’ heautō tithetō, which literally means "let him place by himself at home." Paul was not passing a collection plate at a church service; he was telling believers to do their private household accounting and budgeting on Sunday morning so that a localized famine relief fund would be ready when he arrived.
Objection 7: “The New Testament never explicitly re-commands the Sabbath.”
Many Protestants claim that because the New Testament does not feature an explicit, repetitive command enforcing Saturday rest for Christians, it is no longer binding.
• The Devastating Reality:
You only command a law that is being widely broken, forgotten, or changed. Every single author of the New Testament, and every early convert, was a strict Sabbath-keeper who met systematically on Saturday (Acts 13:42-44)
There was zero debate about the day of worship in the early church (Acts 15)
If a law is only valid if it is explicitly re-commanded in the New Testament, then Christians are free to practice bestiality, incest, and use pejorative nicknames, as none of these are explicitly detailed in New Testament lists.
Furthermore, Jesus did command its preservation. Prophesying about the destruction of Jerusalem which occurred in 70 AD, decades after the cross, Jesus explicitly ordered His followers:
“And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath” (Matthew 24:20). He fiercely protected its physical sanctity decades into the Christian dispensation.
Objection 8: “We are under grace, not the law. The Old Testament commandments are done away with.”
This is the ultimate catch-all argument. It claims that because Christians are saved by faith in Christ, the literal keeping of the Decalogue is an act of legalism that denies the finished work of grace.
Grace is not a license to violate God’s moral boundaries; grace is the supernatural power to finally fulfill them.
Scripture defines sin with absolute precision: “Sin is the transgression of the law” (1 John 3:4).
If the Ten Commandments were abolished at the cross, then sin no longer exists on earth. And if sin no longer exists, then no one is a sinner, no one needs a Savior, and Christ died for nothing. When asked this exact question, Paul wrote with absolute clarity:
“Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law” (Romans 3:31).
No Sunday-keeping Christian would ever argue that being "under grace" means they are now free to steal, murder, lie, or commit adultery.
Why then do we instantly switch our logic and claim that grace gives us a divine hall pass to violate the one commandment God explicitly screamed at us to “Remember”?
By whose authority do you stand on Sunday?
You claim Sola Scriptura, the Bible and the Bible alone. Yet, you willingly abandon a commandment written by the finger of God (Exodus 31:18) to observe a day that exists only because of the imperial edicts of a pagan emperor (Constantine) and the human canons of the Roman Catholic Church.
By keeping Sunday, Protestants reject their own foundational principle of the Bible alone, subconsciously bowing to the ecclesiastical authority of church tradition over the immutable Word of the Living God.
Protestantism stands at an uncomfortable theological crossroad.
If you cling to Sunday, you are abandoning Sola Scriptura. You are choosing to recognize the civil edicts of a pagan emperor (Constantine's Sunday Law of 321 AD) and the ecclesiastical decrees of a church council (the Council of Laodicea, which cursed Sabbath-keepers) over the immutable, finger-written Law of Almighty God.
The question is no longer about a day of the week. It is about a throne of authority. Are you following the Word of your Creator, or the traditions of men?
Objection 1: “We keep Sunday in honor of the Resurrection. Sunday is the new New Testament ‘Lord’s Day.’”
This is the most common emotional defense. It argues that because Jesus rose on the first day of the aturday was automatically transferred to Sunday to celebrate the New Covenant.
You can read the New Testament from the first verse of Matthew to the last verse of Revelation, and you will find not a single syllable stating that the holiness of the Sabbath was transferred to Sunday, nor will you find a single command to keep Sunday holy.
Human beings do not have the authority to alter God’s signature. God explicitly blessed and sanctified the Seventh day at Creation [Genesis 2:3]. For Sunday to become holy, God would have to explicitly speak, remove His blessing from Saturday, and place it on Sunday. He never did.
Furthermore, Jesus Himself explicitly defined what the true "Lord's Day" actually is. He declared,
“The Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath” (Mark 2:28).
If Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath day, then the Seventh-day Saturday is the only literal "Lord’s Day" recognized by Heaven. We honor the resurrection through biblical baptism (Romans 6:3-4), not by breaking the Fourth Commandment.
Objection 2: “The Sabbath was a temporary Jewish ritual given only at Mount Sinai.”
Most believers claim that the Sabbath belongs to the Old Covenant legal system meant only for ethnic Israel, and has no relevance for modern Gentile Christians.
However, the Devastating Reality is this: The Sabbath was instituted at the close of Creation week, 2,500 years before the first Jewish person ever existed [Genesis 2:2-3]. God blessed and set the day apart in a sinless Eden when Adam stood as the representative for all of humanity.
• ⏸️ Pause and read again: In Exodus 16 before Israel ever reached Mount Sinai or received the stone tablets, God rained manna from heaven to test if the people would keep His Sabbath [Exodus 16:4, 26].
You cannot "forget" a law that hasn't been given yet, nor can you be accused of "refusing to keep My commandments" [Exodus 16:28] if the commandments don't exist. Jesus definitively closed this argument:
“The Sabbath was made for man” (Mark 2:27).
He used the Greek word Anthropos meaning humanity, not just the Jew.
Objection 3: “Paul said the Sabbath was nailed to the cross in Colossians 2:16.”
This is the most commonly butchered scripture against Sabbath Observance claiming: Paul writes, "Let no one judge you... regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths," proving Christians are free from Sabbath-keeping.
This objection completely conflates the Moral Law (the Ten Commandments written by God on stone) with the Ceremonial Law (the sacrificial system written by Moses in a book).
Look at the original Greek text. Paul frames his sentence using a precise Old Testament blueprint: "a festival [ἑορτῆς - yearly feasts], a new moon [νουμηνίας - monthly celebrations], or sabbaths [σαββάτων - yearly ceremonial rest days]." This exact three-part phrasing is used repeatedly in the Old Testament (e.g., Ezekiel 45:17, Hosea 2:11) to specify the shadow rituals of the Levitical sanctuary.
Paul explicitly states these sabbaths were a "shadow of things to come" (Colossians 2:17). The weekly Seventh-day Sabbath cannot be a shadow pointing forward to the cross, because it was created before sin ever entered the universe (Genesis 2:2-3). It points backward to a perfect Creation. The ceremonial sabbaths (like Passover) ceased at Calvary; the moral Seventh-day Sabbath stands eternal.
Objection 4: “Romans 14 proves that day-keeping is entirely optional for a Christian. We can choose any day we want.”
Romans 14:5 states, "One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind."
Sadly, this is also used to claim day-worship is entirely optional.
• The Scriptural Reality: The word "Sabbath" does not appear anywhere in the entire book of Romans.
---> Context is key: Romans 14 is a discussion entirely focused on food, fasting, and Jewish ceremonial fast days.
• The Devastating Proof: The early church was experiencing bitter disputes between Jewish and Gentile converts regarding "doubtful disputations" (v. 1), specifically eating meat vs. vegetarianism (v. 2) and fasting. Jewish tradition demanded fasting on specific days of the week (such as Tuesdays and Thursdays). Paul is telling the church not to break fellowship over humanly appointed fast days.
To stretch a passage about fasting to mean that a Christian has the authority to abolish one of the literal Ten Commandments spoken by the voice of Almighty God is an absolute distortion of the text.
Objection 5: “Hebrews 4 teaches that the Sabbath is now just a spiritual rest in Christ.”
The Protestant Claim that the Sabbath has been spiritualized away; we no longer keep a literal 24-hour day because Jesus is our continuous rest.
The Devastating Reality is that Hebrews 4 is actually the most bulletproof New Testament proof text for literal Seventh-day Sabbath keeping.
In Hebrews 4:4, the author anchors his definition of rest directly to the literal Seventh day of Creation week (Hebrews 4:4). Then, in Hebrews 4:9, the Holy Spirit abruptly introduces a highly technical Greek noun found nowhere else in the New Testament: σαββατισμός (Sabbatismos).
While the rest of the chapter uses katapausis (general rest), verse 9 declares: “There remains therefore a rest [σαββατισμός - Sabbatismos] for the people of God.” In first-century Greek literature, Sabbatismos had only one definition: the physical, literal keeping of the Seventh-day Sabbath. Verse 10 seals the mandate:
“For he who has entered His rest has himself also ceased from his works as God did from His.”
How did God cease? He physically stopped His labor on the Seventh day.
Objection 6: “The early church officially met on Sunday in Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2.”
Protestant Claim that the New Testament records the apostles systematically gathering for worship, breaking bread, and collecting tithes on the first day of the week.
But Neither of these verses describes a Sunday morning worship service, nor do they contain a command to alter God's law.
• Acts 20:7 describes a meeting where Paul preached until midnight. In biblical timekeeping, a day begins at sunset (Genesis 1:5). Therefore, this "first day of the week" meeting occurred on Saturday night. When the sun came up on Sunday morning, what did Paul do? He packed his bags and walked a brutal 19 miles from Troas to Assos (Acts 20:13-14). If Sunday was holy, Paul flagrantly violated it by spending the entire day engaged in hard physical travel.
• 1 Corinthians 16:2 commands believers to "lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper" on the first day of the week. The original Greek text uses the phrase par’ heautō tithetō, which literally means "let him place by himself at home." Paul was not passing a collection plate at a church service; he was telling believers to do their private household accounting and budgeting on Sunday morning so that a localized famine relief fund would be ready when he arrived.
Objection 7: “The New Testament never explicitly re-commands the Sabbath.”
Many Protestants claim that because the New Testament does not feature an explicit, repetitive command enforcing Saturday rest for Christians, it is no longer binding.
• The Devastating Reality:
You only command a law that is being widely broken, forgotten, or changed. Every single author of the New Testament, and every early convert, was a strict Sabbath-keeper who met systematically on Saturday (Acts 13:42-44)
There was zero debate about the day of worship in the early church (Acts 15)
If a law is only valid if it is explicitly re-commanded in the New Testament, then Christians are free to practice bestiality, incest, and use pejorative nicknames, as none of these are explicitly detailed in New Testament lists.
Furthermore, Jesus did command its preservation. Prophesying about the destruction of Jerusalem which occurred in 70 AD, decades after the cross, Jesus explicitly ordered His followers:
“And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath” (Matthew 24:20). He fiercely protected its physical sanctity decades into the Christian dispensation.
Objection 8: “We are under grace, not the law. The Old Testament commandments are done away with.”
This is the ultimate catch-all argument. It claims that because Christians are saved by faith in Christ, the literal keeping of the Decalogue is an act of legalism that denies the finished work of grace.
Grace is not a license to violate God’s moral boundaries; grace is the supernatural power to finally fulfill them.
Scripture defines sin with absolute precision: “Sin is the transgression of the law” (1 John 3:4).
If the Ten Commandments were abolished at the cross, then sin no longer exists on earth. And if sin no longer exists, then no one is a sinner, no one needs a Savior, and Christ died for nothing. When asked this exact question, Paul wrote with absolute clarity:
“Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law” (Romans 3:31).
No Sunday-keeping Christian would ever argue that being "under grace" means they are now free to steal, murder, lie, or commit adultery.
Why then do we instantly switch our logic and claim that grace gives us a divine hall pass to violate the one commandment God explicitly screamed at us to “Remember”?
By whose authority do you stand on Sunday?
You claim Sola Scriptura, the Bible and the Bible alone. Yet, you willingly abandon a commandment written by the finger of God (Exodus 31:18) to observe a day that exists only because of the imperial edicts of a pagan emperor (Constantine) and the human canons of the Roman Catholic Church.
By keeping Sunday, Protestants reject their own foundational principle of the Bible alone, subconsciously bowing to the ecclesiastical authority of church tradition over the immutable Word of the Living God.
Protestantism stands at an uncomfortable theological crossroad.
If you cling to Sunday, you are abandoning Sola Scriptura. You are choosing to recognize the civil edicts of a pagan emperor (Constantine's Sunday Law of 321 AD) and the ecclesiastical decrees of a church council (the Council of Laodicea, which cursed Sabbath-keepers) over the immutable, finger-written Law of Almighty God.
The question is no longer about a day of the week. It is about a throne of authority. Are you following the Word of your Creator, or the traditions of men?
15
12
24
2,416
If love replaces God's commandments, why did Jesus say, “If ye love me, keep my commandments”? (John 14:15).
Biblical love does not abolish obedience.
Love is the motive. Obedience is the evidence.
Biblical love does not abolish obedience.
Love is the motive. Obedience is the evidence.
4
6
20
418
Overcoming every major objection to the Seventh-day Sabbath Observance.
Objection 1: “We keep Sunday in honor of the Resurrection. Sunday is the new New Testament ‘Lord’s Day.’”
This is the most common emotional defense. It argues that because Jesus rose on the first day of the aturday was automatically transferred to Sunday to celebrate the New Covenant.
You can read the New Testament from the first verse of Matthew to the last verse of Revelation, and you will find not a single syllable stating that the holiness of the Sabbath was transferred to Sunday, nor will you find a single command to keep Sunday holy.
Human beings do not have the authority to alter God’s signature. God explicitly blessed and sanctified the Seventh day at Creation [Genesis 2:3]. For Sunday to become holy, God would have to explicitly speak, remove His blessing from Saturday, and place it on Sunday. He never did.
Furthermore, Jesus Himself explicitly defined what the true "Lord's Day" actually is. He declared,
“The Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath” (Mark 2:28).
If Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath day, then the Seventh-day Saturday is the only literal "Lord’s Day" recognized by Heaven. We honor the resurrection through biblical baptism (Romans 6:3-4), not by breaking the Fourth Commandment.
Objection 2: “The Sabbath was a temporary Jewish ritual given only at Mount Sinai.”
Most believers claim that the Sabbath belongs to the Old Covenant legal system meant only for ethnic Israel, and has no relevance for modern Gentile Christians.
However, the Devastating Reality is this: The Sabbath was instituted at the close of Creation week, 2,500 years before the first Jewish person ever existed [Genesis 2:2-3]. God blessed and set the day apart in a sinless Eden when Adam stood as the representative for all of humanity.
• ⏸️ Pause and read again: In Exodus 16 before Israel ever reached Mount Sinai or received the stone tablets, God rained manna from heaven to test if the people would keep His Sabbath [Exodus 16:4, 26].
You cannot "forget" a law that hasn't been given yet, nor can you be accused of "refusing to keep My commandments" [Exodus 16:28] if the commandments don't exist. Jesus definitively closed this argument:
“The Sabbath was made for man” (Mark 2:27).
He used the Greek word Anthropos meaning humanity, not just the Jew.
Objection 3: “Paul said the Sabbath was nailed to the cross in Colossians 2:16.”
This is the most commonly butchered scripture against Sabbath Observance claiming: Paul writes, "Let no one judge you... regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths," proving Christians are free from Sabbath-keeping.
This objection completely conflates the Moral Law (the Ten Commandments written by God on stone) with the Ceremonial Law (the sacrificial system written by Moses in a book).
Look at the original Greek text. Paul frames his sentence using a precise Old Testament blueprint: "a festival [ἑορτῆς - yearly feasts], a new moon [νουμηνίας - monthly celebrations], or sabbaths [σαββάτων - yearly ceremonial rest days]." This exact three-part phrasing is used repeatedly in the Old Testament (e.g., Ezekiel 45:17, Hosea 2:11) to specify the shadow rituals of the Levitical sanctuary.
Paul explicitly states these sabbaths were a "shadow of things to come" (Colossians 2:17). The weekly Seventh-day Sabbath cannot be a shadow pointing forward to the cross, because it was created before sin ever entered the universe (Genesis 2:2-3). It points backward to a perfect Creation. The ceremonial sabbaths (like Passover) ceased at Calvary; the moral Seventh-day Sabbath stands eternal.
Objection 4: “Romans 14 proves that day-keeping is entirely optional for a Christian. We can choose any day we want.”
Romans 14:5 states, "One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind."
Sadly, this is also used to claim day-worship is entirely optional.
• The Scriptural Reality: The word "Sabbath" does not appear anywhere in the entire book of Romans.
---> Context is key: Romans 14 is a discussion entirely focused on food, fasting, and Jewish ceremonial fast days.
• The Devastating Proof: The early church was experiencing bitter disputes between Jewish and Gentile converts regarding "doubtful disputations" (v. 1), specifically eating meat vs. vegetarianism (v. 2) and fasting. Jewish tradition demanded fasting on specific days of the week (such as Tuesdays and Thursdays). Paul is telling the church not to break fellowship over humanly appointed fast days.
To stretch a passage about fasting to mean that a Christian has the authority to abolish one of the literal Ten Commandments spoken by the voice of Almighty God is an absolute distortion of the text.
Objection 5: “Hebrews 4 teaches that the Sabbath is now just a spiritual rest in Christ.”
The Protestant Claim that the Sabbath has been spiritualized away; we no longer keep a literal 24-hour day because Jesus is our continuous rest.
The Devastating Reality is that Hebrews 4 is actually the most bulletproof New Testament proof text for literal Seventh-day Sabbath keeping.
In Hebrews 4:4, the author anchors his definition of rest directly to the literal Seventh day of Creation week (Hebrews 4:4). Then, in Hebrews 4:9, the Holy Spirit abruptly introduces a highly technical Greek noun found nowhere else in the New Testament: σαββατισμός (Sabbatismos).
While the rest of the chapter uses katapausis (general rest), verse 9 declares: “There remains therefore a rest [σαββατισμός - Sabbatismos] for the people of God.” In first-century Greek literature, Sabbatismos had only one definition: the physical, literal keeping of the Seventh-day Sabbath. Verse 10 seals the mandate:
“For he who has entered His rest has himself also ceased from his works as God did from His.”
How did God cease? He physically stopped His labor on the Seventh day.
Objection 6: “The early church officially met on Sunday in Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2.”
Protestant Claim that the New Testament records the apostles systematically gathering for worship, breaking bread, and collecting tithes on the first day of the week.
But Neither of these verses describes a Sunday morning worship service, nor do they contain a command to alter God's law.
• Acts 20:7 describes a meeting where Paul preached until midnight. In biblical timekeeping, a day begins at sunset (Genesis 1:5). Therefore, this "first day of the week" meeting occurred on Saturday night. When the sun came up on Sunday morning, what did Paul do? He packed his bags and walked a brutal 19 miles from Troas to Assos (Acts 20:13-14). If Sunday was holy, Paul flagrantly violated it by spending the entire day engaged in hard physical travel.
• 1 Corinthians 16:2 commands believers to "lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper" on the first day of the week. The original Greek text uses the phrase par’ heautō tithetō, which literally means "let him place by himself at home." Paul was not passing a collection plate at a church service; he was telling believers to do their private household accounting and budgeting on Sunday morning so that a localized famine relief fund would be ready when he arrived.
Objection 7: “The New Testament never explicitly re-commands the Sabbath.”
Many Protestants claim that because the New Testament does not feature an explicit, repetitive command enforcing Saturday rest for Christians, it is no longer binding.
• The Devastating Reality:
You only command a law that is being widely broken, forgotten, or changed. Every single author of the New Testament, and every early convert, was a strict Sabbath-keeper who met systematically on Saturday (Acts 13:42-44)
There was zero debate about the day of worship in the early church (Acts 15)
If a law is only valid if it is explicitly re-commanded in the New Testament, then Christians are free to practice bestiality, incest, and use pejorative nicknames, as none of these are explicitly detailed in New Testament lists.
Furthermore, Jesus did command its preservation. Prophesying about the destruction of Jerusalem which occurred in 70 AD, decades after the cross, Jesus explicitly ordered His followers:
“And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath” (Matthew 24:20). He fiercely protected its physical sanctity decades into the Christian dispensation.
Objection 8: “We are under grace, not the law. The Old Testament commandments are done away with.”
This is the ultimate catch-all argument. It claims that because Christians are saved by faith in Christ, the literal keeping of the Decalogue is an act of legalism that denies the finished work of grace.
Grace is not a license to violate God’s moral boundaries; grace is the supernatural power to finally fulfill them.
Scripture defines sin with absolute precision: “Sin is the transgression of the law” (1 John 3:4).
If the Ten Commandments were abolished at the cross, then sin no longer exists on earth. And if sin no longer exists, then no one is a sinner, no one needs a Savior, and Christ died for nothing. When asked this exact question, Paul wrote with absolute clarity:
“Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law” (Romans 3:31).
No Sunday-keeping Christian would ever argue that being "under grace" means they are now free to steal, murder, lie, or commit adultery.
Why then do we instantly switch our logic and claim that grace gives us a divine hall pass to violate the one commandment God explicitly screamed at us to “Remember”?
By whose authority do you stand on Sunday?
You claim Sola Scriptura, the Bible and the Bible alone. Yet, you willingly abandon a commandment written by the finger of God (Exodus 31:18) to observe a day that exists only because of the imperial edicts of a pagan emperor (Constantine) and the human canons of the Roman Catholic Church.
By keeping Sunday, Protestants reject their own foundational principle of the Bible alone, subconsciously bowing to the ecclesiastical authority of church tradition over the immutable Word of the Living God.
Protestantism stands at an uncomfortable theological crossroad.
If you cling to Sunday, you are abandoning Sola Scriptura. You are choosing to recognize the civil edicts of a pagan emperor (Constantine's Sunday Law of 321 AD) and the ecclesiastical decrees of a church council (the Council of Laodicea, which cursed Sabbath-keepers) over the immutable, finger-written Law of Almighty God.
The question is no longer about a day of the week. It is about a throne of authority. Are you following the Word of your Creator, or the traditions of men?
Objection 1: “We keep Sunday in honor of the Resurrection. Sunday is the new New Testament ‘Lord’s Day.’”
This is the most common emotional defense. It argues that because Jesus rose on the first day of the aturday was automatically transferred to Sunday to celebrate the New Covenant.
You can read the New Testament from the first verse of Matthew to the last verse of Revelation, and you will find not a single syllable stating that the holiness of the Sabbath was transferred to Sunday, nor will you find a single command to keep Sunday holy.
Human beings do not have the authority to alter God’s signature. God explicitly blessed and sanctified the Seventh day at Creation [Genesis 2:3]. For Sunday to become holy, God would have to explicitly speak, remove His blessing from Saturday, and place it on Sunday. He never did.
Furthermore, Jesus Himself explicitly defined what the true "Lord's Day" actually is. He declared,
“The Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath” (Mark 2:28).
If Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath day, then the Seventh-day Saturday is the only literal "Lord’s Day" recognized by Heaven. We honor the resurrection through biblical baptism (Romans 6:3-4), not by breaking the Fourth Commandment.
Objection 2: “The Sabbath was a temporary Jewish ritual given only at Mount Sinai.”
Most believers claim that the Sabbath belongs to the Old Covenant legal system meant only for ethnic Israel, and has no relevance for modern Gentile Christians.
However, the Devastating Reality is this: The Sabbath was instituted at the close of Creation week, 2,500 years before the first Jewish person ever existed [Genesis 2:2-3]. God blessed and set the day apart in a sinless Eden when Adam stood as the representative for all of humanity.
• ⏸️ Pause and read again: In Exodus 16 before Israel ever reached Mount Sinai or received the stone tablets, God rained manna from heaven to test if the people would keep His Sabbath [Exodus 16:4, 26].
You cannot "forget" a law that hasn't been given yet, nor can you be accused of "refusing to keep My commandments" [Exodus 16:28] if the commandments don't exist. Jesus definitively closed this argument:
“The Sabbath was made for man” (Mark 2:27).
He used the Greek word Anthropos meaning humanity, not just the Jew.
Objection 3: “Paul said the Sabbath was nailed to the cross in Colossians 2:16.”
This is the most commonly butchered scripture against Sabbath Observance claiming: Paul writes, "Let no one judge you... regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths," proving Christians are free from Sabbath-keeping.
This objection completely conflates the Moral Law (the Ten Commandments written by God on stone) with the Ceremonial Law (the sacrificial system written by Moses in a book).
Look at the original Greek text. Paul frames his sentence using a precise Old Testament blueprint: "a festival [ἑορτῆς - yearly feasts], a new moon [νουμηνίας - monthly celebrations], or sabbaths [σαββάτων - yearly ceremonial rest days]." This exact three-part phrasing is used repeatedly in the Old Testament (e.g., Ezekiel 45:17, Hosea 2:11) to specify the shadow rituals of the Levitical sanctuary.
Paul explicitly states these sabbaths were a "shadow of things to come" (Colossians 2:17). The weekly Seventh-day Sabbath cannot be a shadow pointing forward to the cross, because it was created before sin ever entered the universe (Genesis 2:2-3). It points backward to a perfect Creation. The ceremonial sabbaths (like Passover) ceased at Calvary; the moral Seventh-day Sabbath stands eternal.
Objection 4: “Romans 14 proves that day-keeping is entirely optional for a Christian. We can choose any day we want.”
Romans 14:5 states, "One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind."
Sadly, this is also used to claim day-worship is entirely optional.
• The Scriptural Reality: The word "Sabbath" does not appear anywhere in the entire book of Romans.
---> Context is key: Romans 14 is a discussion entirely focused on food, fasting, and Jewish ceremonial fast days.
• The Devastating Proof: The early church was experiencing bitter disputes between Jewish and Gentile converts regarding "doubtful disputations" (v. 1), specifically eating meat vs. vegetarianism (v. 2) and fasting. Jewish tradition demanded fasting on specific days of the week (such as Tuesdays and Thursdays). Paul is telling the church not to break fellowship over humanly appointed fast days.
To stretch a passage about fasting to mean that a Christian has the authority to abolish one of the literal Ten Commandments spoken by the voice of Almighty God is an absolute distortion of the text.
Objection 5: “Hebrews 4 teaches that the Sabbath is now just a spiritual rest in Christ.”
The Protestant Claim that the Sabbath has been spiritualized away; we no longer keep a literal 24-hour day because Jesus is our continuous rest.
The Devastating Reality is that Hebrews 4 is actually the most bulletproof New Testament proof text for literal Seventh-day Sabbath keeping.
In Hebrews 4:4, the author anchors his definition of rest directly to the literal Seventh day of Creation week (Hebrews 4:4). Then, in Hebrews 4:9, the Holy Spirit abruptly introduces a highly technical Greek noun found nowhere else in the New Testament: σαββατισμός (Sabbatismos).
While the rest of the chapter uses katapausis (general rest), verse 9 declares: “There remains therefore a rest [σαββατισμός - Sabbatismos] for the people of God.” In first-century Greek literature, Sabbatismos had only one definition: the physical, literal keeping of the Seventh-day Sabbath. Verse 10 seals the mandate:
“For he who has entered His rest has himself also ceased from his works as God did from His.”
How did God cease? He physically stopped His labor on the Seventh day.
Objection 6: “The early church officially met on Sunday in Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2.”
Protestant Claim that the New Testament records the apostles systematically gathering for worship, breaking bread, and collecting tithes on the first day of the week.
But Neither of these verses describes a Sunday morning worship service, nor do they contain a command to alter God's law.
• Acts 20:7 describes a meeting where Paul preached until midnight. In biblical timekeeping, a day begins at sunset (Genesis 1:5). Therefore, this "first day of the week" meeting occurred on Saturday night. When the sun came up on Sunday morning, what did Paul do? He packed his bags and walked a brutal 19 miles from Troas to Assos (Acts 20:13-14). If Sunday was holy, Paul flagrantly violated it by spending the entire day engaged in hard physical travel.
• 1 Corinthians 16:2 commands believers to "lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper" on the first day of the week. The original Greek text uses the phrase par’ heautō tithetō, which literally means "let him place by himself at home." Paul was not passing a collection plate at a church service; he was telling believers to do their private household accounting and budgeting on Sunday morning so that a localized famine relief fund would be ready when he arrived.
Objection 7: “The New Testament never explicitly re-commands the Sabbath.”
Many Protestants claim that because the New Testament does not feature an explicit, repetitive command enforcing Saturday rest for Christians, it is no longer binding.
• The Devastating Reality:
You only command a law that is being widely broken, forgotten, or changed. Every single author of the New Testament, and every early convert, was a strict Sabbath-keeper who met systematically on Saturday (Acts 13:42-44)
There was zero debate about the day of worship in the early church (Acts 15)
If a law is only valid if it is explicitly re-commanded in the New Testament, then Christians are free to practice bestiality, incest, and use pejorative nicknames, as none of these are explicitly detailed in New Testament lists.
Furthermore, Jesus did command its preservation. Prophesying about the destruction of Jerusalem which occurred in 70 AD, decades after the cross, Jesus explicitly ordered His followers:
“And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath” (Matthew 24:20). He fiercely protected its physical sanctity decades into the Christian dispensation.
Objection 8: “We are under grace, not the law. The Old Testament commandments are done away with.”
This is the ultimate catch-all argument. It claims that because Christians are saved by faith in Christ, the literal keeping of the Decalogue is an act of legalism that denies the finished work of grace.
Grace is not a license to violate God’s moral boundaries; grace is the supernatural power to finally fulfill them.
Scripture defines sin with absolute precision: “Sin is the transgression of the law” (1 John 3:4).
If the Ten Commandments were abolished at the cross, then sin no longer exists on earth. And if sin no longer exists, then no one is a sinner, no one needs a Savior, and Christ died for nothing. When asked this exact question, Paul wrote with absolute clarity:
“Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law” (Romans 3:31).
No Sunday-keeping Christian would ever argue that being "under grace" means they are now free to steal, murder, lie, or commit adultery.
Why then do we instantly switch our logic and claim that grace gives us a divine hall pass to violate the one commandment God explicitly screamed at us to “Remember”?
By whose authority do you stand on Sunday?
You claim Sola Scriptura, the Bible and the Bible alone. Yet, you willingly abandon a commandment written by the finger of God (Exodus 31:18) to observe a day that exists only because of the imperial edicts of a pagan emperor (Constantine) and the human canons of the Roman Catholic Church.
By keeping Sunday, Protestants reject their own foundational principle of the Bible alone, subconsciously bowing to the ecclesiastical authority of church tradition over the immutable Word of the Living God.
Protestantism stands at an uncomfortable theological crossroad.
If you cling to Sunday, you are abandoning Sola Scriptura. You are choosing to recognize the civil edicts of a pagan emperor (Constantine's Sunday Law of 321 AD) and the ecclesiastical decrees of a church council (the Council of Laodicea, which cursed Sabbath-keepers) over the immutable, finger-written Law of Almighty God.
The question is no longer about a day of the week. It is about a throne of authority. Are you following the Word of your Creator, or the traditions of men?
15
12
24
2,416
Sabbath unbroken chain from Eden to New Earth
x.com/i/status/21083…
x.com/i/status/21083…
The Bible Unbroken Chain of Faithful Sabbath Observance: From the dawn of creation to the shores of eternity.
If you are a Christian who worships on Sunday, this is not a personal attack on your faith, your love for God, or your salvation. It is simply an invitation to pause, s of inherited human tradition, and trace an undeniable, golden thread woven directly through the pages of your own Bible.
Open your Scriptures. Strip away the commentaries, church councils, and cultural habits. Look solely at the text, and follow the unbroken chain of the Seventh-day Sabbath from the dawn of creation to the shores of eternity.
The Bible presents an unbroken cycle of Sabbath observance from man’s creation to the earth made new.
1. The Anchor in Eden (Genesis)
Before there was a Jew, a Gentile, a temple, or a trace of sin, the Sabbath was spoken into existence. It was not created to fix a broken world; it was created to crown a perfect one.
“And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done; and He rested on the seventh day from all His work... Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it…” (Genesis 2:2-3)
⏸️ Pause and slowly read that again:
God sanctified it. He set it apart for holy use. Adam and Eve opened their eyes to their very first full day of life, and it was a Sabbath. The weekly cycle is not a lunar alignment or a seasonal shift; it is a literal monument to the creation week, stamped into human history at day one.
2. The Test Before the Tablets (Exodus)
A common assumption is that the Sabbath began at Mount Sinai as a localized law for Israel. But weeks before God ever spoke the Ten Commandments from the mountain, He tested His people’s loyalty.
“Six days you shall gather it, but on the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, there will be none.” (Exodus 16:26)
⏸️ Pause and reflect on the truth in that text:
For forty years, God performed a massive, recurring, triple-weekly miracle through the manna (double portion on Friday, none on Saturday, and preservation of Friday's food). When some tried to gather it on the seventh day, God asked, “How long do you refuse to keep My commandments and My laws?” (v. 28). The Sabbath was already an binding law before the stone tablets were even cut.
3. The Central Command (The Decalogue)
When God finally codified His moral standards in stone, He placed the Sabbath command directly in the heart of the law. He began it with a word that implies it already existed:
“Remember.”
“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy… For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day.” (Exodus 20:8, 11)
⏸️ Pause and consider the immense weight on the above verse:
The Fourth Commandment is the only one that points directly to God's authority as Creator. He did not say, "Keep this day because you left Egypt." He said, "Keep this day because I made the world." It is anchored entirely to His identity as the Sovereign God of the universe.
4. The Pattern of the Savior (The Gospels)
When the Word became flesh, He lived out the law perfectly. He did not drop hints of a change, nor did He treat the day as an outdated ritual.
“So He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read.” (Luke 4:16)
Did you catch that?
Jesus spent His ministry stripping the Sabbath of heavy, legalistic human burdens, declaring that “the Sabbath was made for man” (Mark 2:27) not just for the Jewish nation, but for mankind (Anthropos). He then asserted His absolute ownership over it, stating, “The Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath” (v. 28).
If Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath, then the Seventh-day is the true "Lord’s Day."
5. The Silent Witness of the Cross (Calvary)
The most profound pause in cosmic history occurred on Passion Week. Even in the gravity of human redemption, the divine timeline remained unshakeable.
“That day was the Preparation, and the Sabbath drew near… And they returned and prepared spices and fragrant oils. And they rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment.” (Luke 23:54, 56)
Deeply think about that:
On Good Friday, Jesus finished His work of redemption on the cross and cried, “It is finished!” He then spent the Seventh-day Sabbath resting in the tomb. Just as He completed His creation work on the sixth day and rested on the seventh, He completed His redemption work on the sixth day and rested on the seventh. His closest disciples, deep in grief, refused to touch His body for embalming until the Sabbath had passed. If the day was changing on Sunday morning, why did they strictly keep the commandment on Saturday?
6. The Apostolic Path (The Book of Acts)
Decades after the resurrection and the day of Pentecost, the early Christian church now flooding with Gentile converts consistently gathered on the Seventh-day Sabbath.
“So when the Jews went out of the synagogue, the Gentiles begged that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath.” (Acts 13:42)
Stop and consider the truth in that verse:
If the Apostle Paul intended to teach that worship had shifted to Sunday in honor of the resurrection, this was his golden opportunity. He had a massive crowd of eager Gentiles begging to hear the gospel. He did not say, "Come back tomorrow on Sunday." Instead, he made them wait an entire week, and “on the next Sabbath almost the whole city came together to hear the word of God” (v. 44).
7. The Climax of the Great Controversy (Revelation)
The book of Revelation describes a final, global crisis completely centered around worship. The entire world is forced to choose between the authority of the Creator and the authority of the Beast.
“Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.” (Revelation 14:12)
Did you hear that?
The first angel’s message in Revelation 14:7 issues a universal cry: “worship Him who made heaven and earth, the sea and springs of water.” This is an explicit, direct echo of the Fourth Commandment. In the final hours of earth’s history, God's remnant people are identified not by their adherence to human traditions, but by their unshakeable loyalty to His original, written law.
8. The Eternal Sabbath (The New Earth)
The chain does not end with the close of human history. The Sabbath was born in a sinless world, and it will endure forever in a restored world.
“‘And it shall come to pass that from one New Moon to another, and from one Sabbath to another, all flesh shall come to worship before Me,’ says the Lord.” (Isaiah 66:23)
⏸️ Pause and slowly read that again:
Few years from now, on a New Earth completely free from pain, sin, and death, the entire saved family of God will still pause every single seventh day to bow before the Sovereign King.
The chain is completely unbroken. It spans from the perfect soil of Eden, through the smoke of Sinai, through the quiet grave of Christ, through the trials of the apostles, right into the architecture of eternity.
Scripture never breaks this link. It never shifts the solemnity. It never authorizes a replacement.
If the Bible leaves this chain completely intact, it forces every honest believer into a profound, personal crossroads:
If the shift to Sunday was implemented purely by human decrees, imperial edicts, and church traditions, whose authority am I therefore recognizing when I rest?
0
0
3
57
Ceremonial laws versus the moral law
x.com/renewingprotes…
x.com/renewingprotes…
THE TEN COMMANDMENTS VERSUS THE CEREMONIAL LAWS
1) The Ten Commandments deals with moral precepts while the Ceremonial Law deals with various purifications, ordinances, rituals, sacrifices, and feasts (compare Exodus 20:3-17 with Leviticus 1; Leviticus 4; Leviticus 5; Leviticus dments gives knowledge of sin while the Ceremonial Law prescribes offerings for sins (compare Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7 with Leviticus 1; Leviticus 4).
3) The Ten Commandments is referred to as the Royal Law or the Law of Liberty while the Ceremonial Law is called the law contained in ordinances or the handwriting of ordinances (compare James 2:8, 12; James 1:25 with Ephesians 2:15; Colossians 2:14).
4) The Ten Commandments were to be magnified and made honourable by Christ while the Ceremonial Law was taken out of the way by Christ (compare Isaiah 42:21 with Colossians 2:14).
5) The Ten Commandments is to stand fast forever and ever while the Ceremonial Law was nailed to the cross (compare Psalm 111:7-8 with Colossians 2:14).
6) The Ten Commandments is described as perfect while the Ceremonial law made nothing perfect (compare Psalm 19:7; James 1:25 with Hebrews 7:19).
7) The Ten Commandments was not destroyed by Christ but the Ceremonial law was abolished by Christ (compare Matthew 5:17 with Ephesians 2:15).
8) The Ten Commandments was spoken by God Himself while the Ceremonial law was spoken by Moses (compare Deuteronomy 4:12-13 with Leviticus 1:1-3).
9) The Ten Commandments were originally written by God on two tables of stone while the Ceremonial Laws were written by Moses in a book (compare Exodus 24:12; Deuteronomy 4:13 with Colossians 2:14).
10) The Ten Commandments were placed in the ark by Moses himself while the Ceremonial Laws were placed by the side of the ark by the Levites (compare Deuteronomy 10:5 with Deuteronomy 31:26).
Friends, the differences between these two commandments are clear. The Ceremonial Laws were only types, figures or shadows that were pointing forward to the Great Antitype, Jesus Christ. After the death of Christ, the Ceremonial Laws of the sanctuary ceased and became unnecessary. On the contrary, the Ten Commandment law which is the express character of God, and provides a moral framework for His children was to stand fast forever and ever. In fact, it is this law that is going to be the standard of God's judgement for the human race (see James 2:8-12).
Exhortation: In relation to the Ten Commandments, we read the following from the beloved apostle:
i) "Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus" (Revelation 14:12).
ii) "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city" (Revelation 22:14).
White Throne Ministries
0
0
2
89