What is gratuitously affirmed, I gratuitously deny.
Acts 20.7 And on the first day of the week, when we were assembled to break bread, Paul discoursed with them, being to depart on the morrow. And he continued his speech until midnight.
23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.
The Sabbath will be kept in the Millennium.
Will the new Moon also be kept as a religious feast?
Isn't the verse really saying "from month to month and week to week"?
In the verse above we can see that ALL flesh are to worship before G-d
I'm afraid I don't see that. And who is this "G dash d" character that we are supposed to worship?
and not man-made like SUNday worship, via the 'edict' of Constanintine, in veneration of the Sun.
Christian Worship on Sunday is attested to well before Constantine. The Didache, written in AD 70 says "On the Lord's Day come together and break bread. And offer the Eucharist, after confessing your sins that your sacrifice may be pure." St. Ignatius of Antioch writes around AD 110 that Christians "no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord's Day, on which also Our Life rose again." Constantine had nothing to do with it. Put down the Seventh Day Adventist screeds.
The days of the week were named as follows: Sunday was originally named afted the Sun [snip]
Like I said, that's all real nice, but it isn't what the Catholic Church calls the days of the week. I already gave you that list. So its totally irrelevant.
Not to mention the disappearance of Passover and the adoption of Astarte/Ishtar (Easter), a pagan holiday named for the pagan godess of fertility.
Apparently you can't read. Again, the Catholic Church calls "Easter" "Pascha" - "Passover". I think you need to point the accusing finger at the Protestants, not the Catholics.
The reason for the calendar change was to correct for drift in the dates of signifigant religious observations, (primarily Easter/Astarte/Ishtar) and to prevent further drift in the dates.
Nope, completely wrong. The dates of religious observations weren't "drifting", since they are fixed by numbers. The drift was the forward movement of the Solstices and Equinoxes through the calendar. Astronomical events are described by the calendar. The calendar does not force their occurance. The drift of the seasons was the reason for the correction.
Again, the Catholic Church celebrates "Pascha" on the "Dominica in Parsceve", not some pagan feast called "Easter".
Change the beginning of the year to 1 January from 25 March
Only in England. Other countries observed a different New Year. We already went over all that though. Don't you read the posts you are responding to?
A priesthood called "priests of the Sun-god" was created. At the end of A.D.274, perhaps on the 25th of December (Sol's alleged birthday), he inaugurated the new temple of the Sun-god in Rome
December 25 was the winter solstice when Julius Caesar reformed the calendar, so it was Sol's "real" "birthday". The drift of dates under that system caused the Solstice to fall on December 21 by AD 325, when the Council of Nicea used the date of the Vernal Equinox to set the date for the celebration of the Death and Resurrection of Our Lord Jesus Christ. The relationship to the birth of Christ is coincidental. The very earliest Christian calendar, from Rome and dated AD 336 has 25 December as Christmas.
From what I've read December 25th was later adopted by the church at the First Council of Nicea under Constantine.
Apparently, what you've read is total crap. The Council of Nicea never mentioned Christmas.
When Constantine changed the 4th commandment, and certain Holy days, in essence he placed himself above G-d.
Except that he didn't do it, or rather, it was done before him. But never mind. Doesn't matter if you want to wallow in ignorance, does it?
then did the confederacy of godless error take its rise through the treachery of false teachers, who, seeing that none of the apostles any longer survived, at length attempted with bare and uplifted head to oppose the preaching of the truth by preaching "knowledge falsely so called."
That's "Gnosticism". Are you trying to claim the Catholic Church is Gnostic?
That's why the church needed to change the calendar, needed to do away with the Sabbath and started Sun-day worship, in 'honor of the venerable Sun'. Why they needed to distance themselves from Passover and celebrate Easter, a name derived from the pagan godess of fertility, widely known at the time.
Continuously repeating a lie doesn't make it any more believeable. The festival of the Resurrection in the liturigical books of the Church is called "Pascha" - "Passover". Easter is a secular name used among Protestants. Go criticize them.
The church has done nearly all it could to distance themselves from the root that they 'claim' to be grafted unto.
The faithless Jews who rejected Christ are not the "root". Nor is the "Church" grafted on to that root. The Church is that root. It is the Gentiles who are grafted on.
And to top it off, they give credit to Yehoshua for this 'new way'.
Who is "Yehoshua"? I only know a God-man named "Jesus" in Greek and English and Latin and "Yeshua" in Aramaic and Hebrew. Did you make that one up too?
Justin Martyr gives a point, by point, by point, accounting of the similarities between paganism and the 'new religion'. Its the same thing under a new name.
I'm sure St. Justin Martyr would be quite surprised to hear that assertion. Makes you wonder why he was killed if he was really a pagan, doesn't it?
How stupid do you think we are?