Sunday Roots

The Bible Sabbath Association ^ | December 2000 | Dr. Sidney Davis

[DouglasKC]

President's Letter . . .

Sunday Roots Dr. Sidney Davis, BSA President

In 321 AD "Emperor" Constantine declared Sunday a civil holiday of the Roman Empire; yet, it was later, at the 1st Ecumenical Council of Nicea in Bithynia during June, 325 AD (convened by Constantine), that "the Church" and the State, together, conferred a liturgical sanctification to Sunday: an act which usurped the Sabbath when it expressly denounced and condemned the Jewish roots of the Christian faith. Protestant church historians see this event as the beginning of Roman Catholicism as "the State religion." While this is admitted, many are not familiar with the actual document that gives the rationale for this change [from the Sabbath to Sunday]. Understanding the origins of the change might give many a greater appreciation of other truths that were affected by the decision that brought it about.

Why did the action of the Nicene council turn from the established orthodoxy handed down by Christ and the apostles? The answer to this query comes when we see what was at the heart of this issue: an issue which resulted in a great change in church doctrine and beliefs. Such major dogmatic changes continue to affect Christians (even we Sabbatarians) until this very day. (Could it be that we Sabbatarians are also the recipients of this false belief system, and the attitudes that generated it, today?)

Constantine I: On the Keeping of Easter

From the Letter of Constantine Emperor Augustus to the Churches and all those not present at the Council (found in Eusebius, Vita Const., Lib. iii., 18-20):

"When the question relative to the sacred festival of Easter arose, it was universally thought that it would be convenient that all should keep the feast on one day; for what could be more beautiful and more desirable, than to see this festival, through which we receive the hope of immortality, celebrated by all with one accord, and in the same manner? It was declared to be particularly unworthy for this, the holiest of all festivals, to follow the custom [the calculation] of the Jews, who had soiled their hands with the most fearful of crimes, and whose minds were blinded. In rejecting their custom, we may transmit to our descendants the legitimate mode of celebrating Easter, which we have observed from the time of the Saviour's Passion to the present day [according to the day of the week]. We ought not, therefore, to have anything in common with the Jews, for the Saviour has shown us another way; our worship follows a more legitimate and more convenient course; and consequently, in unanimously adopting this mode, we desire, dearest brethren, to separate ourselves from the detestable company of the Jews, for it is truly shameful for us to hear them boast that without their direction we could not keep this feast. How can they be in the right, they who, after the death of the Saviour, have no longer been led by reason but by wild violence, as their delusion may urge them? They do not possess the truth in this Easter question; for, in their blindness and repugnance to all improvements, they frequently celebrate two Passovers in the same year.

We could not imitate those who are openly in error. How, then, could we follow these Jews, who are most certainly blinded by error? For to celebrate the passover twice in one year is totally inadmissible. But even if this were not so, it would still be your dutynot to tarnish your soul by communications with such wicked people [the Jews]. Besides, consider well, that in such an important matter, and on a subject of such great solemnity, there ought not to be any division. Our Saviour has left us only one festal day of our redemption, that is to say, of his holy passion, and he desired [to establish] only one Catholic Church. Think, then, how unseemly it is, that on the same day some should be fasting whilst others are seated at a banquet; and that after Easter, some should be rejoicing at feasts, whilst others are still observing a strict fast. For this reason, a Divine Providence wills that this custom should be rectified and regulated in a uniform way; and everyone, I hope, will agree upon this point. As, on the one hand, it is our duty not to have anything in common with the murderers of our Lord;and as, on the other, the custom now followed by the Churches of the West, of the South, and of the North, and by some of those of the East, is the most acceptable, it has appeared good to all; and I have been guarantee for your consent, that you would accept it with joy, as it is followed at Rome, in Africa, in all Italy, Egypt, Spain, Gaul, Britain, Libya, in all Achaia, and in the dioceses of Asia, of Pontus, and Cilicia. You should consider not only that the number of churches in these provinces make a majority, but also that it is right to demand what our reason approves, and that we should have nothing in common with the Jews. To sum up in few words: By the unanimous judgment of all, it has been decided that the most holy festival of Easter should be everywhere celebrated on one and the same day, and it is not seemly that in so holy a thing there should be any division. As this is the state of the case, accept joyfully the divine favour, and this truly divine command; for all which takes place in assemblies of the bishops ought to be regarded as proceeding from the will of God .

Make known to your brethren what has been decreed, keep this most holy day according to the prescribed mode; we can thus celebrate this holy Easter day at the same time, if it is granted me, as I desire, to unite myself with you; we can rejoice together, seeing that the divine power has made use of our instrumentality for destroying the evil designs of the devil, and thus causing faith, peace, and unity to flourish amongst us. May God graciously protect you, my beloved brethren."

This is the wording of the actual historical document which led the institutional church into the apostasy (departure from the true faith) that led to the complete abandonment of the Sabbath. The heart of the issue was the Passover; it is referred to historically as the QUARTODECIMAN CONTROVERSY (Quartodeciman means "the fourteenth"). The change that occurred was one of a radical shift from the Passover, which was observed by the Church according to the Jewish calculation of the calendar (on Abib 14-regardless on what day of the week it fell), to Easter Sunday. In other words the change was from a DATE of the month (the fourteenth of Abib) to a DAY of the week, Sunday.

Making Sunday as a day of special honor for Christians was very attractive to the Romans because the seventh day of the pagan week (named after Saturn) was considered an unlucky day, and also because the Jewish Sabbath had become a special object of ridicule and scorn-owing to the Roman persecution of the Jewish people. Constantine, both a Roman and a pagan, led "the Christian Church" in this religio/political coup. Thus, we see the rationale for the change of the Sabbath to the legal sanctification of Sunday as having occurred in relation to this change of the Passover to Easter.

From Constantine's letter, it is clear that the basis for this drastic change was not founded upon any Bible doctrine nor any Scriptural proof texts, which Christians (especially Sabbatarians) give as reasons today. The change, for whatever other possible reason, was blatantly based on anti-Judaism, which became anti-semitism (even anti-Israel). This decision, by the ecumenical Nicene council, exempted "the Universal (Catholic) Church," in its opinion, from following the Scriptural commands of the Sabbath and the Holy Feasts-such as the Passover.

"The Church" equated obedience to these Scriptural mandates with following Judaism (today-called "being under the Law"). They supposed, since the Jews were so proud of observing the Sabbath and Holy Feasts, that if "Christians" also followed these "Jewish" things, then they would be in league with Judaism. Of course, since many in Judaism (but not all) denied the truth of Jesus as the Messiah, "the Church" thought keeping the Sabbath and Passover would be equated as associating with those who deny Christ. (This, of course, was a false doctrine which overcame "the Church.")

Centuries later, almost all Christians and Jews are affected by this apostasy. Most Christians think of Sunday and Easter as Biblically mandated Holy Days, and are totally ignorant of the origin of the false doctrine which they believe. Also, there are many Jewish people who think of Jesus as leader of a Gentile (thus pagan) religion, forgetting His Jewishness and His epic defense of the Torah as a Rabbi.

Both mainstream Rabbinic Judaism and mainstream Christianity stubbornly follow their respective traditions: voicing the idea that to do otherwise would leave one either "not a Jew" or "not a Christian." The few Christians who faithfully keep the Jewish Sabbath and enjoy the Jewish Holy Feasts are consigned to being a cult by mainstream Christianity. They are mostly not respected as real Christians or second class Christians at best. Likewise, the minority of Jewish people who accept Jesus as Israel's valid Messiah are viewed as traitors and apostate Jews by the mainstream Jewish community; by some they are even likened to being "nonpersons."

This "anti-Christian" stigma attached to the observance of the Bible (Jewish) Sabbath has resulted in a strange religious neurosis by some Sabbatarians who, while observing the Sabbath, also observe "Easter" as a way of appeasing their cultic consciences and evangelical suspicions. Even among Sabbatarians, those who observe the Quartodeciman Christian Passover festival (as the early church did) are seen as "Judaizers" (or "under the law"), not realizing that such theological descriptions were used as justification for the anti-Semitism of "the early Church." This anti-Semitism was the inspiration behind a new hermeneutic which distorted the same New Testament Scriptures that were misconstrued as proof texts-not only by Protestant evangelicals against the Bible Sabbath, but also by some Sabbath-keepers against the Biblical Holy Days.

We, as Sabbatarians, must face the truth of this history-if we are to ever effectively confront the threat presented to us by the so-called "New Covenant Theology" (NCT). Our inability to face our history and to acknowledge the consequences that this history has made on our Sabbatarian traditions and doctrines leave us both vulnerable and victims to the NCT. Many Sabbatarians consider the "Church-State" decree of the Nicene Council of 325 AD as the cap stone event or the pivotal point in history that fulfilled the prophecy of the great power represented by a beast with 10 horns (Daniel 7:25), of whom it was said he shall "think to change times and laws." But I think many would balk at the actually meaning of the Hebrew/Aramaic text and the real evidence that points to its actual historical fulfillment.

"And he shall speak great words against the Most High [God], and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change the times [of sacred feasts and Holy Days] and the law" (Daniel 7:25- The Amplified Bible; [brackets belong]). Also see Genesius Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament, p.248- "times, a set time... Used of holy times (feast days) Dan. 7:25."

"In determining what days should be regarded as holy, and in the composition of a prayer for national use, Constantine exercised one of the rights belonging to him as Pontifex Maximus; and it caused no surprise that he should do this." -Drury's History of Rome, Chap. 57, part I, par. 4 from the end, Quoted in A.T. Jones' The Two Republics, p. 319.

"I have offered and still offer $1000 to any one who can prove to me from the Bible alone that I am bound, under grievous sin to keep Sunday holy. It was the Catholic Church which made the law obliging us to keep Sunday holy. The Church made this law long after the Bible was written. Hence said law is not in the Bible. Christ, our Lord empowered his church to make laws binding in conscience. He said to his apostles and their lawful successors in the priesthood, 'Whatever you shall bind on earth shall be binding in heaven.' Matt.16.19. Matt. 18:17. Luke 16.19. The Catholic Church abolished, not only the Sabbath, but all the other Jewish festivals."- T. Enright CSSR, St. Alphonsus (Rock) Church, St. Louis, June 1905.

Someone should have informed Constantine and the Nicene council that the law was "done away" or that the Sabbath and the festivals were "nailed to the cross." You will note that the Catholic church does not use any of the classic "proof texts" that are traditionally used by Protestant evangelicals against the Sabbath (which, I repeat, are the very same texts used by Sabbath-keepers against holy days and festivals). It was this act (engineered in 325 AD by the Nicene council), that the Catholic church claims for itself, and that inspired a new hermeneutic of "certain proof texts" (traditionally used against Sabbatarians), which justified the anti-Judaism of the early church and the neo-anti-Judaic NCT teaching today.

No one would dare accuse a Christian of being anti-Semitic or anti-Judaic in attitude, doctrine and belief (a real Christian would not admit to such either). Yet, the "Sunday roots" origins, that gave birth to our hermeneutical devices, by which we formed our doctrines-betray us, as Christians generally (and particularly for Sabbatarians), and holds us hostage to a contradictory and inconsistent Sabbatarian theology that commands Sabbath observance on the one hand while condemning festival observance on the other.... Fundamental to this dilemma is how these hermeneutical devices have formed our theology regarding the law of God.

The majority of Sabbatarians even those who observe the Holy Days are unwilling and unwitting victims to a inherited theology of "the law"-that defines "the law" as two monolithic divisions called "moral" and "ceremonial." These very definitions ascribed to God's law, are not only unbiblical, but were coined by medieval theologians specifically to do away with the Sabbath! And yet, we use these terms designed to do away with the Sabbath in trying to defend it. These very terms and concepts buttress our contradictory Sabbatarian arguments. The logical inconsistency of our traditional Sabbatarian doctrines and our defenses of them are becoming ever increasingly apparent by anyone who is being challenged by the teachings of the NCT.

These are matters that should be of grave and serious concerns to all classes of Sabbath-keepers requiring immediate attention and focus. Discussion forums, Sabbath seminars and conferences that can provide the venue for the airing of these concerns-which bring the issues to the fore and that invite the participation of Sabbath-keepers, are encouraged. There are many things that may divide us doctrinally in the ranks of Sabbath-keepers, but as Sabbath-keepers we will stand or fall on a the Sabbath truth we have in common.

It is time that we come to terms and reexamine our "Sunday roots" if we would make certain of our "Sabbath roots." Let us come together, open our doors, break down the barriers, tear down the walls and come to the table of dialog for our common good.

He who has an ear ....

[DouglasKC]

Very interesting letter that clearly explains why most Christians keep Sunday as their day of worship, mainly because of anti-jewish sentiment early in the history of the Christian church.

[RobbyS]

It seems to have been the custom not to keep the sabbath in the 2nd Century, since by that time the majority of Christians were no longer Jews. The destruction of the Temple and the exclusion of Christians from the synagogues left Christians on their own. There is the implication here that Christians were the only ones at fault.

[DouglasKC]

It seems to have been the custom not to keep the sabbath in the 2nd Century, since by that time the majority of Christians were no longer Jews. The destruction of the Temple and the exclusion of Christians from the synagogues left Christians on their own. There is the implication here that Christians were the only ones at fault.

Possibly, but the biggest reason seems to have been anti-semitism on the part of the early church. The letter from Constatine certainly shows the attitude of hatred that many of that time felt toward the Jews.

[sola gracia]

There are no commands to keep the Sabbath in the New Testament.

[RobbyS]

Antisemitism is not an apt term, unless you look at the ongoing cultural war between Greeks and Jews that go back to the Maccabees and realize that the Greeks especially were glad to have access to Jewish monotheism without Jewish particularism. The Jews displayed great hostility against the Christians from the beginning, even if we minimize the charges made in the New Testament. The end of Temple Worship was also an end to any common worship. Hebrews is the Christian reaction to that event; the Jewish reaction is to move elements of temple worship to the synagogue.

[ClimoMike]

There are no commands to keep the Sabbath in the New Testament.

I always get a kick out of people(and I am not saying you) who say this but then turns around and preach how you should tithe(or believe it ). I remember talking to a lady before we went to Church(she went to Church on Sundays and I see nothing with going to church on Sunday). Anyways, we were talking about the sabbath before hand and she said the sabbath is just in the O.T. well, we were in Church and the time came for the offering. The envolope(sp.) said tithes. I asked her if she believed in tithing. She said yes. I asked her where the tithing command was in the bible. She did not answer me.

[sola gracia]

There are no commands to tithe in the New Testament.

[DouglasKC]

There are no commands to keep the Sabbath in the New Testament.

God created the Sabbath, through Christ, at the beginning of creation (Genesis 2:2) in the old testament, which is also the inspired word of God.

Jesus said:

Mar 2:27 And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.

The word translated "man" in this verse is the greek word:

444 anthropos anth'-ro-pos

from 435 and ops (the countenance; from 3700); man-faced, i.e. a human being:--certain, man.

It was created for all human beings else the Lord God Jesus Christ would surely have specified "it was made for the Jews", or "was made for Israel".

Since it was created by God in the old testament, affirmed by God in the New Testament, and kept by God in the flesh in the New Testament, I feel that I have no choice but to obey God.

[sola gracia]

But what you fail to understand is that the Sabbath was a sign of the Old Covenant. See Exodus 31:12-18 and Ezekiel 20:12. 9 (the whole book of Hebrews shows how the Old Covenant has passed away and the New Covenant is in place) There is no evidence that the Sabbath was kept before the giving of the Law. There is no New Testament commandment given to continue to observe the Sabbath. (see Acts 15 - surely the Council of Jerusalem would have mentioned the need to keep the Sabbath when instructing the Gentile converts.)

The Law was shadow, Christ is the substance. Now is you want to keep the Sabbath that is up to you, however, you best remember the admonition of Paul to those who wanted to put Christians under the Law, if you place yourself under any law of the Old Covenant you must continue to keep all of the Law. (see Galatians 5:3) Is that what you are advocating????

[DouglasKC]

Antisemitism is not an apt term, unless you look at the ongoing cultural war between Greeks and Jews that go back to the Maccabees and realize that the Greeks especially were glad to have access to Jewish monotheism without Jewish particularism. The Jews displayed great hostility against the Christians from the beginning, even if we minimize the charges made in the New Testament. The end of Temple Worship was also an end to any common worship. Hebrews is the Christian reaction to that event; the Jewish reaction is to move elements of temple worship to the synagogue.

Anti Judaism I guess would be the proper term for that time. But regardless of what the the situtation was, Christians knew that they didn't need temples or synagogues to worship on the commanded day. They had scripture and they aboslutely knew what day God wanted them to keep. They seem to have flat out rejected it only because of their hatred of the Jews.

[DouglasKC]

But what you fail to understand is that the Sabbath was a sign of the Old Covenant. See Exodus 31:12-18 and Ezekiel 20:12. 9 (the whole book of Hebrews shows how the Old Covenant has passed away and the New Covenant is in place) There is no evidence that the Sabbath was kept before the giving of the Law.

There is ample evidence. God created the sabbath in Genesis:

Gen 2:2 On the seventh day God finished his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
Gen 2:3 God blessed the seventh day, and made it holy, because he rested in it from all his work which he had created and made.

It's creation far predates the covenent affirmed at Mount Sinai.

Also God says in Genesis about Abraham:

Gen 26:5 because Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws."

This indicates that certain commandments, statutes and laws were known to some people in Abrahams time, centuries before Sinai. It's not inconcievable that the Sabbath was one of them.

Also God was commanding his people to keep the sabbath before the old convenent was instituted:

Exo 16:23 He said to them, "This is that which Yahweh has spoken, 'Tomorrow is a solemn rest, a holy Sabbath to Yahweh. Bake that which you want to bake, and boil that which you want to boil; and all that remains over lay up for yourselves to be kept until the morning."

This occurs days, if not weeks, before the covenent was struck at Sinai.

In addition, the sabbath is so special to God that he seems to have designated a seperate covenent for it and it alone:

Exo 31:16 Therefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.

Either way the sabbath clearly pre-dates the covenent agreement made at Mount Sinai.

There is no New Testament commandment given to continue to observe the Sabbath. (see Acts 15 - surely the Council of Jerusalem would have mentioned the need to keep the Sabbath when instructing the Gentile converts.)

The gentiles weren't instructed not to kill and rob so does that make it okay? Besides, gentiles did keep the sabbath:

Act 13:42 So when the Jews went out of the synagogue, the Gentiles begged that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath.

Act 13:44 The next Sabbath almost the whole city was gathered together to hear the word of God.

Act 18:4 He reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded Jews and Greeks.

Everyone was keeping the sabbath.

The Law was shadow, Christ is the substance. Now is you want to keep the Sabbath that is up to you, however, you best remember the admonition of Paul to those who wanted to put Christians under the Law, if you place yourself under any law of the Old Covenant you must continue to keep all of the Law. (see Galatians 5:3) Is that what you are advocating????

Christ is the substance. Christ kept the law, including the sabbath. When we let the spirit of Christ live in us, it is easy to do what Christ did because the love of Christ works in us. It's in that sense that the law is written in the hearts of Christians, it hasn't disappeared, but has been fulfillled with the spirit of Christ.

[DouglasKC]

There are no commands to tithe in the New Testament.

I'm not so sure about that. Read Hebrews chapter 7. Paul starts off talking about how Abraham tithed to Melchizedek even though Melchizedek wasn't a member of the Levi tribe. He then starts talking about the Levitical priesthood recieving tithes and how the law about tithing has to be changed (not abolished) now that the levitical priesthood was fading away. Since God's people are to become "kings and priests" in the milleniel kingdom, Paul might be saying that the tithes should now be going to the new priesthood that has Jesus Christ as the high priest in heaven.

It's a tough chapter to read, I tried King James, New King James, Modern King James and a few other translations and still kept getting lost...the best translation I found was the "God's Word" translation.

[LadyDoc]

Then why did St. Iraneus explain that Christians met on the First day to commemorate the resurrection of Christ? That was 200 years before Constantine.

[DouglasKC]

Then why did St. Iraneus explain that Christians met on the First day to commemorate the resurrection of Christ? That was 200 years before Constantine.

The Writings of Irenaeus are available on-line at the Ante-Nicean Fathers website.

I've searched all through his writings and can't see where he ever mentions "Lord's Day" or the "first day".

I do know that there is a quote that has been falsely attributed to him but actually doesn't appear in his writings.

Please indicate the quotation you are referring to and where it appears in his writings.

Thanks!

[LadyDoc]

My mistake. I thought it was in my book Irenaus Against Heretics. But it's in Justin Martyr's First Apology:

Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability,147 and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given,148 and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration.

[ClimoMike]

My mistake. I thought it was in my book Irenaus Against Heretics. But it's in Justin Martyr's First Apology

Oh, the good antijewish Martyr. Lets just see what he really though the reasoning behind the sabbath was....

"For since you have read, O Trypho, as you yourself admitted, the doctrines taught by our Saviour, I do not think that I have done foolishly in adding some short utterances of His to the prophetic statements. Wash therefore, and be now clean, and put away iniquity from your souls, as God bids you be washed in this laver, and be circumcised with the true circumcision. For we too would observe the fleshly circumcision, and the Sabbaths, and in short all the feasts, if we did not know for what reason they were enjoined you,-namely, on account of your transgressions and the hardness of your hearts.---Dialogue of Justin

I have a hard time believing him that this is the reason for the law. Justin here is saying that the law was giving because of the Jews sin. John said the sin is the transgression of the law(1 jn 3:4)

[DouglasKC]

My mistake. I thought it was in my book Irenaus Against Heretics. But it's in Justin Martyr's First Apology:

No problem. There is no doubt that gentile Christians, which Justin Martyr was, had already begun to distance themselves from Jewish converts as soon as 100 years after the death of Christ. Martyr spent most of his life in Rome where false Gods were rampant. Perhaps worshipping on Sunday served two purposes: It didn't look so suspicious since there was weekly feast to the Sun god on that day...and it also served to make them appear less "Jewish". Either way it did seem to be a departure from from scripture.

But I think the authors intent wasn't to prove that Constantine was the first person to come up with the concept of Sunday worship, but was the person who made it official for the Roman church, which ultimately became the Roman Catholic church and her protestent sisters.

[DouglasKC]

I have a hard time believing him that this is the reason for the law. Justin here is saying that the law was giving because of the Jews sin. John said the sin is the transgression of the law(1 jn 3:4)

Good point...

[LadyDoc]

I suspect that the question on what day to worship the Lord goes back furthur, since Paul ordered his followers not to argue over which day to worship the Lord. The arguments over how much of the Jewish law to follow goes back to the council in Jerusalem, where Paul argued that change of heart was the main thing necessary, not following rigid rules.

Christians to this day continue to argue over these things, but as he pointed out in Romans, we should not do so.

[DouglasKC]

I suspect that the question on what day to worship the Lord goes back furthur, since Paul ordered his followers not to argue over which day to worship the Lord.

This seems to be a common misconception that is often read into Paul's writings. If you give me the verse you're referring to I'll give you my opinion on it.

The arguments over how much of the Jewish law to follow goes back to the council in Jerusalem, where Paul argued that change of heart was the main thing necessary, not following rigid rules.

Essentially that's true. On our own we couldn't hope to follow God's laws, but with Christ all things are possible.

Christians to this day continue to argue over these things, but as he pointed out in Romans, we should not do so.

Verse?