What love. That's just hurtful. And cannot be true. Remember logic class? "No idea, anyone." Words that usually are never true.

Or could it be, you made a mistake in argument and I pointed it out to you, and you didn't like it?

I agree with you that we all don't have the perfect or full understanding and there's no wrong in that. Even Paul admitted this about himself..."For we know in part, and we prophesy in part." 1Cor 13:9

However that's not the case most of the time with dedication.


Yes, that's another problem.

It's too bad that there's this "dedication" to protect the Church positions or teachings instead of a dedication to know what God truly is saying in scriptures and try to come to know His positions and teachings more clearly.

I don't see the point of defending the Church teachings when there's only true valuable gain in finding out what is God's true teachings.

If God's teachings is contrary to the Church's position...we should be rejoicing to know that we are coming closer to know the Lord as He is. I don't see the reason to leave the Church or criticize it. It should be understandable amongst all the members that we should expect that we don't know all the truth and that we have some doctrines wrong or needs some fine tunings.

There's so much fear in the Church in admitting or coming to find out that they don't have all the truth -- that it is critical. It is this fear that we are often dealing with on the Adventist forums.

It's too bad that this fear is promoted by the Church leaders ... stressing that we have all the truth and abasing any other denomination who believe differently.

If any member disagree with the doctrines, especially their pet Sabbath doctrine by which it is a complete obsession of the Church....then their is this categorizing these members as "dissenters".

Well, Kland -- that is their tactic --
Instead of dealing with the questions they attack the person.
Notice what has happened in the last several posts.

I question their positions (their interpretations) and the whole volley of enmity fell on attacking my person,

Thus they completely derailed the subject and try to make Adventism seem a joke.


Yes, -- such great love!

I believe that I'm in the right thread and not off topic at all. Wasn't I answering directly the title of this thread?

"Was the first day of the week or Sunday ever made a day of worship?"

My answer was YES. I provided Biblical text saying the first day of the week or the 8th day was said to be a "holy convocation" -- a Sabbath.

I did not say that it replaces the 7th day Sabbath laws. I don't believe that we need to be either in one camp or the other to be in this discussion. I'm in BOTH camp for I see that BOTH the 7th day law and the 8th day laws are Biblical.

I'm not saying that these laws says we are to keep every 8th day of the week as a "holy convocation"...nor am I saying that we are to keep the 7th day of the week as a "holy convocation" by doing no work (the priesthood worked more on the Sabbath then other days of the week) as we Adventist think.

I believe that scriptures support strongly that both the 7th day and the 8th day laws are TYPES and needs to be understood with the New Covenant mindset for us to know how we should keep them the way the Lord intended us to keep them today.

Nor Am I saying that I know all the answers how to keep these with the new covenant mindset. That's why I'm engaging in this study ... hoping for some enlightenment on the matter.

I'm agreeing with JAK that most Adventist don't understand the reason why Sunday keepers keep Sunday; despite most Sunday keepers don't have their understanding based from the law or other scriptures. Why it stems from the 8th day laws and how these were fulfilled in the New Covenant way in the NT.

It is the same with Adventist who keeps the Sabbath law with an Old Covenant mindset; they have no understanding how this law should be kept with a New Covenant mindset; what's God's real purpose to institute it; how it fits in the plan of salvation; why some of the Feasts days are called Sabbaths also; and how these 8th day Feasts days are associated with the 7th day Sabbath.

So I did my best to share my understanding of both the 7th day law and the 8th day Laws and how they relate.


The Wave Sheaf

In my first post, I have listed the 5 Laws that says to observe the 1st day and the 8th day (==1st day) as a holy convocation--a Sabbath day.

Actually I had forgotten to mention one other law -- the wave-sheave offering law which is waved the day after the Sabbath(on a Sunday) and starts the countdown of the 50 days (7x7 days + 1) that leads to Pentecost. So it is a type of 1st day in the 8 days Feast of Tabernacle.

However to my surprise and with questions the wave sheaf is NOT kept as a "holy convocation" -- a Sabbath day. Here is an argument for those who are like the Judaizers still in the Old covenant way of keeping the Sabbath law.


The Wave Sheaf & Pentecost: Always on Sunday

These 2 Feasts days (wave-sheave and Pentecost), pattern on those 8 days laws, ALWAYS fall on the 1st day of the week even in the OT unlike the other 8th day feast Sabbath days that can fall on any day of the week.

However, like in any subject, this interpretation is debated. I think it was the Sadducees who interpreted that the meaning of "Sabbath" in Lev 23:11 meant the day after the first day of unleavened bread as that day was declared to be kept as a Sabbath day; whereas the Pharisees interpreted it as the 7th day Sabbath for you need to count 7 Sabbaths after that. I view the Pharisees position is more Biblical than the Sadducees as you come to a problem in the number when counting 7 Sabbaths if your starting point is not on a Sunday -- unless you make any day of the week a Sabbath and count 7 Sabbaths that way.


Early History of Sunday observance based on Wave Sheaf & Pentecost understanding got lost

Based on the law and the New Covenant fulfillment of these laws, these two Feasts (wave-sheave and Pentecost) ceremony fulfillment on Sunday is why the early Church (which was originally mostly composed of Jews with an understanding of the law) started to observe Sunday also as a worship day. According to some historians, many of them kept also the Sabbath day.

However this understanding of the law got lost through time because the majority of Christians shifted to being Greeks and they didn't have a Jewish background or understanding of the law anymore.


The False Notion that the Law was abolish in the Early Church

Also what came to play is after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD; the false notion that the law was abolish and was done away crept into the Christian understanding so to separate themselves from the Jews in the fear to have problems with the Romans who at that time still had dominion over the land. There were other reasons like the Greeks view the Jewish law observance was rigid and the Judaizers with their lack of understanding the new covenant did create serious problems also. All these factors plus the lack of having the scriptures on hand brought a gradual shift to an interpretation that the law was abolish.

This long standing argument that the law is abolish, Adventist also uses it whenever it is convenient for them to reject a section of the law they don't want to uphold. But most Christian denomination including Adventist don't have any problem to uphold the tithing law despite their interpretation of it is seriously not biblical and can be easily challenged.


The Wave Sheaf is NOT a Biblical Sabbath observance versus Pentecost is

Both the wave-sheave(==Christ resurrection) and Pentecost(==the Church who are the loaves baked with leavened) are "first fruits" ceremonies.

It is interesting to note that the wave-sheaf is NOT declared as a Sabbath; whereas Pentecost is. Most Christians today validates Sunday observing relating to Christ resurrection when in the law the wave sheaf was not declared as a holy convocation or Sabbath day. However, the resurrection day in the Fall Feast (the Feast of Trumpet) is declared as a Sabbath day.

So after some pondering,the thoughts that came to me is that it shows that God is putting some emphasis of the fulfillment of the "first Fruits" on the Church and not on Christ. This made sense to me when pondering on the meaning of the Sabbath given in Ex 20:11 is to "hollowed[qadesh] it". qadesh means "to consecrate, sanctify, prepare, dedicate" Christ doesn't need to be sanctify. He always been without sin. He's the ONE who sanctify US.

So that could be why the declared Sabbath days in the 8th day laws are focus when the fulfillment is on the Church members like Pentecost and the day of Trumpet (which is when the 1st resurrection happens) and not on Jesus resurrection day on the wave-sheaf. We see this also for the day of Passover when the unblemished lamb is killed -- Passover is NOT a Sabbath day; whereas the 1st day of unleavened bread and the 7th day of unleavened bread are Sabbaths that focus on US when we are to eat bread without leavened by following Jesus' lead whose life was always without leavened (sin).

Below is the main text about the wave-sheave. Notice that day is NOT said to be kept as a Sabbath day :

Lev 23:10 "Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye be come into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest unto the priest: 11 And he shall wave the sheaf before the LORD, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it.

As most understand the New Covenant fulfillment was the resurrection day of Christ by which He represents the first fruit that the priest "waved" up and down to symbolize the resurrection. The Wave-Sheave was fulfilled on the first day of the week (Sunday) but was NOT said to be a Sabbath.

Here's the main texts about Pentecost. Notice that it is a LEAVENED Feast that represents us and is to be kept as a holy convocation day :

Lev 23:15 " ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven sabbaths shall be complete: 16 Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the LORD. 17 Ye shall bring out of your habitations two wave loaves of two tenth deals: they shall be of fine flour; they shall be baken with leaven; they are the firstfruits unto the LORD. ... 21 And ye shall proclaim on the selfsame day, that it may be an holy convocation unto you: ye shall do no servile work therein: it shall be a statute for ever in all your dwellings throughout your generations."

Num 28:26 "Also in the day of the firstfruits, when ye bring a new meat offering unto the LORD, after your weeks be out, ye shall have an holy convocation; ye shall do no servile work:"

Despite you were doing as you said above; however I was referring specifically that you were twisting the word "evening" in John 20:20 to say that Jesus appeared at His resurrection to the disciples after sunset -- on a Monday and not on Sunday.



You fail to acknowledge the word "evening" can also mean after noon time when the sun from its highest point starts to go down. So your argument doesn't stand here.

If you were a young believer and not aware of much scriptures; I wouldn't of made that comment and given you that you had yet much to learn. But you are not a young believer and the global moderator of this forum.

If you were just repeating a counter argument that you've read somewhere; you are responsible to check if the counter argument is Biblical before using it. This can be easily done in only 5 minutes by a simple click of a mouse on the strong code for "evening" of John 20:20 and you would of been informed that it had two time either after noon time when the Sun start to go down or at sunset.

Besides you should know at least the basic law given in the OT of the passover lamb (Ex 12:6) and the daily evening sacrifice (Ex 29:38-41) that it was to be offered between the two evenings.

So I cannot give you the excuse of "ignorance" when it can be verified in 5 minutes, with your years of being in the Church, and being the global moderator of this forum.

A day is from evening to evening in scripture.

When Jesus appeared to the disciples in the upper room, it wasn't just at dusk -- it was after sunset.

Read the story again --
Jesus walks with two disciples to Emmaus.
They arrive in Emmaus when "it is toward evening, and the day is far spent".

But that is NOT the time Jesus appeared to the disciples in the upper room. He went in to have supper with the two in Emmaus.
When they sit down to eat, they recognize him, Jesus disappears, and the two jump up and hurry back to Jerusalem.

How long do you think it took them to get back to Jerusalem? It's 60 furlongs or about 12 kilometers -- and they didn't have any cars only their own feet to take them back to Jerusalem.

Those two arrive in Jerusalem and tell the disciples their whole experience, and the disciples are amazed.

Now calculate the time.

It was already evening, or beginning of dusk, when they arrived in Emmaus.
They prepare supper --
Recognize Jesus at supper.
Hurry 12 kilometers back to Jerusalem.
Tell the disciples the whole story of everything they had experienced "in the way".

You are looking at about two hours at least AFTER evening is first mentioned. And only then does Jesus appear to the twelve in the upper room.

So no -- your harsh and judgmental accusations are ill founded. Jesus did appear to the 11 disciples in the upper room AFTER sundown.

And no, nothing in your feast day explanations made Sunday a new day of worship. I'm sure some of the "feast Sabbaths" sometimes fell on a Sunday, as some did on a Monday, or a Tuesday, etc.
Yet, no sanctity is given to a weekly Sunday, in any of them.

And that in reality was the purpose of the question in the OP.

If it was after sunset as you are assuming, then John being Jewish wouldn't of said in John 20:19 "Then the same day at evening [G3798], being the first day of the week,". He would of said "Then the same day at evening, being the second day of the week".

As I said G3798 opios has two types of "evening" meaning and the way John expressed it; it is most likely to be the one between Noon and Sunset (around 6:20pm in Jerusalem in the month of April).


60 furlongs = 7 miles x 20 minutes per mile(walking pace) =2 hrs 20 min.

So it took them 2.5 hrs to get to Emmaus. Plenty of time to get there even before noon time considering sunrise is also around 6ish. But I would assume they probably left Jerusalem after lunch. So let's say they left at 1pm they would arrive to Emmaus at 3:30 pm.


I hate to say this but "liar liar pants on fire."

Luk 24:29 "But they urged Him, saying, “Stay with us, for it is getting toward evening, G2073 and the day [fn]is now nearly over.” So He went in to stay with them."

You got to be more careful dedication and check the scriptures before posting anything to save you some embarrassment. You can count that I will check the scriptures and even the Greek and Hebrew words and not take the English translation at face value either.

Here the word evening is different than in John 20:19. From the little time I had to view it, I would say this word means sunset.

But Luk 24:29 says it was "getting towards evening[sunset]...the day nearly over". Now in those days how much time or hours before sunset would people use this expression? Again, we can only speculate because the Bible doesn't say what time it was exactly. It could be sometimes after 3ish, 4ish, or 5ish. We don't know. Let's suppose it was 3ish -- already 9 hrs of the 12 hrs of daylight has past...maybe in those days they considered having 3 hrs before sunset that this is considered "getting towards evening" having "the day nearly over".

Is it again....liar, liar pants on fire? There's no mention of that is there? I couldn't find any other account of this story besides Luke and Luke doesn't mention whose house they went to. But considering the timing of the story, (the day Jesus resurrected) and most of the disciples stayed in Jerusalem... I would assume they were going to someone's house (maybe they were expected???) to tell them what had happened(?) and traditionally the women of the house prepared the meal.


Again you are speculating. We don't know what time exactly they got to Emmaus nor the time they left.

But Luke 24:30-31 says that when Jesus broke the bread (at the beginning of the meal) and disappeared... that's when the two disciples recognized Jesus and at once they went back to Jerusalem. The way Luke said it; I would speculate that they probably ran back to Jerusalem.

If they ran, the calculation would be different : 7 miles x 8:32 min/mile(running time) = 58.24 minutes (about 1 hr).

So let us suppose they arrive at Emmaus let's say at 4pm. Sat down at the table....let's give them a good hour before their eyes were open ... So they could of started running back towards Jerusalem at 5pm ...get there at 6 or possibly a little before as it all depends on the time of their arrival in Emmaus and all. So it is in the realm of possibilities that they got to the upper room sometime before Sunset.

This would validate the way John 20:19 was written where "evening" opsios can mean sometime between noon and sunset. Sunset in Jerusalem in April was around 6:20pm. So the possibility is there for them to arrive before sundown.

Again, if it was well after sunset as you assume, then John, being Jewish, I would think to be more accurate would of written it "So when it was evening on that day, the second day of the week" and not the first.


Look above how you've twisted the scriptures at least twice again with the texts in Luk 29. I've seen you do this too many time dedication. It's ok to speculate when the information is not provided. If you do so then you have to write in a way to make clear that it is a speculation. You don't do that but treat it as if that's what the Bible says.

Actually it is a very common habit in our church. So I cannot put all the blame on you. I was doing the same quite often myself until someone brought it to my attention. It was a very hard habit to break; however it helped me to always check myself and how I remembered scriptures by checking the source instead of relying on what I was taught or on my memory.


However let us suppose that it was after sunset and it was the second day of the week when Jesus appeared to the 11 disciples in Jerusalem; it still doesn't matter as Jesus still fulfill the law of the wave sheaf and has risen on the first day of the week(Sunday).

I have said and stressed that the wave sheaf law doesn't say that it is to be kept as a "holy convocation". Then I even quoted scriptures saying to note that scriptures does NOT tells us that it is a "holy convocation" or Sabbath day. Maybe you have missed that.

I also explained that the day of resurrection(wave sheaf fulfillment) does NOT fall on the 8th day but on the first day of an 8th days law. In this case it was the first day of the count down to Pentecost (7 x 7 day + 1=50 days). Pentecost is an 8th day type where that day is declared a holy convocation Sabbath day -- NOT the wave sheaf despite it still falls on the 1st day of the week.

So your argument has no weight and all the 8 days laws still stand that I have noted.

For those Sunday keepers who doesn't understand the law, nor check the Greek words.... this argument (based on a assumption) that Jesus appeared to the 11 disciples on a Monday ... would falsely prove their limited understanding wrong. As it is not a valid argument in the face of scriptures.

I don't know where you got that argument; but they probably also didn't study the law or had a very shallow Judaizer(Old Covenant) type of understanding; showing that their minds is still closed to the New Covenant understanding of the law. They're focus was probably only to prove that the Sunday keeping was wrong that they didn't see anything else and probably twisted the scriptures too to prove their point instead of being objectionable and seeking to understand what God was really saying and fulfilling.

Again! That's not true and I even have quoted many texts that says some of these 8th days laws-feast are to be kept as a "holy(quadesh) convocation ...Sabbath day.... not to do any civil work." Same wording are used as the 7th Sabbath day observance.

Check your Bible... read Lev 23 and Num 29. Then do a search with "holy convocation".

Someone far more inspired than elle, fully supports Dedication, so it is not surprising to see so much venom from elle.

If you are going to talk about "the 7th day law and the 8th day laws", then why did you exclude from your statement, "1st day laws"? Isn't that unbalanced to do that?

Again, You can't even support when the year [of the "actual" feast dates] starts. Relevant here, is the 7th day Sabbath is based upon what verses "your" 1st/8th day laws are based upon what? A clue would be, what would 10th day laws be based upon?