Saturday, June 11, 2016

 Did Constantine Change the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday?

Did Constantine Change the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday?

Many are asking did Constantine change the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. The short answer is No! Did Constantine's first Sunday law play a key part in the final change of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday? The answer is an unmistakable resounding Yes!
Did Constantine change the SabbathPlease consider carefully the following two questions. Does Satan hate God and His law? And since breaking the law of God is sin, would Satan attack and attempt to change God's law and deceive us on the truth of obedience to it? The wise will understand that he would and has attacked the Ten Commandment law of God and that there can be no doubt that he would do so. When did he first begin this attack on planet earth? In the very beginning in the Garden of Eden. See also the Catholic version of the Ten Commandments.
And while the second Commandment defines who and what we should not worship, the fourth Commandment defines who it is we do worship. Most are unaware of this fact and yet there is no shortage of scriptures both stating and demonstrating this. Satan wanted to be worshipped like the most High (Isaiah 14:12-14) and so instituted his own church and his own day of worship. And when did this begin? This can traced back as far as the tower of Babel around 2000 B.C. See the origin of Babylon and Sun worship first for a better understanding of this topic and the role of Emperor Constantine. See who changed the Sabbath to Sunday for more information.
It should come as no surprise that Satan has had no trouble in finding those he can deceive into posting false information about the Sabbath and hence attack any facts that prove there has been foul play with the fourth Commandment. So in an attempt to cover up the truth on the part Constantine played that resulted in the final change to the Sabbath, the proponents' whole argument is typically that Emperor Constantine did not change the Sabbath and only instituted the first Sunday law. That much in fact is true, but there is a lot more to the story which they very conveniently fail to mention like why and the major role Constantine did play in the change of the Sabbath to Sunday.
The deceived proponents usually say something like it is well documented that the early Church adopted Sunday as their day of worship. This statement is false and based on the abuse of two or three scriptures that refer to the first day of the week such as Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2. And if their statement was true, then there would have to be a very clear instruction from God as Jesus made it extremely clear that no change would occur to the law. This is the Ten Commandment law of God and something this important does not change on assumptions. There would always be very clear scriptures if there were to be so much as a jot or a tittle of a change. See Matthew 5:18 and Luke 16:17.
If the early Church really had changed to Sunday worship, the Apostles would have been instructed to do so by God and yet no such instruction exists. And absolutely all scriptures relating to worship in the Church would be on Sunday in the book of Acts if this were true, which would be many scriptures. So how many verses are there in the book of Acts showing Christians worshipping in the Synagogue (Church) on the first day of the week? Zero! There is not one single scripture! How many scriptures are there that show both Jew and Gentile worshipping in the synagogue on the Sabbath? Every single one of them and more than you can count on both hands! Not just those two or three scriptures that say “first day of the week” that do not even occur in a Church and are bad assumptions and deliberate attempts to bury a Commandment of God. Here are just a few examples of scriptures that are not assumptions unlike those trying to prove a fallacy: Mark 1:21, Mark 6:2, Luke 4:16, Luke 6:6, Luke 13:10, Acts 13:14, Acts 13:27, Acts 13:42, 44, Acts 15:21, Acts 17:1-2 and Acts 18:4. See who changed the Sabbath to Sunday and the Sabbath to Sunday change for full detail and all the proof.
These same people who are determined to squash the truth on the Sabbath day also typically quote Colossians 2:16, Galatians 4:10 and Romans 14:5. Are these scriptures all talking about the same thing? Yes! Are they talking about the Sabbath of the Lord? Not a chance! See Galatians and the law for a very misunderstood book.
Note what The People's New Testament (1891) by B. W. Johnson states in regards to these scriptures.
“Romans 14:5 – One man esteemeth one day above another. A second difference of opinion is now cited. Some, Jewish converts or Gentiles who did not understand that the old covenant was ended, believed that the Jewish sabbaths and new moons should be kept sacred. Compare Col_2:16, and Gal_4:10.”
This Bible commentary links all three passages but not with the Sabbath of the Lord thy God but the Mosaic Law with all the Jewish ceremonial sabbaths such as Passover and the Day of Atonement as well as the New Moon festivals etc. These were practiced because of sin and that is why they all ended at the cross.
Here is another from the Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge by Canne, Browne, Blayney, Scott on Romans 14:5.
“Romans 14:5 – esteemeth: Gal_4:9-10; Col_2:16-17”
Again we see that all three passages are connected. But with what? See the Ten Commandments and the ceremonial law or Colossians 2:16, Galatians 4:9-10 and Romans 14:5-6 for full detail. See also Adam Clarke and Albert Barnes Commentaries on Colossians 2:14-16, Albert Barnes and People's New Testament Commentaries on Galatians 4:9-10 and People's New Testament and Adam Clarke Commentaries on Romans 14:5.
There are many web sites out there claiming these scriptures end the fourth Commandment but how many really know that these scriptures are quoted in ignorance and do not refer to the Ten Commandments or the Sabbath at all, but to the sacrificial law that was practiced before the cross when the Ten Commandments were broken? I believe this shows one of two main things. Those erecting these erroneous web sites are either deceived by Satan or they just simply have no idea on the sanctuary service and just read these scriptures and decide what they think they mean when in fact they have no idea. If you study the real truth on these passages, you will know that when you encounter anyone quoting these scriptures that they do not understand Biblical truth and thus one cannot trust anything they do say.
One such site called got questions has truth mixed with error on every topic I read and yet so many are linking to their pages because what they write sounds good even though most of their material is seriously wrong. Don't just believe what tickles your ears but examine the scriptures daily as the Bereans did. (2 Timothy 4:3-4, Acts 17:11) Now is not the time to be apathetic as the return of Christ is imminent and so Satan is working harder than ever to spread lies on crucial topics. Below you can find the real truth on the very significant part that Emperor Constantine did play in the change to the Sabbath.
So how do those that oppose the Sabbath truth say this Commandment has ended? It was changed to Sunday in the Bible. Wrong! Colossians 2:16 says let no one judge you for keeping it. Wrong! Romans 14:5 says we can observe any day. Wrong! Galatians 4:9-10 says the day is bondage. Wrong! It is only nine Commandments now. Wrong! All Ten Commandments were nailed to the cross. Wrong! The Sabbath is a ceremonial law. Wrong! It does not matter what day we keep. Wrong! We do not know the true day so we should not bother. Wrong! We are under grace so the law is gone. Wrong! The calendar has changed and the day is lost. Wrong! Jesus broke the Sabbath so we can too. Wrong! Jesus is our Sabbath rest so the day is gone. Wrong! The Sabbath was only for the Jews. Wrong again! So which is it? It seems that all those who say the Sabbath is abolished cannot decide on why they say this Commandment is gone. Does anyone see a problem here? To begin with, many of these reasons contradict each other and so have to be wrong! If the Sabbath Commandment was really abolished then there would have to be one clear reason that everyone would agree on but not so! Why are there so many different reasons? Because they all have one thing in common. They are all excuses perpetuated by Satan! See should Christians keep the Sabbath or Sabbath and antichrist truth for the real truth on these excuses.

Did Constantine Change the Sabbath?

In 312 A.D., prior to his pivotal victory over his rival Maxentius at the Battle of Milvian Bridge, Constantine became a “Christian” after claiming to see in broad daylight a vision of “a cross above the sun” with these words emblazoned, “in hoc signo vinces” (by this sign conquer”). After defeating his enemies and becoming Emperor of Rome, Constantine presided in full royal pomp over the “First Council of Nicea” in 325 A.D.
As a shrewd political genius, his scheme was to unite Christianity and paganism in an effort to strengthen his disintegrating empire. Constantine knew that pagans throughout the empire worshiped the sun on “the first day of the week,” and he discovered that many Christians and especially in Rome and Alexandria also kept Sunday because Christ rose from the dead on that day. So Constantine developed a plan to unite both groups on the common platform of Sunday keeping. On March 7, 321 A.D., he passed his famous national Sunday law:

First Sunday Law enacted by Emperor Constantine - March, 321 A.D.

“On the venerable Day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed. In the country, however, persons engaged in agriculture may freely and lawfully continue their pursuits; because it often happens that another day is not so suitable for grain-sowing or for vine-planting; lest by neglecting the proper moment for such operations the bounty of heaven should be lost. (Given the 7th day of March, Crispus and Constantine being consuls each of them for the second time [A.D. 321].)” Source: Codex Justinianus, lib. 3, tit. 12, 3; trans. in Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol.3 (5th ed.; New York: Scribner, 1902), p.380, note 1.
Now a professed Christian, Constantine nevertheless remained a devout sun worshipper. “The sun was universally celebrated as the invincible guide and protector of Constantine,” notes Edward Gibbon in his classic Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, ch. xx, par. 3.
Constantine even printed coins which “bore on the one side the letters of the name of Christ, on the other the figure of the sun god.” Arthur P. Stanley, History of the Eastern Church, lect. vi, par. 14.
Again, Constantine’s promotion of Sunday observance was part of his definite strategy to combine paganism with Christianity: “The retention of the old pagan name of dies Solis, or 'Sunday,' for the weekly Christian festival, is in 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.’” – Stanley’s History of the Eastern Church, p. 184.
In spite of the rising popularity of Sunday sacredness, Church historian Socrates Scholasticus (5th century) wrote: “For although almost all churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries [of the Lord's Supper] on the Sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, have ceased to do this.” – Socrates Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical History, Book 5, ch. 22.
Another historian also confirmed this by stating, “The people of Constantinople, and almost everywhere, assemble together on the Sabbath, as well as on the first day of the week, which custom is never observed at Rome or at Alexandria.” – Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History, Book 7, ch. 19. Thus even in the 5th century, Sabbath keeping was universally prevalent (except in Rome and Alexandria) along with Sunday keeping. Many Christians kept both days, but as the centuries wore on, Sunday keeping grew in prominence and especially within Roman Catholic territories.
In 330 A.D., Constantine moved his capital from Rome to Constantinople (modern Istanbul), thus preparing the way for the Roman Catholic Popes to reign in Rome as the successors of Constantine. As the Papal Church grew in power, it opposed Sabbath observance in favour of Sunday sacredness and made the day change official in the Council of Laodicea (A.D. 363-364). Constantine's law had now been fully integrated into the Papal Church and the final step of the Sabbath to Sunday change was complete.
So around the year A.D. 364, the Catholic Church outlawed Sabbath keeping in the Council of Laodicea when they decreed 59 Canon laws. The following is the relevant Canon law: Canon XXIX: “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 from Christ.” (Percival Translation).
Four hundred years after the death of Christ and one hundred years after Constantine's linking of Church and State by his Sunday law edict, Rome and Alexandria were the only places in the world where many of the Christians kept only Sunday and not the true Sabbath. Why was it that Rome and Alexandria were also the first locations that Sunday worship began? Because this is where the pagan practices of Babylon eventually landed after it was conquered. And what was the dominant pagan practice that the Babylonian priests brought with them? Sun worship which was done on Sun-day! See the history of Sunday worship for more detail.
So one can understand why Rome and Alexandria did not bother to keep the true Sabbath as they had not done so for 200 years. Throughout the entire history of the changeover from Sabbath to Sunday, Rome and Alexandria had worked together. Alexandria provided the philosophical reasons for the changes and Rome provided the decrees and anathemas. Constantine's help was given only to the worldly Church leaders at Rome and those Christians that resisted the errors that were being introduced into the Church met with his opposition. “Unite with the bishop of Rome or be destroyed,” was Constantine's position.
“Great as were the favors which Constantine showed to the church, they were only for that strong, close-knit, hierarchically organized portion that called itself Catholic. The various [so-called] heretical sects could look for no bounty from his hands.” – Williston Walker, A History of the Christian Church, page 105.
The change of the Sabbath to Sunday was totally completed by the seventh century as the Popes consolidating their enormous power persecuted all who resisted their innovations. Did Satan use Constantine to play a key part in his plan to change the Sabbath to his day being Sunday? The answer is clear! From sun worship 2000 B.C., to Sunday worship in the Church. Satan infiltrated the Christian Church and most are oblivious to the fact that this has happened or understand the relevance. Sunday or “dies solis”, the day of the sun came from Satan worship and is his day. The mystery Babylonian religion went straight into the Church of Rome and that is why God calls her Babylon.
For more information on the Sabbath you may like to start with the Sabbath day truth. I pray that all you dear Catholics especially will read the page on Catholic Church error and was Peter the first Pope? See also who and what is the Antichrist.
Visits: 84782  Page Last Modified: May/10/2016 11:23:41  © Copyright 2007 - http://www.The-Ten-Commandments.orgDid Constantine Change the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday?

Wednesday, June 8, 2016

                                     Three Angels Messages
             
                      ေကာင္းကင္တမန္သံုးပါးတို ့၏သတင္းစကား

 ၁။ ဗ်ာဒိတ္ ၁၄း၁၄ တြင္ ဘာအေၾကာင္းၾကီးကိုေျပာသနည္း။
တဖန္ငါၾကည့္လွ်င္ ျဖဴေသာမိုးတိမ္ရွိ၏။လူသားေတာ္နွင့္တူေသာသူသည္ ေခါင္းေတာ္၌ ေရႊသရဖူကိုေဆာင္း
လွ်က္ထက္ေသာတံစဥ္ကို ကိုင္လွ်က္ မိုးတိမ္ေပၚမွာထိုင္ေတာ္မူ၏။ ဗ်ာဒိတ္က်မ္း ၁၄း၁၄။
 ေကာင္းကင္တမန္တပါးသည္ ဗိမာန္ေတာ္ထဲကထြက္၍ကိုယ္ေတာ္၏တံစဥ္ကိုလႊတ္၍ စပါးကိုရိတ္ေတာ္မူ
ပါ။ရိတ္ရေသာအခ်ိန္ေရာက္ပါျပီ။ေျမၾကီး၌ရိတ္စရာစပါးမွည့္ပါျပီဟုမိုဃ္းတိမ္ေပၚမွာထိုင္ေသာသူကိုၾကီးေသာ
အသံနွင့္ဟစ္ေလ၏။မိုဃ္းတိမ္ေပၚမွာထိုင္ေသာသူသည္မိမိတံစဥ္ကိုေျမၾကီး၌သြင္း၍ေျမၾကီး၏စပါးကိုရိတ္
ေတာ္မူ၏။ေကာင္းကင္တမန္တပါးသည္ေကာင္းကင္ဘံု၌ရွိေသာဗိမာန္ေတာ္ထဲကထြက္၍သူ၌လည္းထက္
ေသာတံစဥ္ပါ၏။မီးကိုအစိုးရေသာေကာင္းကင္တမန္တပါးသည္ယဇ္ပုလႅင္ထဲကထြက္၍ထက္ေသာတံစဥ္ပါ
ေသာသူကိုၾကီးစြာေသာေၾကြးေၾကာ္ျခင္းနွင့္ ေခၚလွ်က္သင္၏ထက္ေသာတံစဥ္ကိုလႊတ္၍ေျမၾကီး၏စပ်စ္သီး
ျပြတ္တို့ကိုရိတ္ေလာ့။အသီးမွည့္ျပီဟုေျပာဆို၏။ေကာင္းကင္တမန္သည္လည္းမိမိတံစဥ္ကိုေျမၾကီး၌သြင္း၍
ေျမၾကီး၏စပ်စ္သီးကိုရိတ္ျပီးမွ ဘုရားသခင္၏အမ်က္ေတာ္တည္းဟူေသာနယ္ရာတန္ဆာၾကီးထဲသို့ခ်ေလ
၏။ ျမို့ျပင္၌နယ္ရာတန္ဆာကိုဖိနင္း၍အေသြးသည္တဆယ္ေျခာက္ယူဇနာခရီးတေလွ်ာက္လံုး၌ျမင္းဇက္
ၾကိုးကိုမွီသည္တိုင္ေအာင္နယ္ရာတန္ဆာထဲကထြက္ေလ၏။ ဗ်ာဒိတ္က်မ္း ၁၄း၁၅-၂၀။

၂။  လူသားသည္ၾကြလာေတာ္မမူမီ ေလာကီသားအေပါင္းတိ့ုအား ဘာသတင္းတရားမ်ားေဟာၾကားၾက
မည္နည္း။
အေျဖ။ ေကာင္းကင္တမန္သံုးပါးတို့၏သတင္းတရားမ်ားေဟာရမည္။
ေျမၾကီးေပၚမွာေနေသာသူတည္းဟူေသာအသီးသီးဘာသာစကားကိုေျပာေသာလူမ်ိဳးအႏြယ္ခပ္သိမ္းတို့အား
ထာ၀ရဧ၀ံေဂလိတရားကိုေဟာရေသာေကာင္းကင္တမန္ပါးက၊ဘုရားသခင္ကိုေၾကာက္ရြ့ံ၍ခ်ီးမြမ္းၾကေလာ့။
တရားစီရင္ေတာ္မူေသာအခ်ိန္ေရာက္လာျ႔ပီ။ေကာင္းကင္ေျမၾကီး၊သမုဒၵရာ နွင့္စမ္းေရတြင္းတို့ကိုဖန္ဆင္း
ေတာ္မူေသာအရွင္ကိုကိုးကြယ္ၾကေလာ့ဟု၊ၾကီးေသာအသံနွင့္ေျပာဆို၍ေကာင္းကင္အလယ္၍ပ်ံ၀ဲလွ်က္ရွိ
သည္ကိုငါျမင္၏။ေကာင္းကင္တမန္တပါးကလည္းဗာဗုလုန္ျမိဳ့ၾကီးျပိဳလဲျပီ။မိမိမတရားေသာေမထုန္၏အဆိပ္
အေတာက္တည္းဟူေသာစပ်စ္ရည္ကိုလူမ်ိဳးအေပါင္းတို့အားတိုက္ေလျပီးေသာဗာဗုလုန္ျမိဳ့ၾကီးျပိဳလဲျပီဟု
လိုက္၍ေျပာဆို၏။ထိုမွတပါး တတိယေကာင္းကင္တမန္ကအၾကင္သူသည္သားရဲနွင့္သူ၏ရုပ္တုကိုးကြယ္
၍သူ၏တံဆိပ္လက္မွတ္ကိုနဖူး၌ခံသည္ျဖစ္ေစလက္၌ခံသည္ျဖစ္ေစ၊ထိုသူသည္ဘုရားသခင္၏ေဒါသဖလား၌
ေလာင္းေသာအမ်က္ေတာ္စပ်စ္ရည္စစ္ကိုေသာက္ရလိမ့္မည္။သန့္ရွင္းေသာေကာင္းကင္တမန္တိ့ုေရွ့၊သိုးသူ
ငယ္ေရွ့တြင္၊ကန့္နွင့္ေရာေသာမီးထဲမွာျပင္းစြာေသာညဥ္းဆဲျခင္းကိုခံရလိမ့္မည္။ထိုညဥ္းဆဲျခင္း၏မီးခိုးသည္
ကမၻာအဆက္ဆက္တက္လွ်က္ရွိ၏။သားရဲနွင့္သူ၏ရုပ္တုကိုကိုးကြယ္၍၊သူ၏နာမတံဆိပ္လက္မွတ္ကိုခံေသာ
သူတို့သည္ေန့ည၌မျပတ္သက္သာမရဟု လိုက္၍ၾကီးေသာအသံနွင့္ေျပာဆို၏။ဘုရားသခင္၏ပညတ္တို့ကို
၎၊ေယရႈ၏ယံုၾကည္ျခင္းက္ု၎၊ေစာင့္ေရွာက္ေသာသန့္ရွင္းသူတို့သည္ဤအရာကိုသည္းခံစရာအေၾကာင္း
ရွိ၏။ ဗ်ာဒိတ္က်မ္း ၁၄း၆-၁၂။
ဤသတင္းတရားသည္ခရစ္ေတာ္ဒုတိယအၾကိမ္မေပၚထြန္းမီကာလ၌ေနာက္ဆံုးသတင္းတရားျဖစ္သည္။
ထို့ေၾကာင့္ကိုယ္ေတာ္ၾကြလာေတာ္မူေသာအခါအသက္ရွင္လွ်က္ရွိေနေသာသူတို့သည္၎းသတင္းတရား
မ်ားကိုအထူးသတိျပဳ၍ဂရုစိုက္ျပီးလွ်င္ေလ့က်က္အပ္ၾကရသည္။

၃။  ပထမေကာင္းကင္တမန္သည္ဘာသတင္းကိုေၾကာ္ျငာသနည္း။
 ေျမၾကီးေပၚမွာေနေသာသူတည္းဟူေသာအသီးသီးဘာသာစကားကိုေျပာေသာလူမ်ိဳးအႏြယ္ခပ္သိမ္းတို့အား
ထာ၀ရဧ၀ံေဂလိတရားကိုေဟာရေသာေကာင္းကင္တမန္ပါးက၊ဘုရားသခင္ကိုေၾကာက္ရြ့ံ၍ခ်ီးမြမ္းၾကေလာ့။
တရားစီရင္ေတာ္မူေသာအခ်ိန္ေရာက္လာျ႔ပီ။ေကာင္းကင္ေျမၾကီး၊သမုဒၵရာ နွင့္စမ္းေရတြင္းတို့ကိုဖန္ဆင္း
ေတာ္မူေသာအရွင္ကိုကိုးကြယ္ၾကေလာ့ဟု၊ၾကီးေသာအသံနွင့္ေျပာဆို၍ေကာင္းကင္အလယ္၍ပ်ံ၀ဲလွ်က္ရွိ
သည္ကိုငါျမင္၏။ဗ်ာဒိတ္က်မ္း ၁၄း၆-၇။

၄။  ဘုရားသခင္သည္တရားစစ္ေၾကာစီရင္မည့္အခ်ိန္ကိုခ်ိန္းခ်က္ေတာ္မူသေလာ။
အေၾကာင္းမူကားခန့္ထားေတာ္မူေသာသူအားျဖင့္ ေလာကီသားတို့ကိုေျဖာင့္မတ္ျခင္းတရားနွင့္ညီေလွ်ာ္စြာ
စစ္ေၾကာစီရင္မည့္ေန့ရက္ကိုခ်ိန္းခ်က္ေတာ္မူျပီ။ထိုသူကိုေသျခင္းမွထေျမာက္ေစေတာ္မူေသာအားျဖင့္
ခပ္သိမ္းေသာလူတို့အားယံုေလာက္ေသာသက္ေသကိုျပေတာ္မူျပီ။တမန္ေတာ္၀တၳဳ ၁၇း၃၁။

၅။ ခ၇စ္ေတာ္ၾကြလာေတာ္မူေသာအခါ မည္သူဆံုးရႈံးမည္၊မည္သူကယ္တင္ျခင္းရမည္ဟူေသာတရားစီရင္
ျခင္းသည္ျပီးစီးမည္ေလာ။
မတရားေသာသူသည္မတရားသျဖင့္ျပဳေစဦး။ညစ္ညဴးေသာသူသည္ ညစ္ညဴးေစဦး။ေျဖာင့္မတ္ေသာသူ
သည္ေျဖာင့္မတ္ေစဦး။သန့္ရွင္းေသာသူသည္သန့္ရွင္းေစဦး။ငါသည္အလွ်င္အျမန္လာမည္။ငါသည္အက်ိဳး
အျပစ္ကိုေဆာင္ခဲ့သည္ျဖစ္၍လူအသီးသီးတို့အားမိမိတို့အက်င့္အတိုင္းဆပ္ေပးမည္။ဗ်ာဒိတ္က်မ္း၂၂း၁၁-၁၂။
မွတ္ခ်က္။  ။ ဗ်ာဒိတ္ ၁၄း၆-၇ တြင္ တရားစီရင္ျခင္းနွင့္ေကာင္းကင္သန့္ရွင္းရာဌာနကိုေဆးေၾကာသုတ္သင္
ျခင္းအေၾကာင္းတို့သည္တပါးတည္းျဖစ္သည္။(အခန္း၄၁ တြင္သန့္ရွင္းရာဌာနနွင့္၀တ္ျပဳျခင္းအေၾကာင္း
ၾကည့္ရန္)။ေကာင္းကင္တမန္သည္ဒံေယလအားရက္ေပါင္း၂၃၀၀ျပီးမွ သန့္၇ွင္းရာဌာနကိုေဆးေၾကာသုတ္
သင္မည္ဟုေျပာသည္။(ဒံေယလ၈း၁၄)ဤရက္ေပါင္း၂၃၀၀(နွစ္ေပါင္း၂၃၀၀သည္ ခရစ္ေတာ္မေပၚထြန္းမီ
သကၠရာဇ္၄၅၇ ခုနွစ္မွစ၍ခရစ္ေတာ္ေပၚထြန္းျပီးသည့္ေနာက္သကၠရာဇ္၁၈၄၄ တြင္ဆံုးသည္။(ဒံေယလ
အခန္း၁၇တြင္ ရက္ေပါင္း၂၃၀၀ အေၾကာင္းၾကည့္ရန္)သကၠရာဇ္၁၈၄၄ခုနွစ္ကစ၍ဗ်ာဒိတ္က်မ္း၁၄း၆-၇ တြင္ ပထမေကာင္းကင္တမန္၏သတင္းတရားသည္ေဟာေျပာစျပဳေသာအခ်ိန္ေရာက္သည္။ကမၻာေပၚတြင္
ရွိအရပ္ရပ္တို့၌ ဤသတင္းတရားကိုဘာသာစကားအမ်ိဳးမ်ိဳးအားျဖင့္ယခုတိုင္ေဟာေျပာေနေသာေၾကာင့္
သက္ေသမ်ားစြာရွိၾက၍၎င္းနွင့္ဆိုင္ေသာအနာဂတၱိက်မ္းသည္ျပည့စံုျခင္းသို့ေရာက္ေလျပီ။

၆။  ဒုတိယေကာင္းကင္တမန္သည္ဘာသတင္းစကားကိုၾကားေျပာသနည္း။
ေကာင္းကင္တမန္တပါးကလည္းဗာဗုလုန္ျမိဳ့ၾကီးျပိဳလဲျပီ။မိမိမတရားေသာေမထုန္၏အဆိပ္
အေတာက္တည္းဟူေသာစပ်စ္ရည္ကိုလူမ်ိဳးအေပါင္းတို့အားတိုက္ေလျပီးေသာဗာဗုလုန္ျမိဳ့ၾကီးျပိဳလဲျပီဟု
လိုက္၍ေျပာဆို၏။ဗ်ာဒိတ္က်မ္း ၁၄း၈။
မွတ္ခ်က္။  ။ဗာဗုလုန္အဓိပၸါယ္၊ရႈပ္ေထြးျခင္း။ယခုေခၚၾကေသာ ခရစ္ယာန္အသင္းတို့သည္တစ္လံုးတ၀
တည္းမဟုတ္၊ခရစ္ေတာ္ေနာက္ေတာ္ကိုလိုက္ေနေသာ အသင္းသားမ်ားဟူ၍ဆိုၾကေသာ္လည္းေလာက
နွင့္ပူးတြဲလွ်က္ေနၾကသည္။ခရစ္ေတာ္နွင့္လက္တပ္သည္ဟူ၍ဆိုစဥ္တြင္ေလာကီနွင့္မတရားေသာေမထုန္
ျပဳေသာေၾကာင့္ဒုတိယေကာင္းကင္တမန္သတင္းတရားသည္ဘုရားသခင္၏ေၾကာက္မက္ဖြယ္ျဖစ္ေသာ
(ဗာဗုလုန္ျမိဳ့ၾကီး ျပိဳလဲျပီ) ဟူ၍ျခိမ္းေျခာက္ျခင္းကိုေၾကာ္ျငာသည္။ဗ်ာဒိတ္ ၁၇း၅ ၌ ဗာဗုလုန္ျမိဳ့သည္ျပည့္
တန္ဆာတို့၏အမိဟုေခၚသည္။၎းအခန္းၾကီးကိုသတိနွင့္ဖတ္ပါလွ်င္ဗာဗုလုန္ျမိဳ့ၾကီးသည္ ေရာမပုပ္ရဟန္း
မင္းၾကီး၏အသင္းျဖစ္၍၊၎မွဖြားေသာသမီးတို့သည္ေရာမအသင္းထဲကထြက္ခြါၾကေသာ္လည္းေလာကနွင့္
မတရားေသာေမထုန္ျပဳျခင္းမကင္းေသာအသင္းမ်ားျဖစ္ၾကသည္။
ေပတရုသည္ ဗာဗုလုန္ျမိဳ့ေဟာင္းသို ့တစ္ခါမွ်မေရာက္စဖူး၊သို့ေသာ္ငါ့သားမာကုမွစ၍ဗာဗုလုန္၌ရွိေသာသင္
တို့နွင့္အတူေရြးခ်ယ္ေတာ္မူေသာအသင္းေတာ္သည္သင္တို့ကိုနႈတ္ဆက္ၾက၏ ဟုေရာမျမိဳ့ကေရးသည္။
(ရွင္ေပတရုၾသ၀ါဒစာပထမေစာင္ ၅း၁၃။ ၎ေရာမျမိဳ့၌ရွိေသာအသင္းေတာ္ကိုဗာဗုလုန္ျမိဳ့၌ရွိေသာအသင္း
ေတာ္ဟူ၍ေခၚသည္။)

၇။  တတိယေကာင္းကင္တမန္၏သတင္းစကားကား အဘယ္သို့နည္း။
ထိုမွတပါး တတိယေကာင္းကင္တမန္ကအၾကင္သူသည္သားရဲနွင့္သူ၏ရုပ္တုကိုးကြယ္
၍သူ၏တံဆိပ္လက္မွတ္ကိုနဖူး၌ခံသည္ျဖစ္ေစလက္၌ခံသည္ျဖစ္ေစ၊ထိုသူသည္ဘုရားသခင္၏ေဒါသဖလား၌
ေလာင္းေသာအမ်က္ေတာ္စပ်စ္ရည္စစ္ကိုေသာက္ရလိမ့္မည္။သန့္ရွင္းေသာေကာင္းကင္တမန္တိ့ုေရွ့၊သိုးသူ
ငယ္ေရွ့တြင္၊ကန့္နွင့္ေရာေသာမီးထဲမွာျပင္းစြာေသာညဥ္းဆဲျခင္းကိုခံရလိမ့္မည္။ထိုညဥ္းဆဲျခင္း၏မီးခိုးသည္
ကမၻာအဆက္ဆက္တက္လွ်က္ရွိ၏။သားရဲနွင့္သူ၏ရုပ္တုကိုကိုးကြယ္၍၊သူ၏နာမတံဆိပ္လက္မွတ္ကိုခံေသာ
သူတို့သည္ေန့ည၌မျပတ္သက္သာမရဟု လိုက္၍ၾကီးေသာအသံနွင့္ေျပာဆို၏။ဘုရားသခင္၏ပညတ္တို့ကို
၎၊ေယရႈ၏ယံုၾကည္ျခင္းက္ု၎၊ေစာင့္ေရွာက္ေသာသန့္ရွင္းသူတို့သည္ဤအရာကိုသည္းခံစရာအေၾကာင္း
ရွိ၏။ ဗ်ာဒိတ္က်မ္း ၁၄း၉-၁၂။
မွတ္ခ်က္။  ။ဤသားရဲသည္ ဗ်ာဒိတ္၁၃း၁-၂ ၌ေဖၚျပသည္။ဤသားရဲသည္ပါပ ရဟန္းမင္းၾကီးအသင္းျဖစ္
ေၾကာင္းက်မ္းဆရာမ်ားတို့ကသေဘာတူၾကသည္။က်ားသစ္၊က်ားရဲအေၾကာင္းအနာဂတၱိစကားမ်ားတို့သည္
ပုပ္ရဟန္းအသင္းအားျဖင့္ျပည့္စံုသည္။သားရဲတံဆိပ္တည္းဟူေသာပုပ္ရဟန္းမင္းၾကီးတံဆိပ္အေၾကာင္း
ကိုတတိယေကာင္းကင္တမန္၏သတင္းတရားသည္လူအေပါင္းတို့အားသတိေပးႏႈိးေဆာ္သည္။ ထိုပုပ္ရဟန္းမင္းၾကီးအသင္းသည္စတုတၳ ပညတ္ေတာ္ ဥပုသ္ေန့ေနရာတြင္ တနဂၤေႏြေန့၌ကိုးကြယ္၀တ္ျပဳ
ရန္ခရစ္ယာန္အသင္းမ်ားတို့အထဲမွာထားျခင္းသည္မိမိတန္ခိုး၏လကၡဏာ တံဆိပ္ျဖစ္သည္ဟူ၍ၾကိမ္းပ
ေျပာဆိုသည္။ေရာမဗရင္၈်ီအသင္းကထုတ္ေသာဒူးေ၀းဓမၼ အေမးအေျဖစာအဂၤလိပ္ဘာသာ (စာမ်က္ႏွာ
၆၇ တြင္ ၾကည့္ရန္)။
အေမး။  ။အသင္းေတာ္သည္ ပြဲေန့မ်ားနွင့္သန့္ရွင္းေသာေန့မ်ားတို့ကို ခန့္ထားနိုင္ေသာတန္ခိုးရွိေၾကာင္း
အဘယ္သက္ေသျပနိုင္သနည္း။
အေျဖ။  ။ဥပုသ္ သည္စေနေန့မွ တနဂၤေႏြေန့သို ့ေျပာင္းလဲေစျခင္းအားျဖင့္ျပသည္။ ဤေျပာင္းလဲျခင္းကို
ဘာသာကြဲမ်ားတို့သည္သေဘာတူၾကသျဖင့္ တနဂၤေႏြေန့ကိုက်ပ္တည္းစြာေစာင့္၍အသင္းေတာ္ခန့္ထား
ေသာအျခားေသာပြဲေန့မ်ားကိုမေစာင့္ၾကေသာေၾကာင့္သူတို့သည္မိမိတို့ကိုမိမိတို့ ဆန့္က်င္ဖက္ျပုၾက၏။
ထို့ေၾကာင့္တတိယေကာင္းကင္တမန္သတင္းတရားသည္စတုတၳပညတ္ေတာ္တြင္ရွိဥပုသ္ေနရာတြင္တနဂၤ
ေႏြေန့သြင္း၍၎ေန့တြင္ျငိမ္၀ပ္စြာမေစာင့္မခံယူရဟု သတိေပး ႏႈိးေဆာ္ျခင္းျဖစ္သည္။

၈။   သားရဲကိုကိုးကြယ္၍ သူ၏တံဆိပ္လက္မွတ္ကို ခံေသာသူတို့သည္အဘယ္သို့ေၾကာက္မက္ဖြယ္ေသာ
အျပစ္ဒဏ္ကိုခံရမည္နည္း။
ထိုသူသည္ဘုရားသခင္၏ေဒါသဖလား၌ေလာင္းေသာအမ်က္ေတာ္စပ်စ္ရည္စစ္ကိုေသာက္
ရလိမ့္မည္။သန့္ရွင္းေသာေကာင္းကင္တမန္တိ့ုေရွ့၊သိုးသူငယ္ေရွ့တြင္၊ကန့္နွင့္ေရာေသာမီးထဲမွာျပင္းစြာေသာ
ညဥ္းဆဲျခင္းကိုခံရလိမ့္မည္။ထိုညဥ္းဆဲျခင္း၏မီးခိုးသည္ကမၻာအဆက္ဆက္တက္လွ်က္ရွိ၏။သားရဲနွင့္သူ၏
ရုပ္တုကိုကိုးကြယ္၍၊သူ၏နာမတံဆိပ္လက္မွတ္ကိုခံေသာသူတို့သည္ေန့ည၌မျပတ္သက္သာမရၾက။
 ဗ်ာဒိတ္က်မ္း ၁၄း၁၀-၁၁။
မွတ္ခ်က္။  ။ထို့ေၾကာင့္အလြန္ဂရုျပဳဖြယ္ျဖစ္ေသာတတိယေကာင္းကင္တမန္၏သတင္းစကားကိုခရစ္ယာန္
အသင္းသားမ်ားနားလည္ဖို့ရန္။ ဒံေယလအနာဂတၱိက်မ္း ၇။ ဗ်ာဒိတ္က်မ္း ၁၂၊၁၃၊၁၄ တို့ကိုသတိနွင္ေသခ်ာ
စြာေလ့က်က္အပ္သည္။

၉။ ေကာင္းကင္တမန္၃ပါးတို့၏သတင္းတရားကိုေလာကီသားတို့အား ေဟာေျပာေသာသူတို့သည္အဘယ္
သို့ေသာသူတို့နည္း။
ဘုရားသခင္၏ပညတ္တို့ကို၎၊ေယရႈ၏ယံုၾကည္ျခင္းက္ု၎၊ေစာင့္ေရွာက္ေသာသန့္ရွင္းသူတို့သည္ဤအရာ
ကိုသည္းခံစရာအေၾကာင္းရွိ၏။ ဗ်ာဒိတ္က်မ္း ၁၄း၆-၁၂။
မွတ္ခ်က္။  ။ေကာင္းကင္တမန္သံုးပါးတို့၏သတင္းတရားသည္လူတို့အားေဟာေျပာေနစဥ္အခါ ခရစ္ယာန္
အမ်ားတို့သည္အသင္းတို့၌ကြဲျပားျခင္းရွိမည္အေၾကာင္းအထက္က်မ္းခ်က္ကျပသည္။ထိုခရစ္ယာန္အမ်ား
တို့သည္ေလာကနွင့္ပူးတြဲေနၾက၍ေရာမကထြက္ေသာခရစ္ယာန္တရားေတာ္မ်ားကိုသင္ေပးစဥ္ဘုရားသခင္
၏ပညတ္တို့ကိုလည္းေကာင္း၊ေယရႈ၏ယံုၾကည္ျခင္းကိုလည္းေကာင္း၊ေစာင့္ေရွာက္ေသာသန့္ရွင္းသူတို့သည္
ရွိၾကမည္။ထိုသူတို့သည္ဗ်ာဒိတ္ ၂၂း၁၄ တြင္ ပါေသာစကားထဲကခ်ီးမြမ္းျခင္းနွင့္ႏွစ္သိမ့္ျခင္းတို့ကိုရၾကမည္။
( အသက္ပင္နွင့္ဆိုင္၍ျမိဳ့တံခါးအတြင္းသို့၀င္အံ့ေသာငွါ ပညတ္ေတာ္တို့ကိုက်င့္ေသာသူတို့သည္မဂၤလာ
ရွိၾက၏။)

Saturday, June 4, 2016

I Am Sevnth-Day Adventist Church Meber

https://www.sabbathtruth.com/free-resources/article-library/id/916/catholic-church-admits-they-made-the-change
                                      

I am  Seventh-day Adventist Church Member .
Bible never say , the pastor must be educated and must be attend the bible College . Bible say , the Christians were must be tell the Bible messages to the people.
I am pastor at when I stay at Thailand , but now I can't at USA, that is not match with Bible.
I have been at USA , I stay as like general people , cause of I am not Educated. Now I am alive ,cause of bless from the God. God love me.
So I have to talk about Jesus. I have to stand in front of God. I am smart for the God.
My parent were Buddhist until now. I never known about Jesus before. No one come and tell about Jesus, but I had dream about seven time. So I have to tell about Bible truth . I never give up any disappointed problems.
Every human can die one time on his life , but our soul is in Jesus's hand . Jesus can saved our soul and we cannot die second time. Revelation 21:8.
Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke
, exhort, with all long suffering and teaching 3 dor the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own besires,because they have itching ears,they will heap up for them selyesteachers;4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned asibe to fables. 5 But you be watchful in all things, endure af-flictions,do the work of an evan-gelist, tulfill your ministry.
For I!am already being poured out as drink offering, and the time of my beparture is at hand.7 I have fought the fight, I have finish the race, I have
kept the faith 2 TIMOTHY 4; 2-6
Then many false prophets will fise up and deceivemany12 And decause lawl
esness will grow cold 13 But he who en- dures to the ens shall be saved.14
And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as awitness to all the nations, and then the end will come. MATTHEW 23; 11- 14
And I will cause the captves of is-rael to retuen, and will reduild those placse
as the first. 8 I will cleanse them from all their iniq- uity by which they have sinned against Me, and I will pardon all their inquities by which they have transgressed agains Me 9 Then it shall be to Me a name of joy, a praise,and
an honor before all natise, and an honor before all nations of the earth, who shall hear all the good that I do to them; they shall fear and tremble for all the goosness and tremble for all the prosper- ity that I prvide for it
JEREMIAH 33;7-9
See that you do not refuse Him who speaks For if they did notescape who refused Him who spoke on earth, much more shall we not Him who speaks furn away from Him who speaks from heav-en-26 whose voice then shook the earth; but now He has promised, saying , " tet once more L shake a not only the earth, dut also heaven, "d 27 Now this, yet once more, " in dicaes
the removal of those things that are being shake, as of things that are made that the things which cannot cannot be shaken may remain .
Therefore, since we are re-ceving akingdom which can not be shakem, let us have grace.by which we may a serve God ac- ceptably with reverence and God - ly tear, 29 For our God is a consum- ing fire HEBREWS 13; 25-29
For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old,
and the earth standing out of wa-ter and in the water, 6 By which the world that existed perished,being floode with water7 But the heavens and the earth which are now presrved by the same word,are reseved for fire until the day of judgment are perdition of un-goddly men 8 But,beloved do not dorget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as thousand years, and a thousnd years as one day9 The Lord is not slack conceningHis promise as some count slackness, dut is longsuffering toward us, a not wikking that and=y should per- ish dut that all should come to re- pentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heav
ens will pass away with a great not noise and the ele- ments will melt with fervent: heat; that are in it will be burned up, a 2PETER 5-10


                        I `am Seventh-Day Adventist Church Member
I am Seven Day Adventist Church member . When I arrived in USA , Pastor Jimmy Shwe order to help religious mission on 2008, April . But I cannot to do for mission cause of uneducated. So I work for the God as so much as I can as my way. Some of the religious teacher pointed to me ,I am not suitable for as a pastor , also they thought I want to be called as pastor. Some people were want to see any recommendation letter or religious ID from our mission . But ,I never seen in Bible , Christ 's followers were have ID.
I am not born from the Educated family . Even . no passed from primary school. But ,I known well about of Bible.Also , I did not attend the Bible College. But, God is using to me for sharing the Bible messages .
I believe , God is using to me as a sample in front of people, who proud prince of the world.
Now, lets study the Bible together !
The Proverbs of Solomon the son of David, king of Isreal;2 To know wisdom and instruction; to perceive the words of understanding;3 To received the instruction of wisdom ,justice, and the judgment and discretion.5 A wise men will heat ,and will increase learning ;and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels: 6 To understand a proverb ,and the interpretation ; the words of the wise ,and their dark sayings.7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge but fool despise wisdom and instruction. 8 My son ,here the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother; 9 For they shall be an ornament of grace unto thy head ,and chains about thy neck.10 My son , if sinners entice thee, consent thou not.11 If they say, Come with us ,let us lay wait for blood ,let us lurk privily for the innocent without cause:12 Let us swallow them up alive as the grave; and whole, as those that go down into the pit:13 We shall find all precious substance , we shall fill our houses with spoil:14 Cast in thy lot among us; let us all have one purse:15 My son, walk not thou in the way with them; refrain thy foot from their path:16 For their feet run to evil ,and make haste to shed blood . 17 Surely in vain the net is spread in the sight of any bird. 18 And they lay wait for their own blood; they lurk privily for their own lives . 19 So are the way of every one that is greedy of gain; which taketh away the life of the owners thereof.20 Wisdom crieth without ; she uttereth her voice in the streets.
The Proverbs 1: 1 – 20.
For the LORD giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding .7 He layeth up sound wisdom for the righteous: he is a buckler to them that walk uprightly.
The Proverbs 2 : 6 – 7 .
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; a good understanding have all they that do his commandment : his praise endureth for ever .
Psalm 111 : 10
The statutes of the LORD are the right ,rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes. 9 The fear of the LORD is clean ,enduring for ever : the judgment of the LORD are true and righteous altogether . 10 More to be desired are they than gold ,yea , than much fine gold : sweeter also than honey and the honey comb. 11 Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward.
Psalm 19 : 8- 11 .
Boast not thyself of tomorrow ; for thou knowest not what a day may bring forth .2 Let another man praise thee, and not thine own mouth ; a stranger, and not thine own lips.
The Proverbs 27: 1-2.
Keep therefore and do them ; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say ,Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.
Deuteronomy 4 : 6.
But where shall wisdom be found ? and where is the place of understanding ? 13 Man knoweth not the price thereof; neither is it found in the land of the living .14 The depth saith , It is not in me: and the sea saith, it is not with me.15 It cannot be gotten for gold ,neither shall silver be weighed for the price theref.16 It cannot be valued with the gold of OPhir, with the precious onyx, or the sapphire.17 The gold and the crystal cannot equal it; and the exchange of it shall not be for jewels of fine gold.18 No mention shall be made coral, or of pears; for the price of wisdom is above rubies. The topaz of Ethiopia shall not equal it, neither shall it be valued with pure gold.20 Whence then cometh wisdom? And where is the place of understanding? 21 Seeing it is hid from the eyes of all living , and kept close from the fowls of the air.22 Destruction and death say, We have heard the fame thereof with our ears. 23 God understandeth the way thereof ,and he knoweth the place thereof.24 For the looketh to the ends of the earth ,and seeth under the whole heaven;25 To make the weight for the winds; and he weigheth the water by measure.26 When he made a decree for the rain ,and a way for the lighting of the thunder; 27 Then did he see it , and declare it; he prepare it, yea, and searched it out . 28 And unto man he said ,Behold, the fear of the ‘lord, that is wisdom; and to depart from evil is understanding.
Book of Job 28 : 12-28 .
For you see your calling, breth- ren, that not many wise accord- inf to the flesh,not
many mighty, not many noble, are called, 27 But God has chosen the foolish thaings fo the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things fo the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; 28 and the base
things of the world and the thing which are despises God has en, and the things which are not , to bring to nothing the things that are 29 that no flesh should glory in His presence 30 But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God ----and righ- teousness and sanctifcation and redemption--31
that, as it writ- ten , " He who glories, let him glory in the LORD , " a
I CORINTHIANS 1: 26-28
For we are God's fellow- ers; you God's field, you are God's boilding I Corinthias3
9
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God For it is written, He the wise in their own crftiness" a, 20 nad again, " the LORD knows the thoughts of the wise,
that they are futile." 21 There- fore let on boast in men For all things are yours:
I Corinthians 3; 1-21

Sunday, May 29, 2016



                                       Protestant of Catholic




Question: "What is the difference between Catholics and Protestants?"

Answer: There are several important differences between Catholics and Protestants. While there have been some attempts over the last several years to find common ground between the two groups, the fact is that the differences remain, and they are just as important today as they were at the beginning of the Protestant Reformation. The following is brief summary of some of the more important differences:

One of the first major differences between Catholicism and Protestantism is the issue of the sufficiency and authority of Scripture. Protestants believe that the Bible alone is the source of God’s special revelation to mankind and teaches us all that is necessary for our salvation from sin. Protestants view the Bible as the standard by which all Christian behavior must be measured. This belief is commonly referred to as “sola scriptura” and is one of the “five solas” (sola is Latin for “alone”) that came out of the Protestant Reformation as summaries of some of the differences between Catholics and Protestants.

While there are many verses in the Bible that establish its authority and its sufficiency for all matters of faith and practice, one of the clearest is 2 Timothy 3:16, where we see that “all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” Catholics reject the doctrine of sola scriptura and do not believe that the Bible alone is sufficient. They believe that both the Bible and sacred Roman Catholic tradition are equally binding upon the Christian. Many Roman Catholics doctrines, such as purgatory, praying to the saints, worship or veneration of Mary, etc., have little or no basis in Scripture but are based solely on Roman Catholic traditions. Essentially, the Roman Catholic Church’s denial of sola scriptura and its insistence that both the Bible and tradition are equal in authority undermine the sufficiency, authority, and completeness of the Bible. The view of Scripture is at the root of many, if not all, of the differences between Catholics and Protestants.

Another disagreement between Catholicism and Protestantism is over the office and authority of the Pope. According to Catholicism the Pope is the “Vicar of Christ” (a vicar is a substitute) and takes the place of Jesus as the visible head of the Church. As such, the Pope has the ability to speak ex cathedra (with authority on matters of faith and practice), making his teachings infallible and binding upon all Christians. On the other hand, Protestants believe that no human being is infallible and that Christ alone is the Head of the Church. Catholics rely on apostolic succession as a way of trying to establish the Pope’s authority. Protestants believe that the church’s authority comes not from apostolic succession but from the Word of God. Spiritual power and authority do not rest in the hands of a mere man but in the very Word of God. While Catholicism teaches that only the Catholic Church can properly interpret the Bible, Protestants believe that the Bible teaches God sent the Holy Spirit to indwell all born-again believers, enabling all believers to understand the message of the Bible.

Protestants point to passages such as John 14:16–17: “I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.” (See also John 14:26 and 1 John 2:27.)

A third major difference between Catholicism and Protestantism is how one is saved. Another of the five solas of the Reformation is sola fide (“faith alone”), which affirms the biblical doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone because of Christ alone (Ephesians 2:8–10). However, Catholics teach that the Christian must rely on faith plus “meritorious works” in order to be saved. Essential to the Roman Catholic doctrine of salvation are the Seven Sacraments, which are baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, penance, anointing of the sick, holy orders, and matrimony. Protestants believe that, on the basis of faith in Christ alone, believers are justified by God, as all their sins are paid for by Christ on the cross and His righteousness is imputed to them. Catholics, on the other hand, believe that Christ’s righteousness is imparted to the believer by “grace through faith,” but in itself is not sufficient to justify the believer. The believer must supplement the righteousness of Christ imparted to him with meritorious works.

Catholics and Protestants also disagree on what it means to be justified before God. To the Catholic, justification involves being made righteous and holy. He believes that faith in Christ is only the beginning of salvation and that the individual must build upon that with good works because God’s grace of eternal salvation must be merited. This view of justification contradicts the clear teaching of Scripture in passages such as Romans 4:1–12, Titus 3:3–7, and many others. Protestants distinguish between the one-time act of justification (when we are declared righteous by God based on our faith in Christ’s atonement on the cross) and the process of sanctification (the development of righteousness that continues throughout our lives on earth). While Protestants recognize that works are important, they believe they are the result or fruit of salvation but never the means to it. Catholics blend justification and sanctification together into one ongoing process, which leads to confusion about how one is saved.

A fourth major difference between Catholics and Protestants has to do with what happens after death. Both believe that unbelievers will spend eternity in hell, but there are significant differences about what happens to believers. From their church traditions and their reliance on non-canonical books, the Catholics have developed the doctrine of purgatory. Purgatory, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia, is a “place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God’s grace, are not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions.” On the other hand, Protestants believe that because we are justified by faith in Christ alone and that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us—when we die, we will go straight to heaven to be in the presence of the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:6–10 and Philippians 1:23).

One disturbing aspect about the Catholic doctrine of purgatory is the belief that man can and must pay for his own sins. This results in a low view of the sufficiency and efficiency of Christ’s atonement on the cross. Simply put, the Roman Catholic view of salvation implies that Christ’s atonement on the cross was insufficient payment for the sins of those who believe in Him and that even a believer must pay for his own sins, either through acts of penance or time in purgatory. Yet the Bible teaches that it is Christ’s death alone that can satisfy or propitiate God’s wrath against sinners (Romans 3:25; Hebrews 2:17; 1 John 2:2; 1 John 4:10). Our works of righteousness cannot add to what Christ has already accomplished.

The differences between Catholicism and evangelical Protestants are important and significant. Paul wrote Galatians to combat the Judaizers (Jews who said that Gentile Christians had to obey the Old Testament Law to be saved). Like the Judaizers, Catholics make human works necessary for one to be justified by God, and they end up with a completely different gospel.

It is our prayer that God will open the eyes of those who are putting their faith in the teachings of the Catholic Church. It is our hope that everyone will understand that his “works of righteousness” cannot justify him or sanctify him (Isaiah 64:6). We pray that all will instead put their faith solely in the fact that we are “justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith” (Romans 3:24–25). God saves us, “not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life” (Titus 3:5–7).Protestant of Catholic

Saturday, May 28, 2016





PREFACE
  1. SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISM—WHAT? WHENCE? WHITHER?
     
  2. THE "RELIGIOUS LIBERTY" SCARECROW.
     
  3. ADVENTISTS ASSERT THAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH CHANGED THE SABBATH; BUT WHICH CATHOLIC CHURCH?
     
  4. CATHOLICS LOCATE THE CHANGE OF THE SABBATH BACK WITH THE APOSTLES.
     
  5. THE PAGAN ROMANS AND GREEKS HAD NO WEEKLY DAY OF REST, OR FESTIVAL, OR WORSHIP.
     
  6. HISTORICAL EVIDENCE THAT OUR LORD'S DAY WAS OBSERVED FROM THE TIME OF THE APOSTLES.
     
  7. SUNDAY OBSERVANCE ORIGINATED WITH THE EASTERN, OR GREEK CHURCH, NOT WITH ROME IN THE WEST.
     
  8. CONSTANTINE'S SUNDAY LAW, A.D. 321
     
  9. THE LORD'S DAY AT THE COUNCILS OF NICE, A.D. 325, AND LAODICEA, A.D. 364
     
  10. THE PAPACY AND THE LORD'S DAY.
     
  11. THE MARK OF THE BEAST—WHAT IS IT?
     
  12. THE TEN COMMANDMENTS NOT CHANGED BY CATHOLICS—ADVENTISTS DECAPITATE THE DECALOGUE.Threofore when you see the adomination of desolatin, spo ken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (whoever reads, let him understand 
  13.  
  14. 321 Constantine decrees Sunday as offical Roman-Christian day of rest.

321 Constantine decrees Sunday as offical Roman-Christian day of rest

                           


Constantine, the first Christian emperor of Rome, issued the following edict in A.D. 321:
"Let all the judges and town people, and the occupation of all trades, rest on the venerable day of the sun, but let those who are situated in the country, freely and at full liberty, attend to the business of agriculture; because it often happens that no other day is so fit for sowing corn and planting vines; lest the critical moment being let slip, men should lose the commodities granted by heaven." This law applied only to the Roman Empire. At that date there were numerous Christian Churches outside of the Roman jurisdiction, all keeping Sunday. (See Chapters 6 and 7.)
This law in no way could affect them. Then where did they get the Lord's Day if this law first introduced it? Adventists claim that this was a pagan law because it does not use a Christian term, as Lord's Day, or Christian Sabbath. The answer is easy: Christians needed no law to compel them to keep the day, for they all kept it already as a Christian duty. But the pagans kept no weekly day. Hence the law was directed to them, and, of course, used pagan terms for that day, "the day of the sun." That is the manifest explanation of why the pagan name was used. Gibbon says: "Constantine styles the Lord's Day Dies Solis, a name which could not offend the ears of his pagan subjects." (History of Rome, Chap. 20, Note 8.)
Doctor Schaff says: "So long as Christianity was not recognized and protected by the state, the observance of Sunday was purely religious, a strictly voluntary service." (History of the Church, Vol. III, p. 379) "Constantine is the founder, in part at least, of the civil observance of Sunday." Before this law all Christians had voluntarily kept the Lord's Day as a religious duty. Now the civil law required pagans to respect the Christian rest day. That is the simple truth and the whole of it.
Doctor Schaff, page 380, continues: "Christians and pagans had been accustomed to festival rests; Constantine made these rests to synchronize, and gave the preference to Sunday, on which day Christians from the beginning celebrated the resurrection of their Lord and Saviour. This, and no more, was implied in the famous enactment of 321."
The pagan festivals were only yearly, not weekly. Now they were required to keep a weekly rest day on Sunday so as to harmonize with Christians. Adventists now voluntarily kept Saturday as a sacred duty though the civil law does not demand it. Just so Christians voluntarily kept the Lord's Day as a religious duty, though there was no civil law requiring it. Now the civil law required pagans also to respect the Christian's day, the day which was then observed by the emperor and all his household.
As to the reliability of Doctor Schaff as a historian, Elder J. H. Waggoner says: "Doctor Schaff is justly esteemed as a man of extensive learning, and whose testimony regarding facts no one will call in question." (Replies to Canright, p. 132) Good and true. Doctor Schaff says Christians from the beginning voluntarily kept the resurrection day and Constantine made a civil law requiring the pagans to make their festival days harmonize with the established Christian day. The pagans had to conform to the Christian day, not Christians to the pagan day.
As we have abundantly proved in Chapter 5, the pagan Romans had no weekly festivals. These festivals were all yearly, like our Fourth of July, Thanksgiving, etc. But the Christian’s day was weekly, every Sunday. Constantine made these to synchronize. How? "By giving the preference to Sunday," the Christian's day. This is plain enough.
Notice carefully one clause in the decree, viz.: "Those in the country" were to have full liberty to attend to the business of agriculture. Doctor Schaff gives the reason thus: "He expressly exempted the country districts where paganism still prevailed." (Church History, 3d period, Par. 75, p. 379). This is true, and it shows that the pagans did not keep Sunday nor did they wish to. Hence, where they were greatly in the majority, they were exempted from obeying this law. But in the cities where Christians largely were, there secular business had to cease. This law was made to protect Christians and the Christian's day, not pagans nor a pagan day. Because Constantine, while yet a pagan with other pagans, reverenced Apollo, the sun-god, Adventists argue that he reverenced Sunday as a sacred day. But this argument is fallacious. Sunday was simply the astrological name of the day, named from the planet, the sun. It had no religious significance whatever, no connection with the worship of Apollo. He was not worshipped on Sunday more than any other weekday. That argument is founded on the jingle of words, but not on facts. (See Chapter 5)
The father and mother of Constantine were both Christians, and he venerated them both greatly. His mother was the sainted Helena, one of the most devout Christians of the early centuries. Her influence over her son was always great. Constantine himself thus states the reasons which led him to trust in his father's God, the God of the Christians. "My father revered the Christian God, and uniformly prospered, while the emperors, who worshipped the heathen gods, died a miserable death; therefore, that I may enjoy a happy life and reign, I will imitate the example of my father, and join myself to the cause of the Christians who are growing daily, while the heathen are diminishing." (Schaff, 3d period, Vol. I, Sect. 2, pp. 19, 20). He reasoned thus when made emperor in A.D. 306. Of him Ridpath says: "He perceived the conclusion of the great syllogism in the logic of events. He saw that destiny was about to write Finis at the bottom of the last page of paganism. So, for policy, the emperor began to favor the Christians." (History of the World, Vol. I, Chap. liii , pp. 881, 882)
In the year A.D. 312, while on his march towards Rome with his army to meet his enemy, the Emperor Maxentius, he saw, or at least pretended to see, in the heavens, the sign of the cross with the words, "By this conquer." He then adopted that as the banner for his army under which it ever after marched, and always to victory. Here he openly professed conversion to the Christian religion. He immediately issued an edict in favor of the Christians. It has been lost. The "Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia," Article "Constantine," says: "By the second (Milan 313) he granted them not only free religious worship and their recognition by the state, but also reparation of previously incurred losses. ... A series of edicts of 315, 316, 319 and 323 completed the revolution." By these edicts paganism was overthrown and finally outlawed from 323. (See the life of Constantine in any history or encyclopedia.)
Adventists unfairly try to place his conversion after his Sunday law in A.D. 321. Thus Mrs. White says: "The first public measure enforcing Sunday observance was the law enacted by Constantine two years before his profession of Christianity." (Great Controversy, edition of 1884, Chap. 30, p. 391). This statement alone destroys her claim to inspiration, for it is nine years too late, made with the evident intent to prove his law was pagan. Elder J. H. Waggoner, after naming the decree of 321, says: "At the time when these decrees were issued he had made no profession of Christianity." (Replies to Canright," p. 29). It is astonishing that a man should put in print a statement so entirely untrue. Nothing is more clearly stated in history than that Constantine openly professed conversion to Christianity nine years before his Sunday edict was issued. (See The Life of Constantine by Eusebius.) For years before this he himself and all his household had piously observed the Lord's Day. (See Eusebius, as above.)
The "New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia," Article "Constantine," says: "The impression produced by this apparition (the vision of the cross) found its consummation in a dream by night. It is certain from the sources that the decisive conversion of Constantine to Christianity is to be fixed at the outset of the campaign, or in the spring of 312; also that this conversion rested not upon a single experience, the apparition or the dream, but that preparatory experience cooperated with it. ... Where in passages in Eusebius and elsewhere he speaks of the one religion and belief in one God, he means historical Christianity, and bids, not the Christians, but the pagans, to this doctrine, and in this light alone did his Christian and pagan contemporaries understand him."
Here is the clear testimony of an unbiased authority gathered from all the facts in the case which places the professed conversion of the emperor in A.D. 312, just where all reliable historians do. It was nine years before his Sunday law. Dean Stanley (History of the Eastern Church, Lecture 6, pp. 201, 202) places the conversion of Constantine at the same date, 312, right after his vision of the cross. He says: "That some such change, effected by some such means, took place at this crisis, is confirmed not only by the fact of Constantine's adoption of the Christian faith immediately afterwards, but by the specific introduction of the standard of the cross into the army."
Gibbon in his "History of Rome," Vol. XI, Chap. XX, p. 184, says: "About five months after the conquest of Italy, the emperor made (A.D. 313) a solemn and authentic declaration of his sentiments by the celebrated edict of Milan which restored peace to the Catholic Church."
From this time on he joined himself with Christians, did all he safely could for them and against paganism till in 323 he outlawed paganism entirely. The "Encyclopedia Britannica," Article "Constantine," says: "Rome was naturally the stronghold of paganism to which the great majority of the Senate clung with great devotion. Constantine did not wish to do open violence to this sentiment, and therefore resolved to found a new capital."
Stanley relates how the emperor refused to take part in a popular pagan procession in Rome. He openly ridiculed it. Says Stanley, "The Roman people were furious. A riot broke out in the streets." His statue was stoned. This is good proof of his hatred of paganism. His opposition to paganism was his reason for forsaking Rome. He caused his sons to receive a Christian education. Motives of political expediency, however, caused him to delay the full recognition of Christianity as the religion of the state until he became sole ruler of the empire.
Adventists are guilty of misconstruing the plainest intent of that law. They assert that this law compelled pagans and Christians alike to cease work on Sunday, except in the country where both were allowed to work. Then they emphasize the fact that this was the first law ever enacted forbidding work on Sunday. Thus Elder Waggoner says: " It has been fully proved that the decree of Constantine was the first authority for Sunday rest." (Replies to Canright, p. 136) Yes, certainly, but to whom did this law apply? To pagans. It was the first civil law by the state after its head had become Christian.
Again Waggoner says: " In the country it permitted all to labor, both pagans and Christians." (Replies to Canright, p. 150) On this it is fair to quote: " A half truth is as bad as a lie." Does that law in any way mention Christians? No. Waggoner assumes that it does, and by this false assumption concludes the Christians worked Sunday, when there is not a hint of such a thing in that law. Our law now permits people to do many things which no Christian will do. At that time Christians reverenced the Lord's Day regardless of what the civil law permitted.
Because the law permitted farmers to work Sunday, Adventists assert that Christians worked on Sunday up till that time. They have no proof of this. (See this work, Chapter 6.) For three hundred years it had been a sacred day with Christians. They kept it voluntarily, as Doctor Schaff states above, hence the law in no way applied to them, but it did require pagans, especially in cities where Christians mostly were, to cease work on that day.
Constantine, his mother Helena, all his children, his household, his servants, and he himself devoutly observed the Lord's Day at the time this edict was issued, 321. Adventists try to ignore all this to carry their theory that this was a pagan law requiring Christians to reverence a pagan day. It is a bad cause that requires such reasoning.
Another Seventh-Day advocate, Rev. A. H. Lewis, D.D., says: "This edict makes no reference to the day as a Sabbath, as the Lord's Day, or as any way connected with Christianity. Neither is it an edict addressed to Christians." (Sabbath and Sunday, p. 142) This is a good confession and states the truth exactly. That law was for pagans who had never rested Sundays. This law required them to do what they had never done before-cease work on Sunday. Christians required no such law, for they kept the day as a religious duty without any civil law requiring it. It would have been absurd and useless for Constantine to issue an edict forbidding Christians to work on the Lord's Day when for three hundred years that had been a part of their sacred faith. The very argument Sabbatarians make to prove that this law was addressed to pagans, in pagan terms, is good proof that Christians needed no such law.
They kept Sunday voluntarily. Look at the absurdity of the Adventist theory: The pagans were keeping Sunday; Christians were not, but instead were keeping Saturday. Constantine wished all to keep the same day. To whom then would he have addressed this law? To Christians, of course, requiring them to change their day. But he did no such thing; for there was no occasion for it.
Elder J. H. Waggoner makes this confession: "Constantine did nothing whatever that can be construed into changing the Sabbath. In his decrees he said not one word either for or against keeping the Sabbath of the Bible. To this he did not refer in any way." (Replies to Canright, pp. 149, 150) Of course not, for his law was addressed only to pagans who kept neither Saturday nor Sunday. But after his professed conversion in 312, did he not keep pagans in high offices? Did he not order sacrifices to be made to pagan gods? Did he not order some pagan rites to be performed for himself? Yes. Why? Out of policy. He had to do so to avoid a rebellion of his pagan subjects who were yet numerous and powerful. He had to bide his time as all wise rulers and reformers do. He could not change the religion and customs of a whole empire in a day. He used common sense, as Lincoln did in abolishing slavery. Lincoln delayed it years after radicals denounced him for his half measures and delay. Now all justify the course he took. Constantine pursued the same wise course in abolishing paganism.
So Adventists denounce him as half pagan because he did not play the fool and fanatic and try to do immediately what was impossible. When he first became emperor pagans were in the majority and filled all important offices. He had these to reckon with till he could gradually change all this. By this course he avoided an opposition which would have defeated him. Then he accomplished the religious revolution in a remarkably short time,-ten years. Neither before nor since has the world ever witnessed so tremendous a revolution in so short a period, and his conversion to Christianity did it.
I have before me the "Life of Constantine," by Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, Palestine. He was often with the emperor, in his palace, at his table, in church, in church councils, etc. He related how the emperor, as rapidly as possible, favored Christians and put down paganism, closed their temples, forbade their worship, and wrote and preached against idols.
But Constantine, long after he professed Christianity, retained the heathen title and office of "Pontifix Maximus," or Supreme Pontiff of paganism. Yes, because that still gave him authority to regulate that worship, and he used it to gradually curtail one thing after another in that religion till, in 323, he suppressed it entirely. In this he followed a successful policy, that is all.
In the preceding pages we have clearly proved that Christians had kept Sunday as a sacred day centuries before the time of Constantine. Eusebius, who lived with Constantine, repeatedly says that all Christians were keeping Sunday at that time, and before. We have proved positively, back a few pages, that the pagan Romans did not rest on Sunday, and hence had no Sunday rest day to give to Christians.
Nothing can be more reasonable and simple than the fact that when Constantine professed Christianity he should, as soon as possible, make a law to protect the Christian rest day, the same as Christian rulers have done ever since. That is just what he did do, and that is the whole of it. Whether he was a really converted man, or a mere professor from policy, has no bearing on the question. He professed to be a Christian, and all his edicts were issued to favor them, the Sunday law with the rest.
That the law was enacted specially to protect the Lord's Day for Christian worship is distinctly stated by Eusebius in his "Life of Constantine," Chapter XVIII. Eusebius lived right there where this law was made and when it was made. He was closely associated with Constantine, and has stated clearly why that law was given. Would he not know better than some partisan Adventist sixteen centuries later? Hear Eusebius: "He [Constantine] ordained, too, that one day should be regarded as a special occasion for prayer; I mean that which is truly the first and chief of all, the Day of our Lord and Saviour. The entire care of his household was entrusted to deacons and other ministers consecrated to the service of God, and distinguished for gravity of life and every other virtue; while his trusty body-guard, strong in affection and fidelity to his person, found in their emperor an instructor in the practice of piety, and, like him, held the Lord's salutary day in honor, and performed on that day the devotions which he loved.
The same observance was recommended by this blessed prince to all classes of his subjects; his earnest desire being gradually to lead all mankind to the worship of God. Accordingly he enjoined on all the subjects of the Roman Empire to observe the Lord's Day as a day of rest."
Notice that all the servants in Constantine's household were Christians, and all kept the Lord's Day with the emperor. He commanded all his subjects to rest that day so that Christians could be free to attend worship on the Lord's Day.
Many Christians were slaves to pagan masters, and could not rest unless their owners did. This law compelled these pagan masters to cease work on that day. Then their slaves could keep the Lord's Day.
Constantine considered himself called of God to care for the Church in external things as the bishops were to care for the internal matters. He said: "You are bishops whose jurisdiction is within the Church. I also am a bishop, ordained by God to overlook whatever is external to the Church." (Eusebius, "Life of Constantine,” Chap. xxiv)
That was why he made his Sunday law—it was to help the Church. Then there is another reliable witness to the fact that Constantine's Sunday law was to protect the Lord's Day, not a pagan day. The historian Sozomen was born in Palestine, the home of the apostles, only about sixty years after the death of Constantine. He was a noted lawyer in Constantinople, the home of Constantine; hence, was familiar with all the laws of the emperor, and knew their object. Of that Sunday law he says: "He also enjoined the observance of the day termed the Lord's Day, which the Jews call the first day of the week. He honored the Lord's Day, because on it Christ arose from the dead." (Eccl. Hist., Chap. ix, p. 22.)
This witness by such an authority living right there should be, and is, decisive. That law was to protect the Lord's Day because Christ arose that day, not because it was a pagan festival day.
Every candid man must see this. This entirely explodes the Adventists' theory that it was a pagan law enjoining a pagan day.
Elder A. T. Jones was once the editor of their church paper, and the best posted historian Seventh-Day Adventists ever had. In his recent book, "The Reformation," published in 1913, he not only admits, but truthfully argues, that Constantine's Sunday law was issued at the request of Christians to help the Church. He says: "The Sunday institution and all that was attached to it was wholly of the Church. And when from the federated Church the State accepted and embodied in the law this exclusively church institution, this, in the very fact of the doing of it, was the union of the Church and the State." "It was only in the furtherance of the grand scheme of the bishops and their church-combine to establish the State as 'the Kingdom of God '" (page 315).
Here we have the real truth about that Sunday law. It was issued by a professedly Christian emperor, to favor the Christian Church by protecting their Christian day of worship long held sacred by them. It is readily agreed that the zeal of Constantine to help the Church was unwise and detrimental in its results; but the fact remains just the same.
The edict of Constantine was the very first law ever made by any one prohibiting secular business on Sunday. All historians agree in this. This very fact overthrows the Adventists' claim that the day, as a rest day, originated with the pagans.
Consider now: If these pagan Romans had been keeping Sunday as a sacred day of worship why did they never before have a law forbidding work on that day? Did all these heathens, for ages, cease their work that day voluntarily without any law requiring it? Even in Christian lands, with strict laws against Sunday business, it is difficult to get people to observe the day. Were the heathens more religious than Christians? The Roman emperor was always the head of the pagan religion, the same as the Pope is the head of the Catholic Church. His edict was law to them. He was "Pontifix Maximus," which authorized him to regulate the pagan worship. If it was part of the pagan religion to regard the day as sacred, why is it that the first law prohibiting work on Sunday was never issued till the Roman emperor professed Christianity? I have asked Adventists this question and they make only an evasive answer. The simple fact is this: Up till the time of Constantine Christians were terribly persecuted and were in the minority, and so could make no civil law forbidding work on Sunday, the day they all kept, as we have seen.
The pagans did not observe Sunday, but worked that day, the same as on all other days. Hence, they wanted no law to prohibit the work they were all accustomed to do that day. A Sunday law was just what the pagans did not want; hence, he, by his authority as emperor, issued an edict requiring his pagan subjects to rest on Sunday, the same as Christians did and had done for three hundred years. That law was made to favor Christians, not pagans. That this law was made at the request of Christians is admitted by Adventists.
Again Elder Jones, in the Battle Creek Journal, December 11, 1888, says: "It is demonstrated that the first Sunday law that ever was enacted was at the request of the Church; it was in behalf of the Church, and it was expressly to help the Church."
This truthful admission overthrows the claim that this law was a pagan law to protect a pagan day. It was exactly the opposite-a law to compel pagans to cease work on the day which Christians kept as a sacred day. Put with this the admission of Waggoner above quoted, viz., that "the idea of the rest from worldly labor in its worship was entirely new to pagans." So it was, but Christians had kept the day for centuries. With whom, then, "originated " the custom of resting from work on Sunday and keeping it as a sacred day of worship?
It had its origin with Christians, not with pagan