Question:
you posted in alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic : Can any of you Catholic Scholars, tell me when the Sabbath was changed from Saturday to Sunday (The Pagan Day of the Sun)? I would like to know, when it was changed, and by who?? Pay more attention. See a post called The Proper Christian Sabbath from yesterday.
Why should we have to go search? If you cannot answer it here, why should we bother? You could go to many different books in my library too, but I won’t refer you to them. If I ask you a question I will do it here, not ask you to go to page 1205 of Such-and-such-book to read it. Christian
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -x-no-archive: yes and jw replied <whole bunch of stuff snipped for space I have told you time and again: I only read and post from within arc-rc. I don’t post anywhere else, even if I see those things that I would like to "sanitize." Then perhaps it would be advisable to not respond to those you KNOW are posted from the "Catholic haters." Write us off! It’s hard enough to do that in other groups. But when I see the same stuff in arc-rc, I feel compelled to respond. There are, I’m sure, lurkers who wish to learn more about Catholicism out there that might read only what "Catholic haters" write and get the wrong impression of Catholicism. There might be people that, wanting the same info, come around in 10 years to do a google.groups search on it. I want the correct info to be in with all else. How noble. So no matter what little obscure corner of a library somewhere there is a negative remark about Roman Catholicism, there will be a team of Roman Catholics out there, rooting all those ugly remarks out and leaving a document that demands "equal time."
Don’t know where you come up with this conclusion based on what I said. I’d suggest that those who want "The Truth from Rome’s POV" can find it on any one of 10 million pro-Rome sites.
But my whole point is that I want a counter to the junk that is frequently posted *here*. Otherwise, how do they/we know YOU have it right?
What is my incentive to lie? What incentive might anti-Catholics have? And, I’ll clue you, I’ve been to half-a-dozen pro-Roman sites, assembled by the Vatican, if I recall correctly. I’ve had to laugh myself silly at the stuff you actually blindly release.
Yeah, truly funny stuff. Like sola scriptura, sola fide, everybody speaking in tongues and all those other things with absolutely no biblical basis. Alberich
Response:
You would also find that they had to change the Sabbath to the day of the Sun, not because of any reason, but they had to change to get the Pagan Sun worshippers to accept their religion.
But that was hundreds of years later! You have to dance around ALL the examples of worship on the Lord’s Day before 315 a.d. in order to support your weak contention that its all the fault of Constantine and his paganized followers. You have to ignore the whole Quartodeciman controversy in the third century about whether to celebrate the Pasch on Passover or on the Sunday afterwards, with Sunday winning finally "because it is the day of the Resurrection." Go back and study early church history before you start spouting off.
Response:
Cunneen, is that the best you can do?? You quote Acts 20: 7, which says only that they broke bread. To this day, that means had a meal.
No it does not only mention breaking bread. You fail to mention it does say which day of the week it was as well as involving preaching/discussion. See below. Continue on to Verse 11, they break bread again. Nothing is mentioned of the Eucharist in verse seven or eleven. So you are reading between the lines. And Yes, Revelation 1:10, mentions the Lord’s Day. But hey, it does attach it to any day of the week.
It doesn’t have to. Any Christian knew then, as they still do today, that the phrase "The Lord’s Day" specifically means both the day after the Jewish sabbath (which became Sunday on the Roman calendar) and the day of the Ressurection. Your "argument" is as if I asked you to reply "tomorrow" and you didn’t because I didn’t "attach it [tomorrow] to any day of the week." So, what is the logic to those quotes.
Beyond your comprehension? Ah, and now we go on to Didache. it mentions the Lord’s Day, does that same quote, say which day of the week it was?? And finally Justin Martyr. If you read his entire works, he spouts lots of Catholic doctrine, and brings in lots of things to differ the new christians from the Jews. You have shown nothing to when the change was made, and even less, to show by who.
ACTS 20:7: "On the first day of the week when we gathered to break bread, Paul spoke to them because he was going to leave on the next day, and he kept on speaking until midnight." (NAB) The first day of the week: the day after the sabbath and the first day of the Jewish week, apparently chosen originally by the Jerusalem community for the celebration of the liturgy of the Eucharist in order to relate it to the resurrection of Christ. Now, if you had access to the Vatican Library, you would find a lot of stuff.
Do you have access? Is that how you know what’s in there? How the church was ordered to accomodate the Pagans of Rome. That is why the Xmas celebration ties in the the birth of the Sun. You would also find that most Christian Holidays were adopted from Pagan beliefs. You would also find that they had to change the Sabbath to the day of the Sun, not because of any reason, but they had to change to get the Pagan Sun worshippers to accept their religion.
Where in the library is all that to be found? Then we can look them up! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you read Matthew 12:40, it says that Jesus will be in the grave three days and three nights. This is repeated in Matthew 20: 17-19, Mark 10: 32-34 and Luke 18: 31-34. Now has does that tie in with Good Friday and Easter Sunday? Now read in Matthew 27: 62, Mark 15: 42, Luke 23: 54, and finally John 19: 31. All of them say that Jesus had to be in the ground before dark, because the next day was the Sabbath. But read John again, because the sabbath was a HIGH day. It was a high Sabbath. Look at your calender. What Jewish High Sabbath is around Easter. There is only one Jewish High Sabbath around that time. That High Sabbath is the Passover. There is lots of talk about the last supper, etc. and the day or days of prepartion for the Passover. What more do you need to know. John spells it out. Jesus had to be in the grave before dark, because the Passover was the next day.
He had to be in the grave before dark because the next day (Passover) began at sundown. The Jewish calendar is lunar and calendar days go from sunset to sunset, not sunrise to sunrise (the Celts did the same. That’s one of the reasons why the old Celtic church pracitces were at odds with Rome). Now, The Passover was Thursday. So Jesus had to be in the grave by dark on Wednesday night. Three days and three nights, just as Jesus himself says in Matthew 12:40. The Jewish day of course runs from Dark to light. So with the finish of the light on Saturday, his time is up, and he arises. He arises Saturday night at dark, because the time is up. So on Sunday morning, when the people awaken and go down to the grave, he has arisen.
<snip
Response:
offensive to him cross posted the following to alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic,alt.talk.creationism alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy Follow ups set to his [his claim not theirs] home group, arcb, & Alberich’s group.
snip The way I happened upon the posts, this came long before I thanked you for finally holding IKHDY to the same standard. I do not seek to cross-post, and as I have mentioned, when I realize I’m doing it in response to someone else’s dumb remarks, I get annoyed with myself. No, I don’t think to look at the top each time. Here is an easy test for it, then: When you come across something about Catholicism, there are two options. (1) It’s likely being cross-posted, since you don’t read the Catholic newsgroup, or (2) Non-Catholics are just engaging in some good, old-fashioned Catholic-bashing behind the Catholics’ backs, as it were (wouldn’t Jesus be proud?!), by *not* posting it to the Catholic group for a fair rebuttal. Do either of these sound good to you?
Rather easy to figure out, if I am in say, soc.jewish.culture, & an off topic item pops up in that group, there are two choices. A: Someone is trolling the group from another newsgroup [cross posting in the process] B: Some one within the group has a question to ask others about the OT subject. Lame but possible. OT [off topic for jw] being a catholic item in the s.c.j or s a Jewish item in a Islamic group being common examples. There is only one other option, if the item is hateful, it is a fair cop that someone does not want to let the party being badmouthed know. Oh! And, btw, just for a perspective for you (you have kind moments, so I shall be kind this time), I am embarrassed to admit this, but I had to GUESS at what the above paragraph meant.
Well yes, your reading problem is well known. Ever learn to read the KJV, it only requires a collage level reading ability. Oh, I forgot, you get headaches, so maybe you should see a demonologist. there is one such claiming to live in the Seattle area. Oh wait, that’s you. SBT. I hope I got it correct.
A thing no one will ever be sure of. jw Alberich
walksalone who has to wonder when jw will quit trying to play the poor pitiful me card. If he ever had a TS card, the poor chaplain had punched into non-existence on the first day if his posting history here is any indication.
Response:
following. Follow ups set to arcb & Alberich’s hone group. So Alberich, I hope you will overlook the temporary intrusion. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – x-no-archive: yes x-no-archive: yes x-no-archive:yes
snip IKH, please stop cross-posting. There have been NUMEROUS complaints about it, and all you are proving is your refusal to listen to the words "No thank you!" You have GOT to be kidding, John!!! What? It’s fine and good to cross-post as long as the cross-post includes Catholic-bashing into the Catholic newsgroup? IKHDY’s cross-posting idiocy is fine? Or is cross-posting wrong only when the post disagrees with you? Your request is the height of hypocrisy. Alberich Funny. In a previous post, you complimented me on criticizing IKH for cross-posting. Frankly, this criticism from you leaves me stymied. The way I happened upon the posts, this came long before I thanked you for finally holding IKHDY to the same standard. I do not seek to cross-post, and as I have mentioned, when I realize
Like this time? Of course, silly me, I forgot, you have mental problems. Thta I don’t doubt, but I ssuspect they are not as you claim. I’m doing it in response to someone else’s dumb remarks, I get annoyed with myself. No, I don’t think to look at the top each time. Here is an easy test for it, then: When you come across something about Catholicism, there are two options. (1) It’s likely being cross-posted, since you don’t read the Catholic newsgroup, or (2) Non-Catholics are just engaging in some good, old-fashioned Catholic-bashing behind the Catholics’ backs, as it were (wouldn’t Jesus be proud?!), by *not* posting it to the Catholic group for a fair rebuttal. Do either of these sound good to you? I’ll say again, it is NEVER my intention to leave my own group. That I
That’s twice you lied in the same message, with the same lie. finally noticed that I was in MULTIPLE groups in corresponding with YOU FRIED me. I said, "Duh!" to myself. I had not been looking at what
Of course you haven’t that requires paying attention to what you are doing as well as being courteous to others. What the Jewish myth called being righteous, aka kind to others. groups, and I had gotten myself embroiled with several, including you.
That rings as true as a new lead silver dollar. But then, with your elimination of your posts from google, it is getting a little harder for others to verify that for themselves. But regardless of the motives for responding, or the group’s source, if I don’t think (remember) to look at the list of groups, it doesn’t matter. IF I have an IQ of 5,000 (metaphor) and NO capacity to remember or memorize (that is close to the truth, on the remembering
So you keep saying, waving it like a flag begging for pity. If you know you have a problem lie that, why would you want to inflict it on others. I suspect most know the answer & it won’t be what you claim. end), what good does being so bright do? No one believes that someone bright could not remember like an encyclopedia.
Indeed many know that, but your posting history indicates not as bright as claimed with an excellent memory for imagined slights. So you were saying? As for our chatter about the RCC within our own group, so? I have gone into the pretender (pentecostal) group and found them lynching the "fundies" which the pretenders aren’t. I have sneaked into the SDA group and they’re lynching us (fundies). I sneak into the RCC group, and they’re reminiscing over how the CHURCH wrote the Bible.
IOW, you don’t pay attention to where you are when you post. That explains some of the headers I’ve seen from you. Headers seen by anyone that wants to, or responds to you. So why must "Roman Catholic haters" (we aren’t) confine ourselves to our "hole?"
Your posts say you are, but then, from you, Janus would have a hard time figuring out what you said, & Izmur, well, I don’t think ]he would have a chance at ciphering what you mean vs. what you say. How about you come up with rules we can ALL live with? And I don’t mean Rome runs the world OR the church.
You mean rules that you like & you don’t have to follow. Now what would be the difference, you already follow those rules according to your posting history. How about the law in America? Each of us is free to express our POV.
Indeed, only in polite mixed company one is expected to be able to provide evidence for his claims, his POV is not part of the conversation unless it is brought up. Now, evidence for your claims is lacking, & according to google, will likely be a no show. As to your pov, I suspect that you will find it to be like assholes, everyone has one & thinks yours stinks. Seems to be a part of being human. jw Alberich
walksalone who, unlike jw, does try to keep his cross posting down to a minimum, its called consideration for others, especially those in Europe & other places that have no say in what they download, & pay by the minute.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – x-no-archive: yes x-no-archive: yes Here is an easy test for it, then: When you come across something about Catholicism, there are two options. (1) It’s likely being cross-posted, since you don’t read the Catholic newsgroup, or (2) Non-Catholics are just engaging in some good, old-fashioned Catholic-bashing behind the Catholics’ backs, as it were (wouldn’t Jesus be proud?!), by *not* posting it to the Catholic group for a fair rebuttal. Do either of these sound good to you? I’ll say again, it is NEVER my intention to leave my own group. That I finally noticed that I was in MULTIPLE groups in corresponding with YOU FRIED me. I said, "Duh!" to myself. I had not been looking at what groups, and I had gotten myself embroiled with several, including you. I didn’t mean to fry you for any cross-posting. Frankly, I don’t care who does it, as long as (1) They don’t complain about my reply going into what they consider to be *their* group (if it was originally in the header), and (2) the original poster has the stones to respond when he posts his stuff in all those groups. (You can guess which of the two IKHDY is usually not able to perform.) But regardless of the motives for responding, or the group’s source, if I don’t think (remember) to look at the list of groups, it doesn’t matter. IF I have an IQ of 5,000 (metaphor) and NO capacity to remember or memorize (that is close to the truth, on the remembering end), what good does being so bright do? No one believes that someone bright could not remember like an encyclopedia. Sure, hey–I hardly ever look at the groups to which the thing is posted except in odd circumstances–say, the response gets people from alt.smokers.cigars asking how our discussion about the Seven Last Words applies to their group (just as an example). But that’s shaded by my philosophy above. As for our chatter about the RCC within our own group, so? I have gone into the pretender (pentecostal) group and found them lynching the "fundies" which the pretenders aren’t. I have sneaked into the SDA group and they’re lynching us (fundies). I sneak into the RCC group, and they’re reminiscing over how the CHURCH wrote the Bible. So why must "Roman Catholic haters" (we aren’t) confine ourselves to our "hole?" I think you answered your own question. You look in other groups, and it’s wise to imagine that others will as well. You are quick to defend your faith, and you should imagine others are as well. So when Pentecostals, or Baptists, or Adventists, or anyone else starts to disparage the RCC, why would you expect Catholics not to defend it? (And for whatever it’s worth–I frequently look into the other groups, but refuse to post to something that is there, if it isn’t posted in arc-rc as well. It’s difficult, for sure, as many seem to be much braver when discussing the Church "behind its back" (as it were), even in the relative anonymity of the internet.) And if that isn’t a decent enough explanation of how I feel, ask yourself just how Christian is it to denigrate something when you think there is nobody around to support the thing you are discussing–this is essentially the situation you would encounter if we Catholics always stayed in our group (as you wish), and other groups were free to discuss Catholicism (also as you wish). You again approach from YOUR perspective without absorbing mine. For the reasons you have outlined, I stick within my group. I do NOT go to the RCC group, it comes to me. I do NOT go to the SDA group; it comes to me. And if I am not in the RCC group, I could care LESS what they/you call Billy Graham. IF I am not in the SDA group, I could care LESS what they say about Sunday worship being "The Mark of the Beast". I stay in my own group. So why are YOU SO OBSESSED to sanitize all groups so that they agree with your POV or they shut the hell up? I don’t get that! Are you actually trolling 1,000 possible groups gleaning for all anti-Rome chatter? How many newspapers and magazines do you read and respond to, so that ALL rhetoric all over the world, is fit for Roman Catholics? IOW, where does it stop? And who in here have you converted? No one. Please get the parody. Jesus used it a lot. However, as you persist in calling me a liar, and rebuking me, and ridiculing me, and sidestepping, and since you have refused to stop archiving my stuff, I am making a concerted effort to leave you. I leave you again. I have told you time and again: I only read and post from within arc-rc. I don’t post anywhere else, even if I see those things that I would like to "sanitize." Then perhaps it would be advisable to not respond to those you KNOW are posted from the "Catholic haters." Write us off! How about you come up with rules we can ALL live with? And I don’t mean Rome runs the world OR the church. I only wish it were up to me!!! =) Frankly, though, my suggestions would be something like: (1) Cross-post only when the post is something of interest to two or more groups (ie, how do Adventists, Baptists, and Catholics differ on the topic of marriage?), (2) Trolling/spamming is a very un-Christian thing no matter *which* sort of Christian a person believes himself to be, and should not be done (this would apply to militant Catholics, of whom there are a few, although names escape me except for Mark Johnson (who only seems to be a Catholic in name, anyway), as well as those like IKHDY), and (3) Nobody should post to a group that they would not post a reply to any responses to their original post. I think that these guidelines would make things much happier for all involved but, then again, I am just me, and in no way positioned to post these on all. Frankly, I’m considering writing my own FAQ. If you wish to correspond with me, these are the rules. What are? What I just wrote? Sorry. I should have used quotes. Let me try again. I am getting so weary of defending myself from all sides that I am considering a FAQ to post at the top of each post. === "If you wish to correspond with me, these are the rules:" #1 bla bla #2 ble ble #3 blu blu etc. "If you cannot abide by the above in corresponding with this handicapped person, please move on." === What do ya think?
I think you should grow up and quit being a crybaby. If you are going to dodge, weave, not answer pertinent questions, make unfounded statements, accuse others of what you are doing, and so on and so forth, then of course you will encounter opposition. There is a difference between being persecuted for righteousness’ sake and being persecuted for being a jerk. Handicapped? You seem to have the ability to make enough off-the-cuff comments as any person who doesn’t care about the truth — or who thinks he knows so much that he doesn’t and shouldn’t have to validate what he says. You have the ability to respond quickly to minor points while ignoring the major ones. And of course, if someone doesn’t agree with you and objects to unfair and unfounded mischaracterizations of others, you can always label him "a lost block head". So you have demonstrated the fact that you are as capable of dealing out abuse as anybody. Handicapped? Not from this viewpoint! If you are going to dish out abuse, be prepared to receive it in spades. A FAQ on the top of the posts is no excuse for S**T inside of it. Now if you want others to play nice, be nice. We can be very nice to those who are nice, even if we disagree with them. You can disagree without being disagreeable. If you aren’t being disagreeable, you probably won’t have to defend yourself. You will still have to defend your arguments, but hey! that’s debate. You don’t play if you won’t pay. Shall we play nice, now? Your choice. And if you choose to play nice, then may the Lord bless you. Otherwise, may you get what you deserve. Regards Raymond E. Griffith jw Alberich God bless, jw
__ _ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com – Accounts Starting At $6.95 – http://www.uncensored-news.com <<<<<<< The Worlds Uncensored News Source <<<<<<<<
Response:
<whole bunch of stuff snipped for space I have told you time and again: I only read and post from within arc-rc. I don’t post anywhere else, even if I see those things that I would like to "sanitize." Then perhaps it would be advisable to not respond to those you KNOW are posted from the "Catholic haters." Write us off!
It’s hard enough to do that in other groups. But when I see the same stuff in arc-rc, I feel compelled to respond. There are, I’m sure, lurkers who wish to learn more about Catholicism out there that might read only what "Catholic haters" write and get the wrong impression of Catholicism. There might be people that, wanting the same info, come around in 10 years to do a google.groups search on it. I want the correct info to be in with all else. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -How about you come up with rules we can ALL live with? And I don’t mean Rome runs the world OR the church. I only wish it were up to me!!! =) Frankly, though, my suggestions would be something like: (1) Cross-post only when the post is something of interest to two or more groups (ie, how do Adventists, Baptists, and Catholics differ on the topic of marriage?), (2) Trolling/spamming is a very un-Christian thing no matter *which* sort of Christian a person believes himself to be, and should not be done (this would apply to militant Catholics, of whom there are a few, although names escape me except for Mark Johnson (who only seems to be a Catholic in name, anyway), as well as those like IKHDY), and (3) Nobody should post to a group that they would not post a reply to any responses to their original post. I think that these guidelines would make things much happier for all involved but, then again, I am just me, and in no way positioned to post these on all. Frankly, I’m considering writing my own FAQ. If you wish to correspond with me, these are the rules. What are? What I just wrote? Sorry. I should have used quotes. Let me try again. I am getting so weary of defending myself from all sides that I am considering a FAQ to post at the top of each post. === "If you wish to correspond with me, these are the rules:" #1 bla bla #2 ble ble #3 blu blu etc. "If you cannot abide by the above in corresponding with this handicapped person, please move on." === What do ya think?
Honestly, I think that you’ll be very lucky to have anyone follow your FAQ. Although most would be willing to do what they can within reason to help in any response, remember that they’re on usenet for their own good, ultimately, not yours. And also remember that there will be the inevitable trolls that give you a hard time, just because of the FAQ. That’s my opinion on it, anyway. Peace, Alberich
Response:
Cunneen, is that the best you can do?? You quote Acts 20: 7, which says only that they broke bread. To this day, that means had a meal. Continue on to Verse 11, they break bread again. Nothing is mentioned of the Eucharist in verse seven or eleven. So you are reading between the lines. And Yes, Revelation 1:10, mentions the Lord’s Day. But hey, it does attach it to any day of the week. So, what is the logic to those quotes. Ah, and now we go on to Didache. it mentions the Lord’s Day, does that same quote, say which day of the week it was?? And finally Justin Martyr. If you read his entire works, he spouts lots of Catholic doctrine, and brings in lots of things to differ the new christians from the Jews. You have shown nothing to when the change was made, and even less, to show by who. Now, if you had access to the Vatican Library, you would find a lot of stuff. How the church was ordered to accomodate the Pagans of Rome. That is why the Xmas celebration ties in the the birth of the Sun. You would also find that most Christian Holidays were adopted from Pagan beliefs. You would also find that they had to change the Sabbath to the day of the Sun, not because of any reason, but they had to change to get the Pagan Sun worshippers to accept their religion. If you read Matthew 12:40, it says that Jesus will be in the grave three days and three nights. This is repeated in Matthew 20: 17-19, Mark 10: 32-34 and Luke 18: 31-34. Now has does that tie in with Good Friday and Easter Sunday? Now read in Matthew 27: 62, Mark 15: 42, Luke 23: 54, and finally John 19: 31. All of them say that Jesus had to be in the ground before dark, because the next day was the Sabbath. But read John again, because the sabbath was a HIGH day. It was a high Sabbath. Look at your calender. What Jewish High Sabbath is around Easter. There is only one Jewish High Sabbath around that time. That High Sabbath is the Passover. There is lots of talk about the last supper, etc. and the day or days of prepartion for the Passover. What more do you need to know. John spells it out. Jesus had to be in the grave before dark, because the Passover was the next day. Now, The Passover was Thursday. So Jesus had to be in the grave by dark on Wednesday night. Three days and three nights, just as Jesus himself says in Matthew 12:40. The Jewish day of course runs from Dark to light. So with the finish of the light on Saturday, his time is up, and he arises. He arises Saturday night at dark, because the time is up. So on Sunday morning, when the people awaken and go down to the grave, he has arisen. Hey, that works. And not only does it work, but it fits with what is written in your own Bible. But with the adoption of the Pagan Easter festival, a few days got changed. So what? Now he was executed on Good Friday and rose on Easter Sunday. So what’s the problem? The important thing is that we celebrate it, Right? Yes in a way, but if you can screw up something that simple, what else have you screwed up??
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -x-no-archive: yes Here is an easy test for it, then: When you come across something about Catholicism, there are two options. (1) It’s likely being cross-posted, since you don’t read the Catholic newsgroup, or (2) Non-Catholics are just engaging in some good, old-fashioned Catholic-bashing behind the Catholics’ backs, as it were (wouldn’t Jesus be proud?!), by *not* posting it to the Catholic group for a fair rebuttal. Do either of these sound good to you? I’ll say again, it is NEVER my intention to leave my own group. That I finally noticed that I was in MULTIPLE groups in corresponding with YOU FRIED me. I said, "Duh!" to myself. I had not been looking at what groups, and I had gotten myself embroiled with several, including you. I didn’t mean to fry you for any cross-posting. Frankly, I don’t care who does it, as long as (1) They don’t complain about my reply going into what they consider to be *their* group (if it was originally in the header), and (2) the original poster has the stones to respond when he posts his stuff in all those groups. (You can guess which of the two IKHDY is usually not able to perform.) But regardless of the motives for responding, or the group’s source, if I don’t think (remember) to look at the list of groups, it doesn’t matter. IF I have an IQ of 5,000 (metaphor) and NO capacity to remember or memorize (that is close to the truth, on the remembering end), what good does being so bright do? No one believes that someone bright could not remember like an encyclopedia. Sure, hey–I hardly ever look at the groups to which the thing is posted except in odd circumstances–say, the response gets people from alt.smokers.cigars asking how our discussion about the Seven Last Words applies to their group (just as an example). But that’s shaded by my philosophy above. As for our chatter about the RCC within our own group, so? I have gone into the pretender (pentecostal) group and found them lynching the "fundies" which the pretenders aren’t. I have sneaked into the SDA group and they’re lynching us (fundies). I sneak into the RCC group, and they’re reminiscing over how the CHURCH wrote the Bible. So why must "Roman Catholic haters" (we aren’t) confine ourselves to our "hole?" I think you answered your own question. You look in other groups, and it’s wise to imagine that others will as well. You are quick to defend your faith, and you should imagine others are as well. So when Pentecostals, or Baptists, or Adventists, or anyone else starts to disparage the RCC, why would you expect Catholics not to defend it? (And for whatever it’s worth–I frequently look into the other groups, but refuse to post to something that is there, if it isn’t posted in arc-rc as well. It’s difficult, for sure, as many seem to be much braver when discussing the Church "behind its back" (as it were), even in the relative anonymity of the internet.) And if that isn’t a decent enough explanation of how I feel, ask yourself just how Christian is it to denigrate something when you think there is nobody around to support the thing you are discussing–this is essentially the situation you would encounter if we Catholics always stayed in our group (as you wish), and other groups were free to discuss Catholicism (also as you wish). You again approach from YOUR perspective without absorbing mine. For the reasons you have outlined, I stick within my group. I do NOT go to the RCC group, it comes to me. I do NOT go to the SDA group; it comes to me. And if I am not in the RCC group, I could care LESS what they/you call Billy Graham. IF I am not in the SDA group, I could care LESS what they say about Sunday worship being "The Mark of the Beast". I stay in my own group. So why are YOU SO OBSESSED to sanitize all groups so that they agree with your POV or they shut the hell up? I don’t get that! Are you actually trolling 1,000 possible groups gleaning for all anti-Rome chatter? How many newspapers and magazines do you read and respond to, so that ALL rhetoric all over the world, is fit for Roman Catholics? IOW, where does it stop? And who in here have you converted? No one. Please get the parody. Jesus used it a lot. However, as you persist in calling me a liar, and rebuking me, and ridiculing me, and sidestepping, and since you have refused to stop archiving my stuff, I am making a concerted effort to leave you. I leave you again.
I have told you time and again: I only read and post from within arc-rc. I don’t post anywhere else, even if I see those things that I would like to "sanitize." – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -How about you come up with rules we can ALL live with? And I don’t mean Rome runs the world OR the church. I only wish it were up to me!!! =) Frankly, though, my suggestions would be something like: (1) Cross-post only when the post is something of interest to two or more groups (ie, how do Adventists, Baptists, and Catholics differ on the topic of marriage?), (2) Trolling/spamming is a very un-Christian thing no matter *which* sort of Christian a person believes himself to be, and should not be done (this would apply to militant Catholics, of whom there are a few, although names escape me except for Mark Johnson (who only seems to be a Catholic in name, anyway), as well as those like IKHDY), and (3) Nobody should post to a group that they would not post a reply to any responses to their original post. I think that these guidelines would make things much happier for all involved but, then again, I am just me, and in no way positioned to post these on all. Frankly, I’m considering writing my own FAQ. If you wish to correspond with me, these are the rules.
What are? What I just wrote? Alberich
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -x-no-archive: yes x-no-archive: yes x-no-archive:yes Can any of you Catholic Scholars, tell me when the Sabbath was changed from Saturday to Sunday (The Pagan Day of the Sun)? I would like to know, when it was changed, and by who?? Pay more attention. See a post called The Proper Christian Sabbath from yesterday. IKH, please stop cross-posting. There have been NUMEROUS complaints about it, and all you are proving is your refusal to listen to the words "No thank you!" You have GOT to be kidding, John!!! What? It’s fine and good to cross-post as long as the cross-post includes Catholic-bashing into the Catholic newsgroup? IKHDY’s cross-posting idiocy is fine? Or is cross-posting wrong only when the post disagrees with you? Your request is the height of hypocrisy. Alberich Funny. In a previous post, you complimented me on criticizing IKH for cross-posting. Frankly, this criticism from you leaves me stymied. The way I happened upon the posts, this came long before I thanked you for finally holding IKHDY to the same standard. I do not seek to cross-post, and as I have mentioned, when I realize I’m doing it in response to someone else’s dumb remarks, I get annoyed with myself. No, I don’t think to look at the top each time. Here is an easy test for it, then: When you come across something about Catholicism, there are two options. (1) It’s likely being cross-posted, since you don’t read the Catholic newsgroup, or (2) Non-Catholics are just engaging in some good, old-fashioned Catholic-bashing behind the Catholics’ backs, as it were (wouldn’t Jesus be proud?!), by *not* posting it to the Catholic group for a fair rebuttal. Do either of these sound good to you? Oh! And, btw, just for a perspective for you (you have kind moments, so I shall be kind this time), I am embarrassed to admit this, but I had to GUESS at what the above paragraph meant. I hope I got it correct.
You did. And sorry if it was a bit convoluted–I had just finished reading a bit of Faulkner (Quentin’s bit from "The Sound and the Fury"), so perhaps I wasn’t quite primed to speak regular English. Alberich
Response:
Here is an easy test for it, then: When you come across something about Catholicism, there are two options. (1) It’s likely being cross-posted, since you don’t read the Catholic newsgroup, or (2) Non-Catholics are just engaging in some good, old-fashioned Catholic-bashing behind the Catholics’ backs, as it were (wouldn’t Jesus be proud?!), by *not* posting it to the Catholic group for a fair rebuttal. Do either of these sound good to you? I’ll say again, it is NEVER my intention to leave my own group. That I finally noticed that I was in MULTIPLE groups in corresponding with YOU FRIED me. I said, "Duh!" to myself. I had not been looking at what groups, and I had gotten myself embroiled with several, including you.
I didn’t mean to fry you for any cross-posting. Frankly, I don’t care who does it, as long as (1) They don’t complain about my reply going into what they consider to be *their* group (if it was originally in the header), and (2) the original poster has the stones to respond when he posts his stuff in all those groups. (You can guess which of the two IKHDY is usually not able to perform.) But regardless of the motives for responding, or the group’s source, if I don’t think (remember) to look at the list of groups, it doesn’t matter. IF I have an IQ of 5,000 (metaphor) and NO capacity to remember or memorize (that is close to the truth, on the remembering end), what good does being so bright do? No one believes that someone bright could not remember like an encyclopedia.
Sure, hey–I hardly ever look at the groups to which the thing is posted except in odd circumstances–say, the response gets people from alt.smokers.cigars asking how our discussion about the Seven Last Words applies to their group (just as an example). But that’s shaded by my philosophy above. As for our chatter about the RCC within our own group, so? I have gone into the pretender (pentecostal) group and found them lynching the "fundies" which the pretenders aren’t. I have sneaked into the SDA group and they’re lynching us (fundies). I sneak into the RCC group, and they’re reminiscing over how the CHURCH wrote the Bible. So why must "Roman Catholic haters" (we aren’t) confine ourselves to our "hole?"
I think you answered your own question. You look in other groups, and it’s wise to imagine that others will as well. You are quick to defend your faith, and you should imagine others are as well. So when Pentecostals, or Baptists, or Adventists, or anyone else starts to disparage the RCC, why would you expect Catholics not to defend it? (And for whatever it’s worth–I frequently look into the other groups, but refuse to post to something that is there, if it isn’t posted in arc-rc as well. It’s difficult, for sure, as many seem to be much braver when discussing the Church "behind its back" (as it were), even in the relative anonymity of the internet.) And if that isn’t a decent enough explanation of how I feel, ask yourself just how Christian is it to denigrate something when you think there is nobody around to support the thing you are discussing–this is essentially the situation you would encounter if we Catholics always stayed in our group (as you wish), and other groups were free to discuss Catholicism (also as you wish). How about you come up with rules we can ALL live with? And I don’t mean Rome runs the world OR the church.
I only wish it were up to me!!! =) Frankly, though, my suggestions would be something like: (1) Cross-post only when the post is something of interest to two or more groups (ie, how do Adventists, Baptists, and Catholics differ on the topic of marriage?), (2) Trolling/spamming is a very un-Christian thing no matter *which* sort of Christian a person believes himself to be, and should not be done (this would apply to militant Catholics, of whom there are a few, although names escape me except for Mark Johnson (who only seems to be a Catholic in name, anyway), as well as those like IKHDY), and (3) Nobody should post to a group that they would not post a reply to any responses to their original post. I think that these guidelines would make things much happier for all involved but, then again, I am just me, and in no way positioned to post these on all. How about the law in America? Each of us is free to express our POV.
Yes, John. But because it’s a right doesn’t remove us of having a responsibility for that which we say. Were some people to say the same things they do here under the veil of anonymity in real life, they would likely be thought (1) to have the intelligence of warm doorknobs, (2) bigoted fools, or (3) insane, even to the point of involuntary committal by the standards of the typical three-point test (and no, I do *not* mean you!). So why should these people think that they can spout off their POVs here with aboslutely no consequences? Frankly, it’s a sign of either a weak or egotistical mind to come to the computer to spout off thinking that there are no consequences here as there are in the land of three dimensions. Alberich
Response:
JMJ Can any of you Catholic Scholars, tell me when the Sabbath was changed from Saturday to Sunday (The Pagan Day of the Sun)?
Saturday is dedicated to the pagan god "Saturn" Are JW’s and the Jew’s secretly worshipping a pagan god? Are they really closet pagans? Jim Carew sfo
Response:
Can any of you Catholic Scholars, tell me when the Sabbath was changed from Saturday to Sunday (The Pagan Day of the Sun)? I would like to know, when it was changed, and by who??
The Sabbath was never changed from Saturday to Sunday. The early Christian Jews continued to meet with their fellow Jews on Saturday, but added a celebration of the Lord’s Day on the first day of the week. Notice the last mention of the Sabbath in Acts (where it had been referenced frequently before) is made in Acts 18:4; there it was (18:6) that Paul said that from now on he would go to the Gentiles. The first day of the week is mentioned in Acts 20 as the day they gathered to break bread (the Eucharist). It was a day of prayer (Revelation 1:10). It is called here the Lord’s Day. In the Didache, which also dates from the late first or early second century we find the following: (Didache 14:1-3) "But on the Lord’s day, after that ye have assembled together, break bread and give thanks [Eucharist], having in addition confessed your sins, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let not any one who hath a quarrel with his companion join with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be polluted, for it is that which is spoken of by the Lord. In every place and time offer unto me a pure sacrifice, for I am a great King, saith the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the Gentiles." http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/St.Pachomius/Liturgical/didac… So by the late first or early second century the primary gathering for Christians was on the Lord’s Day. Since the Gentiles were not allowed (nor the Christian Jews after the mid first century) to worship in the synagogues, celebration of the Sabbath gradually disappeared and the synagogue service was adapted and became the first part of the Christians’ Eucharistic celebration. By the mid-second century we have the following from Justin Martyr: (1st Apology to the Emperor, ch. 67) "And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. 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, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, 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." http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-01/anf01-46.htm#P3941_747415 So Sunday worship in the form of the Eucharistic Celebration is well attested by 150 A.D.
Response:
Can any of you Catholic Scholars, tell me when the Sabbath was changed from Saturday to Sunday (The Pagan Day of the Sun)? I would like to know, when it was changed, and by who??
The early Christians observed the Sabbath since they were still devout Jews. They also gathered on Sundays to celebrate the Resurrection of Christ. In the early Church Sunday was a day to gather, worship and give thanks and then go back to work. Gradually, as more and more gentiles started being baptized the Jewish observance of the Sabbath was dropped leaving the Sunday gathering which eventually assumed the ‘no work’ aspect the Jewish Sabbath had had. Suzanne
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Can any of you Catholic Scholars, tell me when the Sabbath was changed from Saturday to Sunday (The Pagan Day of the Sun)? I would like to know, when it was changed, and by who?? The early Christians observed the Sabbath since they were still devout Jews. They also gathered on Sundays to celebrate the Resurrection of Christ. In the early Church Sunday was a day to gather, worship and give thanks and then go back to work. Gradually, as more and more gentiles started being baptized the Jewish observance of the Sabbath was dropped leaving the Sunday gathering which eventually assumed the ‘no work’ aspect the Jewish Sabbath had had.
A question to ask the originator of this post is "When was the first Saturday, Sabbath observed?" Before the Commandment to keep Sabbath was issued in Sinia, the Israelites were slaves in Egypt. As slaves, they were required to work 10 days because the week in Egypt was made up of 10 days. The original meaning of week meant "Market Days." With the above in mind, the Israelites were not free to observe a seven day week and were not free to observe any Sabbaths. In short, there is no means of identifying which day of the week was the day when God was supposed to have rested against the days of the month or the year or the seasons. The Jews observed the Sabbath when they received the Ten Commandments in Sinia to honor the so-called God’s rest, as if he needed to rest. The observance of "God’s rest" carries no value as to the salvation of the whole world. Observing the resurrection of Christ is the most important occurence in the history of the universe as we know it. The question regarding when Sunday was being replaced by Saturday happened during the Apostolic age and Saint Paul had no problem with either as he indicated very clearly. Shan
Response:
x-no-archive:yes Can any of you Catholic Scholars, tell me when the Sabbath was changed from Saturday to Sunday (The Pagan Day of the Sun)? I would like to know, when it was changed, and by who?? Pay more attention. See a post called The Proper Christian Sabbath from yesterday. IKH, please stop cross-posting. There have been NUMEROUS complaints about it, and all you are proving is your refusal to listen to the words "No thank you!"
You have GOT to be kidding, John!!! What? It’s fine and good to cross-post as long as the cross-post includes Catholic-bashing into the Catholic newsgroup? IKHDY’s cross-posting idiocy is fine? Or is cross-posting wrong only when the post disagrees with you? Your request is the height of hypocrisy. Alberich
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -x-no-archive: yes x-no-archive:yes Can any of you Catholic Scholars, tell me when the Sabbath was changed from Saturday to Sunday (The Pagan Day of the Sun)? I would like to know, when it was changed, and by who?? Pay more attention. See a post called The Proper Christian Sabbath from yesterday. IKH, please stop cross-posting. There have been NUMEROUS complaints about it, and all you are proving is your refusal to listen to the words "No thank you!" You have GOT to be kidding, John!!! What? It’s fine and good to cross-post as long as the cross-post includes Catholic-bashing into the Catholic newsgroup? IKHDY’s cross-posting idiocy is fine? Or is cross-posting wrong only when the post disagrees with you? Your request is the height of hypocrisy. Alberich Funny. In a previous post, you complimented me on criticizing IKH for cross-posting. Frankly, this criticism from you leaves me stymied.
The way I happened upon the posts, this came long before I thanked you for finally holding IKHDY to the same standard. I do not seek to cross-post, and as I have mentioned, when I realize I’m doing it in response to someone else’s dumb remarks, I get annoyed with myself. No, I don’t think to look at the top each time.
Here is an easy test for it, then: When you come across something about Catholicism, there are two options. (1) It’s likely being cross-posted, since you don’t read the Catholic newsgroup, or (2) Non-Catholics are just engaging in some good, old-fashioned Catholic-bashing behind the Catholics’ backs, as it were (wouldn’t Jesus be proud?!), by *not* posting it to the Catholic group for a fair rebuttal. Do either of these sound good to you? Alberich
Response:
Can any of you Catholic Scholars, tell me when the Sabbath was changed from Saturday to Sunday (The Pagan Day of the Sun)? I would like to know, when it was changed, and by who??
Pay more attention. See a post called The Proper Christian Sabbath from yesterday.
Response:
Early Christians gathered to celebrate "The Lord’s Day" and they acknowledged that because of Jesus’ death and resurrection he did away with the Old Mosaic Law and established the Way. Sunday is Holy because Christ himself made it so. Mike Tennyson – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Can any of you Catholic Scholars, tell me when the Sabbath was changed from Saturday to Sunday (The Pagan Day of the Sun)? I would like to know, when it was changed, and by who??
Response:
you posted in alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic : Can any of you Catholic Scholars, tell me when the Sabbath was changed from Saturday to Sunday (The Pagan Day of the Sun)? I would like to know, when it was changed, and by who??
And for those "seventh-daysers" I would ask, WHEN was the Sabbath DAY OF REST changed to the DAY OF WORSHIP, and by whom? For me and my house, I will worship the Lord EVERY SINGLE DAY OF THE WEEK. Our "rest is in the Lord." Colossians 2:16 Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day — In the Name of Jesus, Christian
Response:
Can any of you Catholic Scholars, tell me when the Sabbath was changed from Saturday to Sunday (The Pagan Day of the Sun)? I would like to know, when it was changed, and by who??
Response:
JMJ Can any of you Catholic Scholars, tell me when the Sabbath was changed from Saturday to Sunday (The Pagan Day of the Sun)?
In case your interested Saturday is dedicated to the pagan god "Saturn" What’s your problem? See below The Seven-Day Week and the Meanings of the Names of the Days The Seven Day Week The Naming of the Days Sunday — Sun’s day Monday — Moon’s day Tuesday — Tiu’s day Wednesday — Woden’s day Thursday — Thor’s day Friday — Freya’s day Saturday — Saturn’s day The Seven-Day Week The Babylonians marked time with lunar months. They proscribed some activities during several days of the month, particularly the first — the first visible crecent, seventh — the waxing half moon, fourteenth — the full moon, nineteenth — dedicated to an offended goddess, twenty-first — the waning half moon, twenty-eigth — the last visible crecent, twenty-nineth — the invisible moon, and thirtieth (possibly) — the invisible moon. The major periods are seven days, 1/4 month, long. This seven-day period was later regularized and disassociated from the lunar month to become our seven-day week. The Naming of the Days The Greeks named the days week after the sun, the moon and the five known planets, which were in turn named after the gods Ares, Hermes, Zeus, Aphrodite, and Cronus. The Greeks called the days of the week the Theon hemerai "days of the Gods". The Romans substituted their equivalent gods for the Greek gods, Mars, Mercury, Jove (Jupiter), Venus, and Saturn. (The two pantheons are very similar.) The Germanic peoples generally substituted roughly similar gods for the Roman gods, Tiu (Twia), Woden, Thor, Freya (Fria), but did not substitute Saturn . Sunday — Sun’s day Middle English sone(n)day or sun(nen)day Old English sunnand
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.