arvy

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon your people, and upon your holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision, and prophesy, and to anoint the most holy. arvy: This prophecy, given through only Daniel, is the one most importat of prophecies. Why? Because without this prophecy any one person might have laid claim to having been "Messiah" or "the Son of God" even under all the other seeming significant details with regard to certain events that were to transpire leading up to "Messiah's" Fisrt advent into history. Without Daniel's description giving information with regard to the time of "Messiah's First appearing, No proper time for His reality in history could possibly have been confirmed. The "Revelation," through Daniel was intended for affirmation to all Israel and the Nations of history of the "right time" measured from a ffortold event for the start of the time to a foretold event to close the Time. The whole of that time was a predetermined period of "seventy weeks" of years. Interesting that although the Jewish people do understand this statement for the time relative to Messiah's advent. Yet they do not accept that Jesus was the Christ ("Messiah"). They, to this date, still live in the expectation of "Messiah's" First Coming,-- "In The Flesh."! They have chosen to refuse that "Messiah" has come in the flesh and was "Cut off" (Isa. 53:8-12; Dan.9:26,) for both the Jewish nation and all the nations of the world, becoming the sacrifice of all sacrifices, "causing all the ritual sacrifices and offerings to cease (Dan.9:27) which had been "imposed upon them until the time of reformation" was come (Heb.9:8-10). Such continuation, or "overspreading" of those rituals after "Messiah should be "cut off" would thereafter be looked upon by God as an "Abomination" in His eyes, with their collective national punishment pre-determined to follow thereafter (Dan. 9:27). I believe that God would have me understand that the time (70 weeks of years, 70x7, or 490 years) He predetermined should transpire in a firm logical unbroken sequence from the point of commencement through to close of the of the 490 literal years. "Messiah" would therefore have been crucified ("cut off, but not for Himself," Dan.9:26) in the mid-part ("Midst") of the last 7 years. For whom was Jesus "Cut off" if not for Himself? I believe He was "cut off" (i.e., Crucified) for the Jewish nation, the Nations of this world, and for me, and for you, and all who are now reading this post. Now if there was no predetermined unbroken sequence by which the time set might be calculated then the prohecy is open to any "wind" of interpretation and process for computation. Too many theologians both Catholic and Protestant have already split the prophetic sequence described by Daniel into two segments. 69X7 to end at the crucifixion of "Messiah." The calculation, or time clock, was then come to a stop at the event of Christ's being 'Cut off." But to begin ticking off the last 7 years toward the beginning count for the thousand years of the book of Revelation. Most begin their count for the 69 weeks from twentieth year of King Artexerxes, 445/444 BC. 483 years less 444/445 years leaves a period of 38/39 years into Anno Dominum. Thats interesting considering Saul was standing by to watch Stepen being Stone for his steadfast belief in the Risen Messiah in about 34/35 AD! History with the Bible will afirm that Jesus was "Cut Off" after His baptism in the Jordan by John the Baptist, 26/27AD at about 31/2 years. If we add those 31/2 years to, say, 27AD we will find Jesus was crucified about the year 30/31. So by These theologians perception of the time distorted, the 483 years are not in agreement with either history or the Bible and the last 7 years are broken off from the described, consistant sequence, to conform to the doctrine of a restoration of Israel as a nation, at the last 7 years just before the count of the thousand years of Revelationis. However. If we count from the 7th year of Artexerxes the king of Persia (457/458 BC, Ezra 7 - the letter is cited there) for Daniel's description for a letter of decree instructing the freedom of Israel to begin their prophesied restoration, we will find that the 483 years will bring us to Jesus beginning of HIs Messianic Ministry at His Baptism in the Jordan by John the Baptist at about "30 years of age"(Lk.3:23), or at about 26/27AD. ad 31/2 years to "the Midst of the last week" of years and we are brought to The date of Jesus being "cut Off" and causing "the sacrifice and oblation" of the "shadow" types "to cease" by His own submission to the death on the cross, about 30/31 AD. Add another 31/2 years beyond Jesus' ascension and we are brought to about AD 34 with Saul standing by as Stephen is stoned to death for testifying, among the Jewish nation, to the reality of the resurrected/ascended Messiah of the "Prophets." From the Book of Acts we begin to learn of the History of the rise of Christianity from this very point. The Gospel from here forward in History is no longer "to the Jew FIRST and THEN the Gentiles; but to ALL who will hear, heed and trust in Jesus as "the Messiah" of promise come to the world "in the Flesh." If Jesus did not present Himself, born of a miracle birth, inthe flesh, in the province of Juda, in the city of Bethlehem, become baptised by His cousin and "forerunner," John the Baptist, to begin his Messianic ministry at "about the age of thirty years" at the close of the 69th week of years, and was not "cut off as our supreme "sacrifice and Oblation" for all Israel, Me, and You in the Midst of the last week __ then perhaps we, as Israel, the national religionists, should look for the coming of another Messiah! God forbids! What an "abomidable thought to His Mind!" Isa.66:1-4. What do you think?

And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath arvy: We should note that the context of Jesus statement was made, not with any reference to the first day of the week and we know, if we believe in Creation by expression, that God, The Word was present at His own work of Creating. And if we believe the account of Creation was an actual period of six literal periods of the first weekly cycle of days ("evenings and mornings"), And if that weekly cycle was maintained from creation through the millinnia before there was a Jew. And through the millinia to the Era of Messiah (Creator become flesh) then it should not be difficult to realise that it was on the Sabbath Day which *Christ as *Creator *made the seventh day of the first week the Sabbath for the Man, Adam, and the woman, Eve, from whom all mankind sprang "from the beginning" of all Creation. The challenge presented Jesus was not concerning which day, but how the Seventh day ought to be respected as pleasing to God, the Creator. Jesus was not speaking after the sense of man's right to alter what He Himself had set apart "sanctified" "for man" since His first week of Expressing Creation. Luke 6:5 And he said unto them, The Son of man is lord of the sabbath. arvy: The above statement is applicable to this vesre as well. I must understand here that Jesus, declaring Himself "the Son of Man" is refering to His personal power and authority over the Seventh Day Sabbath with rgard to how it ought to be respected as toward Himself, as both Creator and Messiah. Again no issue was entered into about an alteration from the seventh day to another day. such a concept is stretching the words of the context far beyond the intent of the discussion involved in the context. John 20:19 On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 20:26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" arvy: This context is an accounting of events immediately following Jesus' resurrection. It is a shame to reach for these two verses describing events in relation the time following the resurrection as though they were intended for some proofs for the change from the Seventh Day Sabbath of the Weekly cycle in honor of the Creation, to the First day of the Weekly cycle in honor of Jesus' resurrection. traditional logic on this issue is simply not sustained by the decriptive context for the time, the place, and the purpose. THe reasonhere given is plainly apart from the concept of "worship" per se'. The context plainly states these followers of Jesus were gathered together behind closed doors "for FEAR OF THE JEWS." Worship was not of this contextual intent. As for the first day of the week and the number of days that Jesus a continued to be present among His followers. The New Testament Scriptures inform us He was seen of over 500 persons after He was raised from the grave, for forty days, before He ascended back to heaven. And in all this period of days, was not ever any notable mention from Him of any transferance of His authority for respect toward the first day of the week to honor His resurrection. Neither is there any such mention by so much as one of His desciples, or apostles. That there are historical accountings of certain gatherings with reference to the first day of the week. can not be denied. But that these accountings of events prove any warranted change of authority toward the first day of the week for any form of worship on that day in honor of Jesus resurrection is not thereby confirmed by the apostles in any of these contextual mentions. And I refer to all those scripture references which you have cited. 1 Corinthians 16:2 On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will have to be made. They would have been put to death if they met on the last day of the week. arvy: This context speaks nothing of a gathering for worship of honor relative to the first day of the week. The simple statement of instructionwas only that those believers, desirous to share their wealth with other less fortunate believers, were to set aside on that day perhaps wherever they might be, that hey might have their gifts prepared, collectively, ready to be received by Paul when He should pass their way. This context can not be valid support for any colletive congregational gathering for worship. And the possibility that one might be put to death for respecting the last day of the week in honor of Creation should not be construed as any valid reason for dishonoring what the Creator has said to "Remember." arvy: The total mentions of "the first day" of the week are 8 in the New Testament. Another one is in Acts I believe. In Acts we find Paul preaching on "the first day" on into the night. Eutichus falls asleep and falls from an upper level. "Next day" Paul leaves on foot. We should remember that in that time the day was measured by Jew and followers of Christ, as from sunset to sunset. sound logic then would have Paul possibly beginning his discourse at the latter end of the Seventh Day and continuing into the evening of the first day. The context tells us that early "the next day" (morning, sunrise or sometime there after) Paul walked to a port to take to a ship for passage to continue his journey. Consider again. This was not as a defined gathering for what we think of today as "worship." If it was to honor the first day in this context then we must follow this example and begin our worship from the close of the Seventh Day, at sunset. That is where the context places this described event! And remember. Jesus arose early the morning of the first day, not in the close of the Sabbath Day! There are no Bible facts whatsoever in support of the First day of the week as a day to be set apart or to be observed by Christians either by Jesus or His apostles after he was resurrected, nor after His ascension. But there is to this day "The Lord's Day," A day appointed for His honor, and it is defined by a number. This is not a judgment upon anyone it is just the simple Biblical facts, without the distortions of "church" tradition forced upon scripture. Service under fear is not Christ our Creator's desire. "If you love me. Keep (observe) My commandment/s."

it's not just the event itself, it's the timing of it, and the subject of it (the Church) agree! but it bears a striking similarity to the hallmarks of the rapture in I Thessalonians 4 Revelation 4

harv: Yes! I agree whole heartedly! We do serve and Awesome God in the person of Jesus, the Messiah.

Because you're no longer under the Law,Ood. Titus 2:11-14,"For the GRACE of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works." "Grace (Jesus Christ) Is Our Teacher!" quote] ************************************************8 Ood? Is that short for "Law of God?" Where do you get the teachings of Christ from whereby you come to know His outreach to you as the Messiah? Was not the first basis for even Jesus words founded direct from the Old Testament? Grace and Law according to Psalms is not adverse one to the other. where there is no standard for judgment there is no charge to be made or imputed for either right or error. "Where there is no Law, neither can sin be imputed." Where sin can not be charged, neither can righteousness be imputed. Where ther is no sin to be charged, neither can Grace be Imputed. Hence it would have been far more simple that Christ had removed the Law and not waste His time with the man of Foolishness of men who are willing to admit to sin yet refuse to respect the Law that outright defines Sin, and is called by God Himself Holy and Good. Saved by Grace? Yes! But not to wilfully resist the simplistic yet Holy "Commands" of God that define both what is Sin and what is Right. Who is that man who would seek to zealously to convince another of sin as by his own imaginings, and yet is unwilling to receive correction himself for His own "Sins." There is sin which is committed with knowledge. And there is also sin which is committed in honest ignorance., And there is sin that is committed in willing ignorance (no concern for knowing) either the right or wrong shown through God's Holy words of counsel, "His Law." And "Grace," expressed out of context, no longer conveys God's intended meaning in accordance with "the Law and the Testimonies," whether it shall be drawn from the Old or the New Testaments.

What I find is how amazing it is that so many argue in defense of ignorance with regard to what God, in His own words, His Book, states plainly What sin is, as by definition. And do it with a double tongue, as though they were speaking with firm logic. When I read from John, the definition for Sin, I hear God speaking to me as through "the Law." The word "law" as used here could have reference to "all Scripture." However John's reference here to "the Law" can not logically have reference to His own letter or to any other "letters" of the "New Testsament. So His use of phrase "the Law" in this the context is necessarally connective to the Sacred Writings which were existent from before the era of Christ, "The Law, The Prophets, and Psalms." to which als o Jesus Himself cited in His doctrine. It seems to me that common intelligence should speak to our thought processes that for this definition to be "rightly" associated to the true intent of the context, we need to understand that the phrase is intended to specify another "Law" to be found within "the Law" (Old Testament Scriptures) that speaks to the term "Sin." Do we need to question or alter what was labeled as "Sin" IN "The Book Of The Law?" Who was the "Inspiration" of that book? The Spirit of Moses? Or the Spirit of Messiah? Is it possible that christ might have redefined the definition for sin, He might thereby have freed Himself of the "Need" to Suffer" for me and you? But all ARE "FREE" to REDEFINE SIN, as a matter of freedom of each persons will to either accept or reject the sound counsel of the Messiah of the Prophets, whether of the "LAW" of the Old Testament or the New, whether of the Jew or of the Nations (Gentiles). To be "under" the Law. or to be "under the curse of" the Law is a matter assigned penalty for having "broken" the Law, or living in willful disrespectful of "the Law" authored and written by the finger of God in Christ, Who Himself "sinned NOT." But we, until we come to Messiah for forgiveness for having lived in ignorance or disrespect against "His" Law, are "under the penalty" assessed and announced for such disobedience. "The wages for living in transgression of the Law is(eternal) death; but the gift of God, through Messiah, to all who walk and live Circumspectly with respect to His Law, is eternal life. I am a publican believer in Christ, under Grace, I desire to observe all God's Commands, though he retains every "right" to slay me to this very day in my Life. However I know His Grace is greater than my personal ignorance of His all the encompassing Good of His "Law." By His "Law" I am informed that He will raise me up "At The Last Day." Job, of the trusted in the same "Law" that "though the skinworms should devour him, Yet in his flesh he expected to see God in his flesh."

ugtthtrtfrgdslvdthwrldhgvhsnlysn u gt tht rt fr gd s lvd th wrld h gv hs nl sn U gt tht rt! Fr Gd s lvd th wrld H gv Hs nl sn... You got that right! "For God so loved the world that He gave His only son..."

______________ arvy 'ere, yzf-r1, Yes, is a rather bland answer. I do believe that God is an intelect of omniscience, and there fore a "Spirit" of firm reasoning logic. [isa. 1:18; 53:4-12; 9:1-2, 24-27; Jhn. 4:19-26.] Hence my questions: Q. No. 1, "Is there sound logic for the tranposition... of the 70 weeks to literal years as multiplied by 7, or 490 years? Why not 70 literal weeks, of seven literal days? Seventy "shabua" of days? Q. No. 2: "Where is the true chronological point in history from which the 70 weeks were to have begun?" What be the problem of the 70 weeks from any point of chronology if they were taken to be 70 literal weeks of 7 literal days each? Q. No. 3: what worthy biblical facts can be presented for the logic of an uninterupted 69 week sequence with an indefinite period of now more than 1900 years before the start of the 70th week?" What line of logic, __ biblical or otherwise, __ could reasonably present a sequence for a numbered set of days or years (say 1290 days or years) to begin from one point in a chronology of history, run forward for 75 days or years in unbroken succession, then take up a resumption of the same count of that number 1900 days or years at some non-certifiable point of chronology in the future? Do you think the point of this question is illogical relative to the facts set forward by the "Spirit" of the prophets Daniel and Jesus, the inspiration of "Revelations" relative to specified biblical "times?" How smart do we perceive God to be relative to simple basic mathematics? How might a change in our thinking be affected if we should find much of what we have learned to believe, as a matter of prophetic doctrines, were not in firm factual alignment with His "Mind:" His "Spirit?"

arvy ''ere, E.B. This argument you present is, from an honest perception of scripture, far removed from intent of the statements of those verses cited. When they are read for absolute understanding of intent they will be read in their complete contexts. Those who use this "theological" manner to excuse themselve from the "Memorial" day (the cited week day of "Remembrance") by including all the days of 'ordained annual ceremonial ordinance' with regard to types and sacrifices. are in grave confusion in general over who Jesus is and what His power is with regard to the power of His own resurrection. While Mose may have been the instrument of delivering the "Ten" commandment to A people whom He had just delivered from the bondage of slavery, and made the a Nation to Himself. You will find, By the Bible, that He did so in honoring His own words of promise to Abraham. But now, in this era of the "present truth," according to the "covenant of the blood" of the "New Testament" (the blood of Messiah and of the Creator of all things From the Beginning) all mmen are of the offspring of Jesus the Christ of Abraham and all the prophets. As Jsesus himself said, "He came not to destroy the Law or the prophets; but to fulfill..." Many desire that "fulfill" but in the truth of Prophetical context of the Holy Scriptures it simply means bringing His own words into firm reality. And that is why He inspired the very writings of the book to the "Hebrews" regarding the types and antitypes of His Heavenly Preist hood, which should thence forth from His ascension, have "caused all sacrifice and oblation to cease" and all those "ceremonial Sabbaths" which were a very part of those ordained "Annual rituals." But; it should be clear to us from our Creator/savior's own life example in history, that He still desired the weekly day He Himself gave reason and number to, and instituted first to Adam and Eve, then later wrote on tables of stone Himself, amid other nine of ten commands, "for the Good" of all who would choose to hold those words in moral and, Memorial "respect to His love, His knowedge, His power, His authority as both Creator and Giver of Life, in whom only we obtain life everlasting, at the last day, by that same power, the power to Recreate, to resurrect the decayed: whether righteous or wicked: The righteous in the First Resurrectioin. the non believers in the Second Resurrection. May we all meet together, "in the air," with those "blessed" with everlasting life on the day of the First Resurrection; when the dead in Christ shall rise First, then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up to be with them and from then forward, be forever with our Lord.

Posted Today, 09:52 AM "" If anyone can impose Sabbath upon you, then it is no longer rest but a "work". Yet there is a time set apart by God Himself for us to stop from all labors and consider that He has it all under control. It really is a matter of the heart, not a date of the week, but rejecting what the Lord has given us to choose another way seems like the heighth of "religion" I'm not saying you "must" observe Sabbath from Friday night to Saturday night. I'm saying you should want to meet Him at the time He has set for it... Yes, we can be with Him throughout the weekdays! We absolutely MUST be "in Him" no matter what time or date it is! But you can't understand the Sabbath from the outside using theological lenses. It's not about doctrine or "being right". It's not about going somewhere and looking at the back of someone's head while someone else at the front of the rooms yaks for an hour. It's not about liturgy or singing or preaching. It's not even about obedience so much....it is about rest. This is the one sign that the jewish people have given the entire planet. Nobody took a day off before God commanded them to rest. Now everyone has a day off. The day they choose says a lot about where they put their trust. Some trust in the church to tell them why the church has the authority to change God's "suggestions". Some say Mohammed has the authority to make it Friday... Without any malice, I say it is a mistake to ignore the Sabbath as somehow a "lesser" commandment than the other 9 of the Decalogue. It won't kill you but you will never know the blessing you have missed. "" ___ As a matter of logic, I can perceive how this post will align with the whole of scripture on true Sabbath observance. I believe that the Bible is intended to convey to the reader its own logic (the logic of Him who inspired the writers of it). I also believe I am free to choose to observe the Sabbath as God's Memorial to Himself, as Creator of all things. And I am equally free to choose not to observe the Sabbath as God's Memorial to Himself as Creator of all things. I am equally free to choose to disregard all of the commandments of God, even to the denial of Christ. But what then? will I be freed from the penalty of sin? "God forbid!" Rom. 7 "What shall I say then of the Law. Is it made sin to me. "God forbid!" Is it possible we have become as the Israel who chose to reject the very inspiration of the prophets (Jesus) in an attempt to justify our choice for disbelief in His Memorial? Have we not yet come to undertood biblical definition for sin? What do we say we are freed from? From sin or the penalty for sin? Or Has Christ freed us from sin that we may sin freely? Can none perceive the difference between "types" and 'Memorial.' The memorial for all the "types" "Rest" in baptism and what most of us as "Christians" (followers of Christ) have termed today as "Communion." A "ritualistic" recalling to our minds of that fact of History When Jesus sacrificed Himself "God In the FLesh," Body and blood" for our now and at His Second Advent. Does not our final hope for everlasting life rest in the giver of life, The "Creator of all things" by the Expressions of His Mouth. Gen, 1:1; 2:1-3; Jhn. 1:1-14.

Does the Bible give us any definition whereby any individual can know they are in right standing with regard to God's standards for rights or wrongs. Or are we simply left to personal conscience thought without any set of moral guidelines?

You might want to check out www.templemountfaithful.org Remember that when Israel returned from exile in Babylon, sacrifices were resumed ON THE FOUNDATION of the temple before the temple was complete, during the time of Ezra. Well, there may not be a temple restored, but there is most assuredly a foundation there by the Western Wall. Twice a year, the Temple Mount Faithful seek to resume sacrifices. They do ask permission. The secular government denies it, fearing a public riot from the Muslim sector. The Temple Mount Faithful usually stage a protest, but are not above attempting a sacrifice against official denial. Twice they have come very, VERY close to succeeding by getting in a movable altar. Everything needed has already been made and prepared. There is a high Kohain. Even among Messianics, there is discussion of revisiting theology, seeing animal sacrifice as looking back upon the death of Yeshua, as once it looked forward to it. As I read the Bible from Genesis through Revelation I fail to perceive the need for a repeat of the types with regard to Jesus, the Messiah's Sacrifice, not even among the religion of the Jewish sects. It is my understanding that Jesus Sacrifice was "Once for all" and should could conclude those "foreshadowing types representative of Christ in the wilderness Tabernacle services. How would animal sacrifices since the shedding of God's own Son for the sins of all humanity avail any thing for the Jews Love of Messiah, as a nation, when, as a nation to God, they refused to believe, at the time of HIs First Advent, He was the Messiah Come from God "In The Flesh?" That is with the exception of those Jews, who did receive Him as Messiah come "In The Flesh," and were called "Christians" as a derogatory expression of contempt. Consider now whom John was referring to as being the "Anti- Christs" by description, in 1 Jhn. 2:18&22,4:3; @ Jhn.7. Now who was it of that time Jhn was referrimg to? Was it not to those who "denied" that Messiah had come " In The Flesh." Or I misunderstanding the lingo of the contexts? So from John's perspective of what constituted "the antichrist" for his time. Can we not perceive a change in the connotation for the word as we have chosen to apply the word to another prophetic context of the future. The biblical context was for those who simply chose not to receive Jesus as the Messiah of the prophets: prophecies. That was Johns definition for the word as He used it in His particular context. But as we have chose to apply the word to a "latter day"perspective" it now should carry a much braoder connotation of meaning. One who stang to magnify himself in opposition to Christ. But; not necessarily to deny Jesus as the Messiah having come "In The Flesh." How will he do this? By "scattering the power" of God's people. By creating confusion of sound doctrine from scripture. by the introductiions of "dark sentences." Dan. 8:22-25; 12:7; 1 Thess. 7-2 Thess.2:10; Rev. 13:1-18 (history in symbolism from Babylon to our present time. Compare symbols sequence of Dan. chapter 7 to the rise of the warring little horn against the saints. He is never biblically DEFINED as "the antichrist." He is simply defined by the work he will do as a deceiver in operations against the doctrines of Christ, and that he will hold great power in world politics, and economics. Do we know af any such soveriegn in our present day who can so affect all of Christendom "in the name of God?"

Question 1: Most scholars and theologians count the seventy weeks of Daniel 9 as 70 times 7, and transpose this multiple to literal years. Is there sound logic for this tranposition? Question 2: Where is the true chronological point in history from which the 70 weeks were to have begun? Question 3: What worthy biblical facts can be presented for the logic of an uninterupted 69 week sequence with an indefinite period of now more than 1900 years before the start of the 70th week? Question 4: Does God, the father, and God the Son present us unpredictable and incalculable results from His Prophets projections of time? Did Messiah follow any form for logic relative to the time of His first Coming? Question 5: Is there any importance that we understand and teach Bible prophecy accurately for truth sake? Amos 3:6-8; Jhn.5:39-40; Dan. 2:27-29, and 36-40 Where time has a part in an historical sequence the start of the count must be correct for the close of the count to be correct. Prophecy is History before it has transpired.

whollybybill, or (Holy Bible), arvy "ere. For sound doctrine of the truth and hope for our eternal salvation. I Rest my case, upon the Inspired Scriptures only. However; I am also aware that the Bible, with regard for world events that were and are, to effect all Christendom, beginning from the areas immediately around the Mediteranian and the Aegean seas, and extending outward into our western Civilization, was first rooted in the religion, Judaism. Obviously, biblically, and historically there is much we can not reveal relative to all the historical facts which will support your basic understanding of the whole issue around the "Sabbath /Sunday" Issue. whollybybill: "Oh and I find it curious that the change was made during the First Christian emporer named Constatine." Constantine was but the instrument that got fixed the issue to a document by making it and official decree in 325 AD. There had already been issues between Jews and Christians and Pagans over this earlier in history, probably beginning a little before John wrote thte revelations of Jesus Christ. THe greater part of the issue seemed to have been between the Jews and the Christians to start. The issue of itself became one of an Identification problem for Christians. Why because the first Believers in Christ of the first century were Sabbath observers. This tended to put them, by identification, among the persecuted Jews. If we check history (as undistorted by theologians) we will discover that the alteration of observance, from Seventh day to First day was one of incorporation into the practices of Paganism for the sake of preservation from persecution. the practice became more and more acceptable amid the developing leaders of Christendom (Bishops of the Greek and the Roman church as a whole until "tradition" began using the very scripture in an attempt to justify the "change of Times and Laws." and so it was forcast by Daniel in chapter 7:25" What "times?" What day of the week has proclaimed in scripture for His personal Memorial as Creator of Heaven and Earth? What "Laws?" What "Laws" contain God's proclamation tto be the Creator of Heaven and Earth?" What Day did Jesus as Saviour declare Himself "Lord (having authority over) of?" Any one with courage to discern the truth of this message need only to read the Catholic Catechism concerning the 4th commandment, and the book, "Great Documents of Western Civilization," by Milton Viorst, copyright 1965). Remember. as a matter of Documentation, Constantine was but an instrument in that present time of bring prophecy into reality as histor: it is up to us as individuals to discover and to discern truth from fiction. Sound Counsel from the penman of God, Paul: 1 Thess. 5:20-23 ...

mr. Norton, ' arvy 'ere. To you a new believer in Christ, I offer a suggestioin that you read the Letters of John, a whole 7 chapters. John will encourage you toward growing in your accptance and understanding of true confidence in Jesus as our Messiah. Then back up and read the Book St, John, on the life of Christ and His work on earth and in heaven as our Messiah and "daily" mediator for our salvation. If you do not have these books: Young's Analytical Concordance Halley's Hand Book, and possibly THe Bible Dictionary. You can find these at any Bible Book store. Or maybe you are already aware of the "Blue Letter Bible" which you can access free on line, and perhaps even tha Bible Dictionary. Numerous Bible commentaries and helps may be found for free online on the Blue Letter Bible web site. Get it all for the click of your mouse. You will want, as you have indicated to Jump into scriptures to learn as dilligently and rapidly as your mind will permit the prophetic hope that is yours and mine through the promises of Jesus the Messiah of both the Old and the New Testament books. Because therein are the Words of "the faith of Jesus" to be found for us to apply to our daily living and hope for our future with Christ in "the New heaven and New earth" of Revelation 21. Hebrews 11:1, 3, 6 "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen, were not made of things which do appear... Without faith it is impossible to please Him: for he that comes to God must believe that He is, and that He IS the Rewarder of them that Diligently Seek Him." 1John. 21-26 Hold fast to Jesus. Seek to know the sound doctrine of His book of all that Jesus "began to do and teach...". Acts 1:1-2.