Earlier Chris, you wanted some extra-biblical information concerning early followers perusing Torah.

Perhaps you are looking for proof that exactly points at gentiles only in observing Torah?

Do you realize that the question itself is flawed?

I think you will find it notable that Sunday observance of any kind concerning believers in Messiah did truly not exist. I won’t bother repeating the tons of New Testament scripture already in this thread and our attempts at describing the contexts…. But can you show any witnesses in scripture where there is a direct command to abstain from Torah?

As far as Christian history … who was it that was being fed to Nero’s lions? Just Christians? Did you ever happen to pick up any information from Canstontinople (Istanbul) about what peculiar things are said about these “Nazarines” by the very people who were feeding them to those lions?

In many places (I will do diligence to turn up some data for you) these “Nazarines” are noted as Sabbath Keepers and as one way to offer a non-Jew “Nazarine” a chance at avoiding execution was to spit on a Torah scroll and adopt Sun worship along with denouncing Yeshua.

I will get you some more info. For now, I will admit that organizations such as The Church of God Seventh Day and of course the Seventh Day Adventists have got quite an exhaustive library of article like this.
BUT…. will you look at items from their libraries?

I must submit to you that the history concerning Nicea will produce a testimony of vast quantities of libraries of books by apostolic contemporaries that were destroyed in a zealous endeavor to remove anything remotely “looking Jewish” from this newly developing “church” of Constantine’s. Take the Apostles Creed for example… “I believe in God the Father, Almighty maker of Heaven and Earth…etc.” There is not one word of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, or Moses, or in the miracle of appointed feast days or the deliverance from Egypt… for that matter, without many of those specifics, that creed could indeed match any creed applied to any of the Sumarian gods that existed pre Christ that were also born of virgins and died and rose to deliver their loyal followers from self inflicted sin and judgement… only this one happens to apply Jesus as a name and a specific mention of Pontius Pilot…..

What if (and in your mind I am certain this is a BIG what if….) these books you mentioned earlier containing church history is what was allowed to be preserved by these innumerable church councils due to the specific lack of evidence that followers were indeed Torah embracing… even the gentiles? I mean, there is a devout “God fearer” Roman centurion and others mentioned in acts that even gave money to the synagogue (no one mentioned him erlier) but did you know that Jews gave the title “God fearer” to gentiles who believed God and wanted to be converted to Judaism… many times the Temple authorities in Jesus’ time refused (remember these authorities were corrupt people at that time with exceptions such as Nicodemus and Joseph of Aremethaea) It was because of these types of prejudice refusal toward gentiles (which also goes against Torah by the way) that this was another reason the “good news” was so good… no longer were the Temple authorities to be the only power to grant admission in the Israel of God… Jesus blood bought that now and not their false legalism.

Please don’t wait for Scot or any other to dig and find this hidden history, and please don’t immediately dismiss this as hysteria or paranoi against “the church.” I found much of this data on my own…

Here is an article you might enjoy.. http://ffoz.org/downloads/magazine_supplements/ once you go to this page download the very first article. It is a PDF. Sabbath Keepers of Transylvania.

At least enjoy the read.

EARLY CHRISTIANS – 2nd Century
“The primitive Christians had a great veneration for the Sabbath, and spent the day in devotion and sermons. And it is not to be doubted but they derived this practice from the Apostles themselves, as appears by several scriptures to the purpose.” “Dialogues on the Lord’s Day,” p. 189. London: 1701, By Dr. T.H. Morer (A Church of England divine).

EARLY CHRISTIANS – 2nd Century
“…The Sabbath was a strong tie which united them with the life of the whole people, and in keeping the Sabbath holy they followed not only the example but also the command of Jesus.” “Geschichte des Sonntags,” pp.13, 14

EARLY CHRISTIANS – 2nd Century
“The Gentile Christians observed also the Sabbath,” Gieseler’s “Church History,” Vol.1, ch. 2, par. 30, 93.

EARLY CHRISTIANS – 2nd Century
“The primitive Christians did keep the Sabbath of the Jews;…therefore the Christians, for a long time together, did keep their conventions upon the Sabbath, in which some portions of the law were read: and this continued till the time of the Laodicean council.” “The Whole Works” of Jeremy Taylor, Vol. IX,p. 416 (R. Heber’s Edition, Vol XII, p. 416).

EARLY CHRISTIANS – 2nd Century
“It is certain that the ancient Sabbath did remain and was observed (together with the celebration of the Lord’s day) by the Christians of the East Church, above three hundred years after our Saviour’s death.” “A Learned Treatise of the Sabbath,” p. 77

Note: By the “Lord’s day” here the writer means Sunday and not the true Sabbath,” which the Bible says is the Sabbath. This quotation shows Sunday coming into use in the early centuries soon after the death of the Apostles. It illustrates the apostasy that Paul the Apostle foretold of when he spoke about a great “falling away” from the Truth that would take place soon after his death.

“From the apostles’ time until the council of Laodicea, which was about the year 364, the holy observance of the Jews’ Sabbath continued, as may be proved out of many authors: yea, notwithstanding the decree of the council against it.” “Sunday a Sabbath.” John Ley, p.163. London: 1640.

Please do some more research brother… the Sabbath is but one topic.

I can’t help but think that seminaries do not present ALL exhaustive writings by the historians they promote… Why they would not is beyond me. But at times I can only wonder just how much of our context is as a result of censorship of the history that is contrary to sustaining the agreed upon doctrine.

ITALY AND EAST-C 4th
“It was the practice generally of the Easterne Churches; and some churches of the west…For in the Church of Millaine (Milan);…it seems the Saturday was held in a farre esteeme… Not that the Easterne Churches, or any of the rest which observed that day, were inclined to Iudaisme (Judaism); but that they came together on the Sabbath day, to worship Iesus (Jesus) Christ the Lord of the Sabbath.” “History of the Sabbath” (original spelling retained), Part 2, par. 5, pp.73, 74. London: 1636. Dr. Heylyn.
ORIENT AND MOST OF WORLD
“The ancient Christians were very careful in the observance of Saturday, or the seventh day…It is plain that all the Oriental churches, and the greatest part of the world, observed the Sabbath as a festival…Athanasius likewise tells us that they held religious assembles on the Sabbath, not because they were infected with Judaism, but to worship Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath, Epiphanius says the same.” “Antiquities of the Christian Church,” Vol.II Book XX, chap. 3, sec.1, 66. 1137,1138.

ABYSSINIA
“In the last half of that century St. Ambrose of Milan stated officially that the Abyssinian bishop, Museus, had ‘traveled almost everywhere in the country of the Seres’ (China). For more than seventeen centuries the Abyssinian Church continued to sanctify Saturday as the holy day of the fourth commandment.” Ambrose, DeMoribus, Brachmanorium Opera Ominia, 1132, found in Migne, Patrologia Latima, Vol.17, pp.1131,1132.

ARABIA, PERSIA, INDIA, CHINA
“Mingana proves that in 370 A.D. Abyssinian Christianity (a Sabbath keeping church) was so popular that its famous director, Musacus, travelled extensively in the East promoting the church in Arabia, Persia, India and China.” “Truth Triumphanat,”p.308 (Footnote 27).

ITALY-MILAN
“Ambrose, the celebrated bishop of Milan, said that when he was in Milan he observed Saturday, but when in Rome observed Sunday. This gave rise to the proverb, ‘When you are in Rome, do as Rome does.’” Heylyn, “The History of the Sabbath” (1612)

SPAIN-COUNCIL ELVIRA (A.D.305)
Canon 26 of the Council of Elvira reveals that the Church of Spain at that time kept Saturday, the seventh day. “As to fasting every Sabbath: Resolved, that the error be corrected of fasting every Sabbath.” This resolution of the council is in direct opposition to the policy the church at Rome had inaugurated, that of commanding Sabbath as a fast day in order to humiliate it and make it repugnant to the people.

SPAIN
It is a point of further interest to note that in north-eastern Spain near the city of Barcelona is a city called Sabadell, in a district originaly inhabited. By a people called both “Valldenses” and Sabbatati.”

PERSIA-A.D. 335-375 (40 YEARS PERSECUTION UNDER SHAPUR II)
The popular complaint against the Christians-”They despise our sungod, they have divine services on Saturday, they desecrate the sacred the earth by burying their dead in it.” Truth Triumphant,” p.170.

PERSIA-A.D.335-375
“They despise our sun-god. Did not Zorcaster, the sainted founder of our divine beliefs, institute Sunday one thousand years ago in honour of the sun and supplant the Sabbath of the Old Testament. Yet these Christians have divine services on Saturday.” O’Leary, “The Syriac Church and Fathers,” pp.83, 84.

COUNCIL LAODICEA-A.D.365
“Canon 16-On Saturday the Gospels and other portions of the Scripture shall be read aloud.” “Canon 29-Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday, but shall work on that day; but the Lord’s day they shall especially honor, and as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day.” Hefele’s “Councils,” Vol. 2, b. 6.

any more desire for “extra biblical” history?????????????

SCOTTISH CHURCH
“In this latter instance they seemed to have followed a custom of which we find traces in the early monastic church of Ireland by which they held Saturday to be the Sabbath on which they rested from all their labours.” W.T. Skene, “Adamnan Llife of St. Columbs” 1874, p.96.
SCOTLAND, IRELAND
“We seem to see here an allusion to the custom, observed in the early monastic Church of Ireland, of keeping the day of rest on Saturday, or the Sabbath.” “History of the Catholic Church in Scotland,” Vol.1, p. 86, by Catholic histsorian Bellesheim.

SCOTLAND-COLULMBA
“Having continued his labours in Scotland thirty-four years, he clearly and openly foretold his death, and on Saturday, the month of June, said to his disciple Diermit: “This day is calleld the Sabbath, that is the rest day, and such will it truly be to me; for it will put an end to my labours.’” “Butler’s Lives of the Saints,” Vol.1, A.D. 597, art. “St. Columba” p. 762

COLUMBA (RE DR. BUTLER’S DESCRIPTION OF HIS DEATH)
The editor of the best biography of Colulmba says in a footnote: “Our Saturday. The custom to call the Lord’s day Sabbath did not commence until a thousand years later.” Adamnan’s “Life of Columba” (Dublin, 1857), p. 230.

perhaps the first 700 years after Christ is a good place to stop…. So you see, Chris, you come from a rich heritage of Christians who kept the sabbath for sure. Which sorta blows apart the “it was changed” argument… There are HUNDREDS more just like this if you want to look for it.

Next week I will start giving you some history concerning Christians who refused to eat unclean beasts and were tortured and killed for it…. by the church.

IHi gang, It was a long night. I began digging into guy’s like Polycarp, Mercion, and Tertulian last night.

I think I can see where some of this “church history” is coming from.

Most of my copied discoveries are from a Church of God source. Some have concluded therefore that perhaps it is biased toward Sabbatarian views. Alright then…. maybe I’ll look for other sources…

I found there to be precious few sources outside any Catholic ownership so naturally now I might reject them because of my suspected prejudiced bias.

It seems that as you study, one finds even examples of much disagreement even between “church father” that were contemporaries. There was much to conclude evidence suggesting that unity far from reached between them in many cases. Polycarp was certainly no proponent of Mercion (called him Son of Satan… or something like that)

I have found that many Catholic historians acknowledge that these gentiles indeed had very little displayable Jewish foundation. Yet that Polycarp was indeed a student of John/Yochanan and thus probably had a more hands on experience with Jewish learning.

I find Polycarp a defender of keeping Passover on 14 Nissan.

I find Marcion proclaiming Jews to be damned above all things along with their “old” testament.

I find that Jews along with Romans also had a great part in Polycarp’s martyrdom. (sound familiar?) And I find that these types of Jews were most likely the number one reason many “church fathers” chose no part of “synagogue life” as we come to think of it.

I find that it is interesting that all of the original writings and un-commented on material from any of these church fathers is (so far) in every case exclusively under ownership of the Catholic Church. (to which I find myself mumble “how convenient”)

So what to do…..

———————————————————————————-
Well, so far I do what the apostles did…. meditate upon the scripture. Here is what I conclude thus far:

1. Jesus expressed STRONG desire for unity in his body.

2. God had commands that in context (Numbers 15 etc.) expressed a desire for Israel to attract nations to be like them, but for Israel never to behave like them…. or …. it was o.k. in God’s eyes for nations, sojourners, and outsiders to go and be with and look like Israel BUT it was NOT o.k. for Israel to go to and look like those nations…. especially when it came to worship.

3. Jews (the same Jews that executed Peter, James, boiled John, stoned Stephen etc. and did this to other Jews that believed in Jesus/Yeshua… NOT ALL Jews) in this first century were zealous at some point and very prejudice against gentiles…. gentiles such as Polycarp were martyred just like Jews such as Stephen.

4. Gentiles (whom many many many were raised within a system of Paganism or were from families that were) as a result were, due to out right rejection by the above mentioned Jews, either rejected or simply did not embrace “the synagogue.” In Acts 15 we see James encourage his brethren to allow them to come…. but perhaps his stated desire never was realized as hoped???? And this was directly due to the immovable “Judaisers” that spared no expense at their seeking to fowl up and stumble these new gentile believers … I am sure this animosity between guys like these Jews and guys like Mercion and his ilk was fueled by both sides broad brush prejudicing the other.

5. Jewish historians: I find my challenging friend (Chris) to have a prejudice (sorry if the wrong choice of words) toward guys like Josephus due to what currently appears to be solely for the reason of him being Jewish. Therefore I feel like he will reject Josephus observations of how “churches/synagogues” operated within his scope, much in the same way I seem to want to reject the reports in possession of and in ownership by the Catholic church. So perhaps we are at an impass…..?

6. Local context: It is suggested by the Catholic authors I’ve read that possession of and study of “Jewish” scriptures may possibly been a difficult task by any of these men due to what became popular prejudice (you’d be prejudice to if people calling themselves Jews were trying to have you killed and you didn’t even read their language…) I feel broke hearted by this as the scriptures that these church fathers may have had much difficulty studying on their own are not “Jewish” they are God’s Word… Much like the vehement war the Catholic Church waged against any written scripture that was not done in Latin/Greek was to be destroyed due to the same but opposite prejudice.

Jump to Conclusion (sake of time)………………….

My personal conclusion looks something like this…. It is apperent and much recorded that guys like Tertulian, Mercion, and Polycarp did not and could not have possessed what we now hold in our hands…. THE BIBLE ….

That being said… let it sink in….. What an amazing time we now live in, where we not only have THE BIBLE in a nice neat package, but a 37 year old guy in rural North Idaho can look at a computer screen and find 27 different versions of it as well as study foreign languages at the click of a mouse…. as brilliant as I am sure they were…. these church fathers and Josephus DID NOT HAVE WHAT WE HAVE….

So what does that mean?

It may mean that we know more about context from this view than even they did when it comes to scripture. Not to mention, that we don’t need to fear being stoned to death for possessing it. We can indeed take time to study it.

In this study (now that we have what we have)… will we side with Jesus and God (see 1 and 2) in wanting to establish a unity that perhaps guys like Mercion hated and Polycarp seemingly wanted and Josephus already took for granted within the “synagogue life.”?

Perhaps we may respectfully disagree with the early church’s desperate choice to create a Sunday sabbath. There is much to suggest that they indeed did not possess ALL that we do in scripture packaged knowledge, therefore that decision may not have been thought of to be at odds with the true intent or desire of God and His Messiah.

Without this pakaged product and the time to actually study it and unwillingness on both sides (Jew and Gentile) to at least TRY it and see… perhaps the church fathers could not make the leap that BEING GRAFTED INTO THE COMMONWEALTH OF ISRAEL (if they even had this letter to study anywhere but in Ephesus) may not have been something they could fathom or even if they did try to do so, “false Jews” would not allow for them to practice and experience this… (are you with me Chris?) Perhaps we today may never fully know what it must have been like to be them … on either side.

We see for thousands of years that once the Jews and unbeleiving Romans stopped killing “saints” for whatever they deemed an offence worthy of excecution…. that THE CHURCH began to destroy many attempts at bringing the BIBLE to the common people….. WHY?

I submit that at some point we need to just ponder that perhaps Satan himself is none other to blame for all of the prejudice and wall building destroying well intended believer’s attempts at unity….

Perhaps Jesus point about the gates of Hell not prevailing against it… does not exactly LOOK the way some here want to see it.

If I am to decide upon this ongoing current argument… I must side with the Jewish apostles whom did indeed study and meditate upon the scriptures themselves. Upon this context I can visualize the UNITY Christ spoke of.

It’s all over the “new testament” once you begin to “see” it. Torah was indeed for both Jew and Gentile both in the “old” and “new” testament. Torah was also the foundation spoken of by Paul and Jesus. It is indeed the “starting point” that God himself MADE to be the foundation. If you do not have a compass, how can you be sure north is north? If you do not have a witness in Torah, how can you be sure Jesus was truly the Messiah and Paul was indeed telling the truth? I beleive Paul is Misunderstood by unwilling to believe Jews and therefor twisted in order to look like a bafoon…. AND I beleive Paul is twisted by Gentiles who are eager to seperate their faith from a faith that is indeed rooted in the PEOPLE…. THE LAND… and THE TORAH of —ISRAEL—. Just like Peter said in 2 Peter 3:16-17…. his words are indeed twisted …

So if Peter can himself admit to seeing the twists…. what can we indeed trust…?

I am sorry, Chris, but I must side with the Scriptures as they relate to the PEOPLe, the LAND, and the TORAH of Israel, vs. the interpretation of well intended men (whom maybe we will never know which ones worshipped on Sunday or Shabbat) who may not have had the opportunity to see them (scriptures) as we now do. And for that reason may not have had the privilege of the context of the land, people, and torah as we may now have. Perhaps THIS very fact may be why the prophets wanted to live in these days…?

God is indeed desirous of UNITY… but he has indeed provided a foundation and a “compass” for what He expects that unity to “look like” and it is found in His teachings and instructions for His people Israel…. Israel is in fact what you are grafted into and Israel is the sheepfold and Israel is indeed the Bride. Even if the Jews don’t see this due to blindness … you have an opportunity to be an Israel to glorify God and do it sooooo much better with the Holy Spirit than the unbelieving Jews ever could without Him.

Shalom.

William,

You were right about the unity. Many people do not pay attention when Yeshua said:

Matthew 15:24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”he came to the lost sheep of Israel. -> He was not talking about the Jews in general, but the 10 lost tribes of Israel.

Matthew 10:6 Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.

Luke 15:4
“Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses one of them. Does he not leave the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the lost sheep until he finds it?

The kindom was (and still is) divided. The House of Judah + Benjamin are in Israel right now and the House of Israel is among the nations. Yeshua came and many from the 10 tribes believed in him.

For Judah the 10 tribes are no longer part of their people, they call them gentiles.

Romans 9:25
As he says in Hosea: “I will call them ‘my people’ who are not my people; and I will call her ‘my loved one’ who is not my loved one,”

Like you said in your text, even though the Jews do agree, all that receive Yeshua is as israelite. I am having a hard time explaining this…You must read and understand Hosea to understand what I am saying.

The parable of the prodigal son is about the House of Judah and the House of Israel. Even though the House of Israel went to the nations and commit idolatry, when they receive the Messiah they are received back with much love (lost, dead -> found) by the father. Yeshua came to unite the 2 houses.

Is it possible that people that were never of the seed of Abraham to accept Yeshua and be part of the people of God? YES! YES! It was always like this and many are coming to the knowledge of God through Yeshua, but Yeshua’s “mission” was to unite the two houses. Again, must read Hosea to understand.

God purged the 10 tribes , called them “not my people” “not my son” but later He calls them “my people” “my son”. This is what the NT says about “you have no God, you were not a people, but now you are”. See that the branches are not of another kind of plant, it is still a branch of an olive tree, although wild, it is still olive.

When I understood about the lost tribes being brought back everything in the NT made much more sense. “The time of the gentiles” means all the lost sheep is found.

Comments please ..