Read Comments Comments (17)

• FRANK 10 years ago

  KEEP IT UP WITH THE EDUCATION

  KEEP IT UP WITH THE EDUCATION

  reply
• Mike 10 years ago

  So is that why Ghana lost to Cote Divoire, playing on a Sunday?

  So is that why Ghana lost to Cote Divoire, playing on a Sunday?

  reply
• NANA 10 years ago

  Not man for the sabbath. Who cares about the sabbath if we are the most corrupt nation on earth.?

  Not man for the sabbath. Who cares about the sabbath if we are the most corrupt nation on earth.?

  reply
• Kwame Birmingham 10 years ago

  Jesus was a homosexual I can prove it and that is why I love him so much

  Jesus was a homosexual I can prove it and that is why I love him so much

  reply
• Kaakeeku 10 years ago

  Ana saana!!!. Stay in your emptiness and continue to be the Minister/Director of Poop Affairs. You may soon eat it. Bravo!Kwame Birmingham Aborokyir.

  Ana saana!!!. Stay in your emptiness and continue to be the Minister/Director of Poop Affairs. You may soon eat it. Bravo!Kwame Birmingham Aborokyir.

  reply
• Kaakeeku 10 years ago

  Excellent work. We must follow the teachings of God and not men which has called for disaster.
  It is very clear without an iota of confusion.

  Excellent work. We must follow the teachings of God and not men which has called for disaster.
  It is very clear without an iota of confusion.

  reply
• Onua Ben 10 years ago

  Jesus is the LORD of the Sabbath! Amen

  Jesus is the LORD of the Sabbath! Amen

  reply
• kwaku ba 10 years ago

  Not sure if any of this even matters as today we know the bible is not written by any god. It was written by men from the ancient ancestors of the Hebrews. None of it is true, it is folklore speculation and myths. In Ghana we ...
  read full comment

  Not sure if any of this even matters as today we know the bible is not written by any god. It was written by men from the ancient ancestors of the Hebrews. None of it is true, it is folklore speculation and myths. In Ghana we call it anansesem.
  
  In the modern age of technology we know that the earth, moon, universe, humans, life etc were created by natural processes alone and that no god was necessary or involved.
  
  Bottom line is there is no god. The people who taught us about this god, and then stole our lands, killed and enslaved our people, the British, no longer practise it, because they know it is false.
  
  It is only massively illiterate Africans who accept any religion as gospel because we are poor and need constant money for school fees, funeral, outdoorings, knocking, and the list goes on.
  
  And just to be clear since I know people will ask. heaven and hell? That is false also. And even if it were true no Ghanaian would go there unless god himself or is it herself , was a Ghanaian. In fact that is the whole purpose of the concept. Me and my people good, you and your people bad, therefore I can kill you and steal your house, rape your wife, take your lands, even enslave you, and since I am doing it to protect my own people who god had given special priviledges, if I die in the process of committing these acts I go to heaven to enjoy those benefits anyway. And the only way those other dirty people can enter heaven is if they stop their ways and do it our way and share or give us their resources here on earth.

  reply
• Owura in Toronto 10 years ago

  Good work and extensive research. Keep it up. Bravo

  Good work and extensive research. Keep it up. Bravo

  reply
• opoku boateng 10 years ago

  This is the truth but our pastors do not teach us this.

  This is the truth but our pastors do not teach us this.

  reply
• No-Blowjob 10 years ago

  It is always easy explain the bible the way you want it. Xtians want any easy way out so they divide the bible into two, part for the law and part for grace. Jesus said he hasn't come to relieve humanity from the law. Matt5; ...
  read full comment

  It is always easy explain the bible the way you want it. Xtians want any easy way out so they divide the bible into two, part for the law and part for grace. Jesus said he hasn't come to relieve humanity from the law. Matt5;17

  reply
• Defender 10 years ago

  You misinterpret a multiplicity of scriptures. First of all, Jesus Christ and his apostles were born and raised under the law(Galatians 4:4).
  
  Yes, Jesus Christ abolished the Old Law, including the Sabbath, and the old syst ...
  read full comment

  You misinterpret a multiplicity of scriptures. First of all, Jesus Christ and his apostles were born and raised under the law(Galatians 4:4).
  
  Yes, Jesus Christ abolished the Old Law, including the Sabbath, and the old system of worship. If that were not so, we would be performing sacrifices today for atonement of our sins, and would be bound by its strict system of worship involving the Aaronic and Levitical priesthood.
  
  We dont need a descendant of Aaron petitioning our case to the Father. We have someone better in the person of Jesus Christ (Read the entire book of Hebrews). However, these changes were ushered in after his death.
  The Hebrews writer likened this to a will or testament (Hebrews 9:16-28), which is useless to the beneficiaries while the testator is alive. So, in essence, there was no need for Christ or any of his followers to do anything different than what was done under the Old Law when he was alive.
  
  It was after Christ’s death that the changes he promised were ushered in. For example: Before his death, circumcision was required to enter into a covenant relationship with God (Genesis 17:10-14). Under the new system, circumcision is not required (Galatians 5:2-6). How could Paul make such a bold statement if he was not convinced that after Christ’s death the use of circumcision to delineate who belonged to God was useless?
  
  If Paul was not convinced that we are not bound by the Old Law, why would he go to the extent of calling the Galatians "stupid" for reverting to the Old Law when they have been saved by Christ?
  
  And also, your exegetical spin of 1 Corinthians 16:1-2 doesn’t hold water: Paul didn’t tell the Christians to keep their money at home, for he had no intent on going from house to house to collect the money. The believers met on the first day of the week. That was convenient since all the money could be brought to one place for collection for use per Acts 11: 28, as you rightly stated.
  
  You also failed to address Acts 20:7. This also talks about first century Christians meeting on the first day of the week. Since that was when they officially met, Paul used the opportunity to preach to them.

  reply
• THEREALTRUTH 10 years ago

  THOSE ARE MINE WHO KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS! I COME NOT TO ABOLISH THE LAW BUT TO FULFILL THE LAW! THE LAWS PAUL WAS REFERRING TO WASN'T THE TEN COMMANDMENTS.YAHSHUA WORSHIPED ON THE SABBATH. CONSTANTINE INSTITUTED SUN-DAY...WOR ...
  read full comment

  THOSE ARE MINE WHO KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS! I COME NOT TO ABOLISH THE LAW BUT TO FULFILL THE LAW! THE LAWS PAUL WAS REFERRING TO WASN'T THE TEN COMMANDMENTS.YAHSHUA WORSHIPED ON THE SABBATH. CONSTANTINE INSTITUTED SUN-DAY...WORSHIP OF THE SUN. GO BACK AND READ MORE. THE SACRIFICES AREN'T ANYMORE BECAUSE THE MESSIAH IS THE OFFERING OF SHED BLOOD.

  reply
• Defender 10 years ago

  Yes, Jesus Christ fulfilled what the Law said about him. Did you expect him to not fulfill them? How would we have known he was the messiah, then?
  
  Remember when John the Baptist asked if he was the messiah or should they e ...
  read full comment

  Yes, Jesus Christ fulfilled what the Law said about him. Did you expect him to not fulfill them? How would we have known he was the messiah, then?
  
  Remember when John the Baptist asked if he was the messiah or should they expect someone else? What did Jesus say? Tell him the lame walk, the blind see, in keeping with the miraculous powers of the prophesied messiah.
  
  Well, the New Testament is replete with Christians worshiping on the first day of the week: Examples include Acts 20:7 and I Corinthians 16:1-2. Constantine did not write these
  
  
  
  Well,

  reply
• KK 10 years ago

  If Jesus did not abolish the Law, then he could not fulfil it either. It is implicit in Matthew 5:17 that the Law was to be operational as long as it had not been fulfilled. But the death of Christ and his victorious resurrec ...
  read full comment

  If Jesus did not abolish the Law, then he could not fulfil it either. It is implicit in Matthew 5:17 that the Law was to be operational as long as it had not been fulfilled. But the death of Christ and his victorious resurrection on the first day brought an end to the Law (Rom 10:4) and ushered in a new era of worship. Paul, whom the author of this article ignorantly quote as supporting the Law boldly wrote: "I am not under the Law, though not free from God's laws, but I am under the law of Christ" (1 Corinth 9:21. Here Paul discriminates between God's laws as given under the Old Testament, phraseologically
  referred to as "the Law"; and God's laws as empowered through the Christ, which he called "the law of Christ". Thus whilst Christians are not obliged by God's laws called "the Law", we live under the "law of Christ". "Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink...or with regard to a Sabbath day (the Seventh day Sabbath inclusive). These are a shadow of things to come. The reality is Christ". Thus all Sabbaths had the same significance in preparing God's people to embrace an eternal rest concerning which the author of the Hebrews wrote. The Hebrews author referenced two types of rest: the Seventh-day Sabbath and the Canaan rest only for the purpose of discounting them rather than promoting them for Christians to observe. By embracing Christ, one would have entered God's rest already. Therefore he declared, "Come unto me all who labour and are heavily burdened, and I will give you rest". And again, the son of man is Lord, even of the Sabbath. If the Sabbath did not find its meaning in Christ, then it would be a meaningless and worthless tradition. But it if found its significance and fulfilment in Christ, then it would wane into oblivion.

  reply
• Joe 10 years ago

  What then will happen to Christians who do not observe the Sabbath and go to church on sundays. Strangely the article does not address this.

  What then will happen to Christians who do not observe the Sabbath and go to church on sundays. Strangely the article does not address this.

  reply
• RSA 10 years ago

  The author of this article certainly errs when he discounts the significance of the first day of the week. After Christ’s resurrection on the first day and his subsequent appearances on this same day (excluding all other da ...
  read full comment

  The author of this article certainly errs when he discounts the significance of the first day of the week. After Christ’s resurrection on the first day and his subsequent appearances on this same day (excluding all other days), any well-meaning Bible student would not fail to read meaning into it. The gathering of the church on the first day in Acts 20:7 was, in fact, no coincidence as the author wants us to believe. That Luke did not refer to the meeting day as ‘the day after the Sabbath’ suggests that the Sabbath itself was de-emphasised. If the church had met on the Sabbath, why was there the need for the Sunday meeting to perform the most important Christian ordinances? There is nothing in the passage to suggest that the first day meeting was an extension from the seventh day. For if it really was, then it is amazing why the author would chose the first day as the reference day for the meeting. The discourse grammar explicitly points to the first day as the beginning of the church meeting: “On the first day of the week, we came together to break bread”, surprisingly flipping over and ignoring any church activity the day before (the seventh day). Why not “After the Sabbath, we gathered on the first day to break bread?”
  But if the author of this article demonstrated limited understanding in the foregoing passage, his exposition of Matthew 24:20 leaves much more to be desired. He reasoned that Jesus deemed any flight by his disciples for safety as inappropriate on a Sabbath day as the day was to be held sacred. But this same Jesus had taught that even livestock of less value could be saved on a Sabbath day let alone children of Abraham (Matt. 12: 11-12). It is important to understand why Jesus would regard the Sabbath as a hindrance to their flight. Earlier he had referred to both the adverse winter climate and the conditions of lactating mothers as perilous and inhibitory to their attempts to escape. So was the Sabbath. How?
  To explain, one must understand the historical and cultural contexts of Jesus’ statement. Jerusalem was certainly a walled city with heavily guarded gates. During the reformation in Nehemiah 13, traders from Tyre would take advantage of the availability of the Israelites at home to do business with them on Sabbath days. This was brought to the attention of Nehemiah and the elders, who warned them of this unscrupulous behaviour and drove them away. But alas, they only relocated as far as behind the city gates and signalled their Israelite customers to come over for business. This recalcitrance infuriated Nehemiah who ordered the city gates to be closed every Sabbath so that no one could enter or leave the city until the Sabbath was over (Neh. 13:19). And it became a tradition, even after Jesus’ day that every Sabbath, the city gates was shut and guarded by Sabbath-day gatekeepers.
  Now here was Jesus advising his disciples to flee at the least sign of the presence of the Roman army. But how were they to escape if the day was to be a Sabbath day when the gates would have been shut? Then “Pray that your flight may not be … on a Sabbath day”. Thus contrary to what the author of this article taught, Jesus was more concerned about Jewish resistance in connection with their observance of the Sabbath. It is to be noted that all the religious holidays remained on the Jewish calendar after the cross. If fact, having rejected Jesus, it did not need a prophecy to foretell that the Sabbath, alongside the other religious holidays and rituals would still be upheld by the Jews beyond the cross. And they did, at least, for as long as the temple was still standing.

  reply