• This verse so clearly proves weekly 1st day (Sunday) communion and worship services that sabbatarians are at a loss what to do with it!
• The fact remains that there is nothing that would PREVENT this from being a church communion service of exclusively Christians.

A. Sabbatarians would never get the passage wrong if it said: "And on the Sabbath, we were gathered together to break bread"

1. This proves the natural reading of the passage is a communion service within a Christian assembly regardless of what day is mentioned.
2. There is nothing that would PREVENT this from being a church communion service of Christians.

1. Many Sabbatarians actually argue that this meeting took place on the Sabbath, then say it was the Lord's supper, not a common meal. Some over-zealous, but under-learned Sabbath keepers, will state the actual Greek words used in Acts 20:7 & 1 Cor 16:1 actually refer to the weekly Sabbath, not the first day of the week. They say "first day of the week", is a mistranslation. The only ones who say this are those who have no knowledge of Greek. All translations of the Bible say "first" of the week. We know of no Bible of any kind that says "seventh" day of the week. (Note: Seventh-day Adventists don't usually make this argument.)
2. Although Seventh-day Adventists never make this argument, the fact that other Sabbath keepers do make the argument proves that it is quite possible that this "breaking bread" refers to a communion service of the church, It proves that a church communion service is the natural reading of the text. It also proves that there is nothing preventing it from being a church communion service.
3. This proves that it is quite possible that this "breaking bread" refers to a communion service of the church,
4. Those Sabbatarians who say this was a 1st day meeting always argue it was a common meal.

"Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord's Supper, for in your eating each one takes his own supper first; and one is hungry and another is drunk. What! Do you not have houses in which to eat and drink? Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you? In this I will not praise you." ... "So then, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another. If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, so that you will not come together for judgment. The remaining matters I will arrange when I come." (1 Corinthians 11:20-22; 33-34)

1. Disciples ate the Lord's Supper when they assembled (1 Cor. 11:20-33) God has never authorized Christians to eat anything else but the Lord's Supper in such an assembly: "What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in?" (1 Cor. 11:22). "But if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, lest you come together for judgment" (1 Cor. 11:34). "For the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking" (Rom. 14:17)
2. Jesus commanded disciples to partake of the Lord's Supper (Matt. 26:26-28; Lk. 22:19; etc.) Jesus commanded disciples to assemble (Heb. 10:25). Any connection between Lord's Supper and Assembly? Here is an assembly (commanded by Jesus: Heb. 10:25). They broke bread (commanded by Jesus: 1 Cor. 11:23ff). They came for such a purpose. They did it on the first day of the week.
3. The dichotomy is clear: common meals are taken at home, assembly is for the Lord's Supper.
4. Here in Acts 20:7 the church gathered together on Sunday FOR THE PURPOSE of a common meal? Not likely Notice 1 Cor 11:33-34: "when you come together to eat" is exactly parallel to Acts 20:7
5. Acts 20:11 "and had broken the bread and eaten" This is the Lord's supper. Exactly the same language as in 1 Corinthians 11:20-22; 33-34 "eat the Lord's Supper" "in your eating" "when you come together to eat"
6. In Acts 2:46 it is not the Lord's supper but a common meal. Notice they were individually having people over to the their houses for foot AFTER they had all gathered together in the temple. The Greek word for MEALS means common food and is NEVER used of the Lord's supper.
7. It would be rather strange for God to forbid taking common meals in 1 Cor 11:20-22; 33-34 then give an example of just that in Acts 20:7. This proves Acts 20:7 could not be a common meal.

1. Notice the fact that the disciples planned on meeting together in Troas, one week after "Passover". If they were really breaking bread once a year on the Passover Sabbath, they would have arranged to all meet there. But the meeting place was Troas, one week after Passover.
2. "Passover Sabbath", the time World wide Church of God (Herbert W. Armstrong and splinter groups) all gather together for the annual "high day", is ignored as the disciples merely waited for Paul in Troas. Obviously early Christians did not place the same kind of emphasis on Passover that the Armstrong splinter groups do today.
3. It cannot be argued that Paul's travelling companions were in their own local churches "Passover Sabbath", because they were in Troas on "Passover Sabbath".
4. Nothing is said about any service on Passover, but one week later the disciples are noted as having a communion and worship service.
5. If Passover Sabbath really was the central and most important time for Christians, this would have been the place to record it.
6. But the exact opposite is recorded: Christian leaders waiting in limbo at Troas on Passover, no mention of anything on Passover, the only mention of Christians gathering in the New Testament for worship.
7. It is like having celebrating Christmas, on January 15 a second time! Hey! Lets all get the family together in two weeks, and do Christmas again!
8. We understand that SDA's generally believe that we are at liberty to choose any frequency for the Lord's Supper, yearly, quarterly, monthly or weekly. They generally have settled on a quarterly format with communion always being done on "Passover sabbath".
9. This author always does Bible things in Bible ways. But SDA's partake of the lord's supper on a day never mentioned in scripture and only 4 times a year, which contradicts the Bible the Bible pattern of weekly observance.
10. Acts 20 proves that Christians partook of the Lord's supper every week because it was two weeks after Passover. If the frequency of observance was less than weekly, then they either didn't break bread on Passover or they should not have been breaking bread 2 weeks later.

1. Paul's habit was to stay 7 days: Acts 21:4; 28:14; Acts 20:6. This meant Paul arrived and left on the first day of the week.
2. This means he was with the disciples for two Sundays but only one Sabbath.
3. If I was a Sabbatarian, I would surely make sure I spent two Sabbaths and only one Sunday!
4. In this way Paul stretched his time with the disciples to maximize the number of worship services together.
5. The record of history is that Christians met together before day break Sunday morning. Here, is a Biblical text that says exactly that! Paul arrived the Sunday before and left the following Sunday morning at 6AM.
6. Acts 20: 6 + 11 proves, counting backwards, that Paul arrived 7 days before Sunday... or one week earlier on Sunday.

Some say that since Acts 20:7 says that "Paul intended to leave the NEXT DAY" then v 11 says Paul actually left at next "daybreak", that this must be a Sunday evening communion service and Paul actually left early Monday morning. The entire argument is based upon the assumption that the expression "Next Day", using Roman time, proves the Christians gathered on Sunday Night. However, this is error is proven wrong because there are 7 passages where Jews apply the exact same expression "next day" to the next morning light. The truth is that Acts 20:7 is a Saturday night meeting that carries over to early Sunday morning, all of which was the first day of the week in Jewish time keeping.

Here are 7 passages that prove the usage of "next day" was the normal way for both Jews and Romans to describe a 9 PM to 9 AM duration. In other words, if it was 9PM on a Saturday night, "the next day" referred to the daylight period starting at 6AM Sunrise, Sunday morning, 9 hours later.

1. In the LXX (Septuagint: The LXX was translated by Jews in 250 BC, even though the event of Lot was 2000 BC.) at Gen 19:34: "So they made their father drink wine that night, and the firstborn went in and lay with her father; and he did not know when she lay down or when she arose. On the following day, the firstborn said to the younger, "Behold, I lay last night with my father; let us make him drink wine tonight also; then you go in and lie with him, that we may preserve our family through our father." " (Genesis 19:33-34) (v33 says it was night when they went in. v 34 the exact same Greek word for "next day" is used in Acts 20:7 and Gen 19:34 LXX. v34 again says, "last night".)
2. "The people spent ALL DAY AND ALL NIGHT and all the NEXT DAY, and gathered the quail " (Numbers 11:32) (here next day follows the night, even though it was the same day of the week.)
3. "David slaughtered them from the TWILIGHT UNTIL THE EVENING OF THE NEXT DAY " (1 Samuel 30:17) (twilight is after the sun has set, yet the next day, was technically the same day as twilight, yet, evening of the next day was really the dark period after the daylight.)
4. "When IT WAS EVENING, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who himself had also become a disciple of Jesus. " "NOW ON THE NEXT DAY, the day after the preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered together with Pilate, " (Matthew 27:57, 62) (Here, evening and next day, are the technically the same day, yet it is called the next day!)
5. "And he called to him two of the centurions and said, "Get two hundred soldiers ready by THE THIRD HOUR OF THE NIGHT to proceed to Caesarea, with seventy horsemen and two hundred spearmen." So the soldiers, in accordance with their orders, took Paul and BROUGHT HIM BY NIGHT TO ANTIPATRIS. But THE NEXT DAY, leaving the horsemen to go on with him, they returned to the barracks. " (Acts 23:23-32) (here we have an interesting dilemma: either #1: Romans were counting the hours the same as Jews: third hour of the night was 9PM according to Jews, but called the next morning the next day anyway. Or #2 they were using roman time and the 3rd hour would have been 3 AM, but they called the morning the next day anyway!)
6. "On that day, when evening came, He said to them, "Let us go over to the other side ." " (Mark 4:35) (Here the evening after the day is called the same day! Mark never uses roman time anywhere else! Obviously this was the natural way both Romans and Jews described the evening.)
7. "So when it was evening on that day, the first day of the week, and when the doors were shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst and said to them, " Peace be with you." " (John 20:19) (here is the crunch passage: the evening of the first day of the week was when Jesus was in the tomb! Yet the night after the day light of the first day of the week was called "evening ON THAT DAY.)

1. If communion was yearly, it will specify month and day, (ie 14 day of the 1 month)
2. If communion was monthly it will specify day of the month, but not the month (1st of the month)
3. If communion was weekly only mentions the day of the week (1st Day)

"I do not believe in revealed coincidences. In other words, God revealed things for us to teach us. Have any ever thought it possible that the miracle recorded, the resurrection of Eutychus, in an assembly convened because of another resurrection, was just coincidence, or is this planned by God since not all miracles are recorded. In other words, the context of breaking the bread in Acts 20: 7ff celebrating the resurrection of Jesus was in an assembly were a resurrection happened!" (Perry Hall offers this interesting insight.)

We Speak truth in LOVE
"you are seeking to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth" Jn 8:40

Go To Start: WWW.BIBLE.CA