We received a response from Bible.ca

[Note" Below some of the screen shot images will be the
images text in this color for better reading.]

On June 16, 2009 we posted an article answering 85 questions which the author claimed were questions Sabbatarians (like me!) don’t like to be asked. So, we did the usual. We examined what he had to say, and took it upon ourselves to answer each and every one of those questions. Unfortunately, this didn’t sit to well with the authors of this website. After sending them an email informing them that their questions have been answered and placed on our site, I was told by a gentleman named Joe that Steve Rudd was away on an assignment, and that he and his associate’s reviewed our answers. Here’s a screen copy of the email I was sent:



"Mr Rudd is on special assignment regarding the middle east.

However we reviewed your 80 answers to his questions. You did not answer any one of them, although you did a lot of talking.

For example, you spent 969 words trying to answer question 1:

1. If every man from Adam to Moses kept the Sabbath, why is the Hebrew word for the weekly Sabbath found in the ten commandments, never found in the book of Genesis? Why is no one before Moses ever being told to keep the Sabbath. Why are there no examples of anyone keeping the Sabbath?

None of your 969 words answered the question

The fact remains that the word Sabbath is never used in the book of Genesis and there is not one example of sabbath keeping before exodus 16.

Case closed. Why not just admit this?

You are false teachers. The sabbath is abolished along with the entire ten commandment code. We are under a new law... the law of Christ!"


Actually, it was 899 words, excluding Steve’s originals, and the only reason why the response was this lengthy was because I decided to add further proof of the existence of the Sabbath in Genesis.

After reading his first email, I thought that perhaps all he really did was count the words in my answer, and not review them. So I replied by telling him that the questions were actually quite easy and that Steve’s reasoning behind the word Sabbath in Genesis is quite flawed, because the words for adultery and killing are also missing. To which he replied:




While I didn’t mind being called a false teacher, nor that my illogical skills are “almost non-existent,” I did mind, however, how he responded to my objection, because the way he responded told me that he really didn’t “review” my answers despite telling me he did. Let me explain. He jumps to Genesis 4:14 and tells me that I suggested “killing” is not in Genesis. I didn’t suggest that. What I did suggest was that the Hebrew word translated “kill” in the commandments is absent from Genesis. If he really read my answer he wouldn't have gone to Genesis 4 in the first place, because I already went their in my response.

He goes on by telling me that the word in Genesis 4:14 is different from the one for the sixth commandment, yet they mean the same thing, and that “the word for Sabbath is unique in its form in the OT.” If you grab your Thesaurus, you’ll know that the word “unique” can mean either exclusive, only one of its kind, or even irreplaceable. When he made this argument, I knew even more that he didn’t read my response, because in it I said the following:

Although the Hebrew word shabbath as used in the fourth commandments is not found in the book of Genesis, the Hebrew word shabath is, and this word means to:

The Strongest Strong’s #7673
“repose, desist, observe… cause to, let or make to keep Sabbath.”

This word is translated “rested” in Genesis 2:2, and is used in the context of sabbath resting in verses such as Exodus 16:30 and Exodus 31:16-17. In fact, in Exodus 16:30 this word is connected to God’s “commandments” as seen in verse 28 before the giving of the Ten Commandments in Exodus 20!

Why would you use the argument that there are “similar” words in Genesis to the one in the sixth commandment, and that the one for the fourth commandment is unique, despite the fact that something like this was already shown to be false in the answer you just claimed to have read! The word shabbath as found in the fourth commandment is not so unique, the only one of its kind or even irreplaceable when you realize that the word shabath as found in Genesis 2:2-3 is just as good! This word is used in the context of the Sabbath commandment and even has the definition… “to keep Sabbath.”

When I realized he didn’t even read my first response, I decided to respond to him via a third email. Here’s what I said:



"Regardless, the reason why the first response is lengthy is
because I decided to add extra proof which your obviously
not aware of. I think you should try reading the answers
before trying to respond. Your use of the word "harag" as
found in Gen 4:14 is not even derived from "ratsach" as
found in the 10 Commandments. On the other hand, the
word "shabath" in Gen2:2-3 is actually where the word
"shabbath" as used for the 4th commandment comes from.
Hence your claim "... The word used for sabbath is unique
in its form throughout the OT" shows lack of series bible study.

Bad logic are those 85 questions. And to inform you, I have
read many of the reasoning's of your website, and have spent
some considerable amount of time researching your information.
To give you an example,
visit this link which shows you guys
taking historical quotes completely out of context:

Critic Steve Rudd's Sunday keeping quotes


Okay, maybe I was a bit strong in my response, but the truth comes out that way sometimes. Don't let that distract you as I'm being as honest as possible. Obviously, the case is rather closed for my opponent, because we Sabbatarians understood before hand that the word shabbath is not so unique after all. This word is actually derived from the one used in Genesis 2:2-3, while the one used in the sixth commandment (ratsach) is not derived from the harag of Genesis 4:8, 14. In fact these two words are so intimately connected that Strong’s literally says that shabbath is intensive (severely, seriously, rigorously) of shabath:

shabbâth: Intensive from H7673; intermission, that is, (specifically) the Sabbath: - (+ every) sabbath.

Sure harag and ratsach may have “similar” meanings, but that’s not the argument I was addressing, nor does this have anything to do with the original question, which asked for the exact same word. When I showed him how unreasonable this is, and gave him the missing word “harag” as an example, he responded by giving me one with a similar meaning. So, I have to find an exact word, but he can find a similar word?

If you thought it couldn’t get any worst, think again. In his second email he told me I didn’t know enough about his beliefs to even talk to him. So in response I sent him three links to articles on my website which dealt with many of the allegations on their own site. One of these was our article called Critic #3: Steve Rudd. The next day I was scanning through this article and decided to visit their original web page. I couldn’t believe what I saw! They actually changed everything! Before, almost all those quotes which were supposed to prove that early Christians kept Sunday and never the Sabbath in the early centuries had a date of 90AD. Now those dates have been changed, leaving only one with this date. Then, because my original article showed that they quoted these quotes only half way on their site, they went ahead and quoted them entirely!

To give you a bit of background in case you haven’t read our Critic #3: Steve Rudd article, we showed how Steve’s mission was to show quotes proving early Christians kept Sunday and at the same time NEVER kept Sabbath. Yet when these quotes were found in its original state, we learned that they actually showed that Christians actually were keeping the Sabbath, and sometimes were keeping the Sabbath and Sunday at the same time. Did you get that?

-Steve said: These quotes show they NEVER kept the Sabbath
-The originals say: They DID keep Sabbath.

Here’s a screen shot of how they fixed it on their site. Notice how they included the parts where these Christians also kept the Sabbath, thus admitting, perhaps inadvertently, that they DID keep it:




The top two "350 AD APOSTALIC CONSTITUTIONS" quotes originally read "90AD" on their site and both say that the Christians were also keeping the Sabbath day. Theres more then one that says this. Click HERE to read them for yourself.

I guess when Joe realized their error, they went ahead and finished the context of those quotes, and I missed by chance at screen copying how they had it originally to show it to you all here. But, they did leave one unchanged and fatal mistake. Notice the portion of this next screen shot from the top of their article which is circled in RED. We will underline it in text:



Saturday (Sabbath) or First day?
What day did early Christians worship on???
The first day (Sunday) IS THE LORD’S DAY!
Original Quotes on this page!

The Historical Record!

1. Christians always worshipped on the first day (Sunday)
2. They state that they stopped keeping the Sabbath to worship
on Sunday started with the apostles. None of say they kept the
seventh day Sabbath
. The only mention of Sabbath keeping was
by Eusebius in 300 AD by a cult-sect known as the Ebionites,
who Eusebius says also worshipped on the first day. (Ebionites
were a cult of Judaizers who enforced circumcision, rejected
Apostle Paul’s teachings, denied Jesus' virgin birth and his deity.)


Click HERE and go to their web page to verify (unless they read this and changed it).


Did you catch that? They changed the quotes, but didn’t change their original comment which says that these quotes show they NEVER kept the Sabbath! I think someone realized they got caught.

So in essanse the quotes defeat the purpose of their web page. Their out to prove Christians never kept the Sabbath in the early years, yet those same quotes say they did. This unchanged comment also proves that originally the quotes were written in a way to hide this fact, but when exposed they quickly fixed them. How true is the saying that every secret thing will come to light! What they SHOULD have changed was their heart-surrounded ending comment, which towards the bottom of their page says:

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

The reason why I’m sharing this with you is to once again show you that we are indeed fighting a giant. Our enemy is not Steve Rudd, nor is it his friend Joe. Towards these individuals we must show love, and we must pray for them. Our fight is rather against principalities and powers of the air. We must test everything! We must be ready always to give an answer, and we must also expose the enemies of our warfare, that all may know that the truth will triumph no matter how hard they try to conceal it.

Titus 2:15
(15) These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.

If we receive any further development, we will here share it with our readers. Visit this page often for updates.


For further study, see:

-Critic #3: Steve Rudd
-80 Questions by Steve Rudd ANSWERED!
-Why you need to do your own research