OK now that I got your attention, please relax, it is just a discussion about Sunday shopping that is going to come . How about the topic of Sundays. Where did the notion of Sunday being a holy day come from? Is Sunday the Sabbath that the Bible spoke about, or is it not? What does the New Testament say about keeping A Day holy? Consequently, what is or should be the position of of Christian towards Sunday shopping? I know, it is loaded, but we can do it .
We can accommodate all opinions, whatever background they come from, right?

I have a comment about Sunday shopping that is sure to piss off a few people. I fully support Sunday shopping.

In terms of Sunday being a day of rest, Sunda is only the holy day for the christian population and their religious practices should have nothing to do with the laws of a nation in which church and state are seperate.

In this changing world, employment and family schedules do not fit the old model where people can patronize stores at the old hours. I remember a few years back (ok...more then a few) when stores were open Tuesday to Friday 9 to 5 and Saturday's until noon. In those days, only one partner worked and the other had the opportunity to shop whenever they desired. Today, this has changed.

People argue that 7 day a week shopping takes people out of the home and away from their families when they are forced to work Sundays. While there are those who didn't expect to work Sundays when they started working in that industry, extended hours means more jobs. Most jobs change over time and if you don't like the hours, find a new job.

Historically, debates among Christians regarding the observance of the sabbath and the Lord's day, were heated. The sabbath was based on talmic law which was incorporated into christian faith (the old testament is from the jewish teachings). After Christ's death, Christians began to worship on the Lord's day...the day of Christ's ressurection. For many years, between the time of Christ's death to the time of Pope Gregory I, there was much unrest as to which was the day of rest and some observed Saturday, while others observed Sunday.

Pope Gregory I admonished those observing the sabbath as a day of rest to be antichrists, entrenching Sunday as the day of rest.

What the Christian church stand on this should be, I don't know. I do however believe, governments should not consult the church in writing its laws.

Regarding the Pope. If Catholic people want to believe that the Pope has the power to make laws like that, and is above the Bible, that is fine for them. However, all the protestant world believes in the authority of the Bible. So, we will have two streams of "Christian" argumentation. One comming from the Pope/s and another from the Bible. I am just stressing this for clarity of future comments.

Jesus did not come to replace the Roman rule. He was wrongly accused of trying to do it (re the sign over his head), so that Romans would find it acceptable to have him killed. Following His example, indeed, the Christians should not attempt to make "Christian government" as that would seem impossible. Christianity comes from the heart of individuals, not from the law of the land. And only God is the judge of the hearts.

I offer as an observation that the bible was written by man of 2000 years ago. Even if such writings were directed by god, then they reflected the traditions and way of life that related to that time. It is therefore, inappropriate to literally apply everything in the bible to life today.

If you disagree, try applying this:

Exodus 21
1 "These are the laws you are to set before them:


Hebrew Servants
2 "If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. 3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free.
5 "But if the servant declares, 'I love my master and my wife and children and do not want to go free,' 6 then his master must take him before the judges. [1] He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life.
7 "If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as menservants do. 8 If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself, [2] he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her. 9 If he selects her for his son, he must grant her the rights of a daughter. 10 If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and marital rights. 11 If he does not provide her with these three things, she is to go free, without any payment of money.

I will not disagree. I do not believe that the Old Testament is applicable to Christians. See Hebrews 8:13. By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear. You may want to read the entire chapter.

Basically Hebrews is about outlining the principle of animal sacrifice by the Jews for the forgiveness of their sins, as a foreshadow of Christ being the sacrifice for all people and all times. In the Old Testament times, the sacrifice was made by the High Priest in the Temple (The Holy of Holies), and in the New Testament time, Jesus is the High Priest and the Temple has moved to Heaven. Notice that "churches" would not be temples according to this interpretation. Actually, nowhere in the N.T. building of dedicated buildings is advocated. Cathedrals came in the 3rd century when "Christianity" was made an official religion of the Rome. They ran it like a military, so needed large congregations of the new "converts".
Back to the book of Hebrews. All the ceremonial law of the Jews is no longer applicable. Actually even the Moses' law (ten commandments), are superseded by the two commandments of Jesus. Often the argument arises, can we Christians, therefore, break the 10 commandments? The answer is yes and no. Yes in the case of the observance of the Sabbath, as clearly we are not asked to observe the 7th day as Jews are (nor any other day if you go by the Bible alone). No, because if we follow the two commandments of Christ, we will not steal, murder etc.

Here is the only verse (to my knowledge) on which the observance of Sunday is based. 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. (Paul speaking). There are literally dozens of examples of meeting every day in homes (not on Sunday in so called churches).

I love arguments revolving around religion. They're so *winnable* and always reach an amicable conclusion.

This topic ran its course through here a couple of months ago, and it left as unresolved as it was when it arrived. Do we really need to go through it all again, especially as this time it seems the issue is only being brought up as a means to debate religious philosophy. (I guess this site is turning into a religious forum. It must be true: "One man can change the world")

As much of a waste of time as it will end up being, here (again) is my position on Sunday shopping:

The decision for Sunday shopping should not be based on religion. I don't care, nor do many, what the Bible says about buying a jug of milk on Sundays. Of course, there will be those whose only, or main, argument against Sunday shopping will be based on what is implied in the Bible. Those people have a far too religious-centric view of the world, in my opinion, and need to realise that, while their religion is (rightly so) important to them, it is not (rightly so) important at all to many others.

Also, I would think that ALL businesses would have to be closed on Sundays, if you were going to use religion as your basis. Sinning isn't selective. That means pharmacies, convenience stores, every for-profit store would have to be closed on Sundays. If you use religion as your basis, you would have to agree to that, wouldn't you? I doubt very many people would argue in favour of this.

So, for all our sakes, please don't base your arguments on religion. It's futile and will only cause the issue to veer into religious debate. As it's already done in this thread.

There is no religious argument than can, or should, be made that would cause me to vote against Sunday shopping. That does not mean that I therefore vote in favour of it.

The decision should be based on economics and/or conveniece.

I have seen valid arguments from both sides of the economics debate. It is my opinion that the good economic benefits (convenience will add to tourism, which equals more spending) will, more or less, be out-weighed by the bad economic benefits (greater strain on the workforce without much increase in pay, combined with increased costs on employers).

In the end, economically, I think there are only so many dollars being spent in a week. Spreading that amount out over 7 days, instead of 6, doesn't increase spending, but it does increase the costs to businesses and employers who have to be open for an extra day a week.

So, to me, it doesn't make sense, economically. Based on my limited knowledge of economics, I vote "no" to Sunday shopping.

That leaves "convenience".
It would be, without question, more convenient if the Future Shop was open Sunday so I could go and get that spur of the moment DVD purchase of "Schindler's List".
But how much is convenience worth?. I have lived my life, so far, quite comfortably without the option of Sunday shopping. And I'm sure I could continue to do so. For me, the convenience isn't worthwhile enough to warrant a vote for Sunday shopping.

Unless there was strong support, by the business community, in favour of Sunday shopping, I'd vote against it.

Upon review of your original post, Fairplay, I see that you ask the question of Christians, and their opinions only, so please disregard the above heathen comments.

Which is one of the reasons I am visiting the site less and less lately.

If it weren't for Ed's contributions (and the occasional ones of a few others), I'd probably be gone altogether.

Oh My Kreskin...just glad someone enjoys my rantings.

I enjoy this site since it give me an opportunity to exercise my mind.

Why can't it be a personal thing? .... Why must it be legislated?

Get rid of the legislation and the problem is fixed, .... those who want to, will, those who don't, wouldn't, ....

I know, I know, ... Too simple eh?

Sorry, if I left you with the impression of directing the question to Christians only. But one can not get away from the Christian view, as clearly it was the Roman Church from which Sunday descended, as far as I am aware.

That is a good think as Martha would say

As a Christian, I think, the "Christian" activists who would like to have Christian government and law, should slow down. There is no support for that in the Bible, and as for Sunday being a government sanctioned day of rest, I do not agree with it. The New Testament does not identify any command of a day of rest, so I see even less reason for the government to do so. However, the wannabe christians in the government who love to present themselves in a bit better light then others, will always be on our case.

If a rest is ordered, it becomes somewhat less of a rest, does not it?

Fairplay,

Just an idea: Buy a domain, download this free PHP message board and slap it on a server somewhere.

I'm sure you'll attract more of the individuals that want to confer/debate with you.

Thanks for thinking about me. But remember, the idea here is to talk to people who are local and can, if desired, meet in person. Should I understand that you are steering me outa here or is it just a friendly suggestion? And what interests you Billy?