Me, asking the Universe for guidance about the UFOs. Could they be real? And if so, what on Earth (!) are they?
Tuesday, February 17, 2026
Semelrapport
De nygräddade semlorna jag inhandlade från Konsum (!) var betydligt godare en kondistemlan jag inmundigade under pliktskyldiga former i fjolas. Så jag är nöjd. Väldigt nöjd, faktiskt. Så nöjd att jag undrar om jag ska stanna inomhus resten av dagen för att "smälta maten"...
Tuesday
 |
| Credit: Quiet Space (YouTube) |
So I finally found a suitable "Tuesday deity" after some false starts. Yes, folks, it´s Hanuman!
It´s over
The European Union (EU) have published a report in which they argue that we need to prepare for a three degree increase in the average global temperature for the next 75 years. In other words: they admit that the Paris Agreement is essentially fucked.
And now...sports.
Breaking bread
ChatGPT explains why Seventh Day Adventism is, with outmost certainty, wrong.
What´s the Biblical evidence for Christians celebrating mass on Sunday rather than Saturday?
This is a very precise and historically important question — because it goes to the heart of how Christianity became something other than Judaism.
The short answer is:
Christians did not switch to Sunday because of a single command.
They did it because the Resurrection happened on Sunday, and everything was re-organized around that.
Here is the evidence.
1. Jesus rose on “the first day of the week”
All four Gospels explicitly say this.
Matthew 28:1
Mark 16:2
Luke 24:1
John 20:1
They all agree:
Jesus rose on the first day of the week (Sunday).
This made Sunday:
the day of the new creation
Just as Genesis begins on the first day, the Resurrection inaugurates a new cosmic order.
2. The risen Jesus appears on Sunday — twice
John 20:19:
“On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the disciples were gathered…”
Jesus appears and gives them peace.
John 20:26:
Eight days later (i.e., the next Sunday) Jesus appears again.
This creates a weekly rhythm:
Christ reveals himself on Sunday gatherings.
3. The Eucharist is instituted in resurrection gatherings
Luke 24 (the Emmaus story):
Jesus:
-
walks with disciples
-
explains scripture
-
breaks bread
-
vanishes
This is the first post-Resurrection Mass — and it happens on Sunday.
4. Christians are already meeting on Sunday in the New Testament
Acts 20:7:
“On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul spoke…”
“Breaking bread” is Eucharistic language.
This is a Sunday Mass in the year ~55 AD.
5. Sunday replaces Sabbath because the covenant changed
Paul explains the theology:
Colossians 2:16–17:
“Let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food or drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a sabbath. These are a shadow of what is to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.”
Romans 14:
One person esteems one day; another esteems all days alike.
Christians are no longer bound to the Mosaic calendar.
6. Revelation calls Sunday “the Lord’s Day”
Revelation 1:10:
“I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day.”
By the end of the 1st century, Sunday already has a special Christian name.
The big theological reason
Saturday (Sabbath) commemorates:
Creation
Sunday commemorates:
New Creation
The Resurrection is seen as:
God restarting the universe.
So Christians worship on the day:
death was defeated.
The conclusion
Christians celebrate Mass on Sunday because:
-
Jesus rose on Sunday
-
He appeared to the Church on Sundays
-
The Eucharist was celebrated on Sundays
-
The New Covenant is not bound to the Jewish Sabbath
It was not imposed by Rome.
It arose organically from the Resurrection itself.
If you’d like, I can also show how the earliest non-biblical Christian writings confirm this practice within decades of the apostles.
Yes, please.
Here is the decisive historical evidence — from the generation immediately after the apostles — that Christians were already worshipping on Sunday (the Lord’s Day) long before Constantine, the papacy, or later church law.
These texts are independent, early, and geographically spread across the Roman world.
1. Didache (c. 50–90 AD)
This is the earliest church manual we possess — older than many New Testament books.
It says:
“On the Lord’s Day, gather together, break bread, and give thanks.”
This is a direct instruction for Sunday Eucharist within living memory of the apostles.
2. Ignatius of Antioch (c. 107 AD)
A disciple of the apostle John.
He writes:
“Those who have come to the new hope no longer observe the Sabbath, but live according to the Lord’s Day, on which our life rose through Him.”
This explicitly contrasts:
-
Jewish Sabbath
-
Christian Sunday
and connects Sunday to the Resurrection.
3. Justin Martyr (c. 155 AD)
Writing to the Roman Emperor, he explains Christian worship:
“On the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together… because it is the first day on which God created the world, and Jesus Christ our Savior rose from the dead.”
This is:
-
public
-
official
-
universal
Christian practice — a century before Constantine.
4. Epistle of Barnabas (c. 90–120 AD)
“We keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose from the dead.”
“Eighth day” = Sunday = New Creation Day.
5. What this proves
By 100–150 AD:
Christians in:
-
Syria
-
Asia Minor
-
Rome
-
North Africa
are all:
-
celebrating the Eucharist on Sunday
-
calling it “the Lord’s Day”
-
explicitly not keeping the Jewish Sabbath
This is universal apostolic Christianity.
The deep reason
Sunday worship is not arbitrary.
It is the liturgical expression of the belief that:
Christ’s Resurrection restarted time itself.
Saturday belongs to the old creation.
Sunday belongs to the new.
If you’d like, I can also explain how this connects to the Book of Revelation, the Eucharist, and the cosmic meaning of “the eighth day.”
How do we know that "breaking bread" is Eucharistic language?
We know that “breaking bread” is Eucharistic language because:
-
it is used that way by Jesus himself,
-
it is used that way by Luke,
-
it is used that way by Paul, and
-
it is used that way by the earliest post-apostolic Church.
All four lines converge.
1. Jesus defined “breaking bread” at the Last Supper
At the Last Supper:
“He took bread, gave thanks, broke it, and said:
‘This is my body.’”
That four-fold pattern
(took → blessed → broke → gave)
becomes technical Eucharistic language.
Every time Luke uses “breaking bread,” he is echoing this formula.
2. Luke uses “breaking bread” in a sacramental way
Luke wrote Gospel of Luke and Acts of the Apostles.
He deliberately uses the same phrase in all three places:
| Text | Context |
|---|---|
| Luke 22 | Last Supper |
| Luke 24 (Emmaus) | Jesus is recognized when he breaks bread |
| Acts 2 & 20 | Church worship |
The Emmaus story is decisive:
They did not recognize Jesus
until he broke the bread
This is not ordinary dinner — it is Eucharistic revelation.
3. Paul uses “breaking bread” for the sacrament
Paul writes:
“The cup of blessing which we bless, and the bread which we break — is it not a participation in the body of Christ?”
— 1 Corinthians 10
Paul is explicit:
the broken bread = the body of Christ
So when Acts says:
“They met to break bread”
it is referring to that same sacrament.
4. The early Church confirms it
The Didache (1st century) says:
“On the Lord’s Day, gather and break bread and give thanks…”
It then gives Eucharistic prayers — proving that “breaking bread” is the Mass.
Why this matters for Sunday worship
So when Acts 20:7 says:
“On the first day of the week, when we were gathered to break bread…”
This is not casual eating.
It is:
the earliest recorded Sunday Eucharist.
In short
“Breaking bread” is Eucharistic language because:
-
Jesus defined it that way
-
Luke used it that way
-
Paul taught it that way
-
the early Church preserved it that way
It is one of the clearest bridges between the Gospels and the liturgical life of the early Church.
Roswell debunked?
The real evidence is stashed away in a top secret hangar, bruh. Of course that little piece of alloy isn´t extraterrestrial. Failed experiment indeed!
Or am I just being ironic? Self-ironic, maybe...
Nationell samling?
Lite oklart om detta ens är sant, och vad det i så fall skulle tjäna till. MED fick bara 13,000 röster (0,20%) i förra riksdagsvalet. Utan Janouch, Bard och stöd från Chang Frick torde partiet vara helt meningslöst. Något jag insåg redan 2018 (se den andra länken nedan)...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)