-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Deu 5:4 The LORD talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire,
I was not there. I obey the Sabbath under the new covenant in Christ of which the old pointed. Christ is our Passover. And it is in Christ who brought us out of bondage to sin that we keep the Sabbath. Not the Sabbath written on stone but the Sabbath written on our hearts in Christ.
As God spoke to them Christ speaks to us as it is written:
Deu 18:15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;
Deu 18:16 According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.
Deu 18:17 And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken.
Deu 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
Deu 18:19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
Not sure if that answers your question.
and as it is written again:
Heb 12:20 (For they could not endure that which was commanded, And if so much as a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned, or thrust through with a dart:
Heb 12:21 And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake
Heb 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
Heb 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
Heb 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
Heb 12:25 See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven:
I was not there. I obey the Sabbath under the new covenant in Christ of which the old pointed. Christ is our Passover. And it is in Christ who brought us out of bondage to sin that we keep the Sabbath. Not the Sabbath written on stone but the Sabbath written on our hearts in Christ.
As God spoke to them Christ speaks to us as it is written:
Deu 18:15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;
Deu 18:16 According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.
Deu 18:17 And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken.
Deu 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
Deu 18:19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
Not sure if that answers your question.
and as it is written again:
Heb 12:20 (For they could not endure that which was commanded, And if so much as a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned, or thrust through with a dart:
Heb 12:21 And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake
Heb 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
Heb 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
Heb 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
Heb 12:25 See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven:
S
Yea, I learned a lot from Chuck Swindoll during my teens from his "Insight for Living" radio program aired in one of local broadcasting network here in the Philippines.
I haven't listened so much to Chuck Swindoll, but I'm sure he's good. DA Carson is another one that is associated with EFCA. He writes books mostly; he is a professor at their university called Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.
S
A historian in your own Seventh Day Adventist organization, Samuele Bacchiocchi, disagrees with the view that Constantine changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. He states clearly that the transition of observance occurred almost 200 years before the Council at Nicea, despite the claims of Ellen G. White and the Seventh Day Adventists.
Read his book From Sabbath To Sunday.
Here is what Wikipedia says. I have read from sources other than Wikipedia so I am not using them as my exclusive source of information:
{quote}
In 1977 Bacchiocchi published From Sabbath to Sunday, documenting the historical transition from the Saturday Sabbath to Sunday in the early Christian church due to social, pagan and political factors, and also the decline of standards for the day.[SUP][7][/SUP] The book made an impact on the wider academic community outside of Adventism, as well as within Adventism. Prior to his work, Seventh-day Adventists had focused on the role played by either the Pope, or by Roman Emperor Constantine I in the transition from Sabbath to Sunday, with Constantine's law declaring Sunday as a day of rest for those not involved in farming work. Subsequent to Bacchiocchi's work, Adventists have emphasized that the shift from Sabbath to Sunday was a more gradual process.
{quote ends}
So, even the Seventh Day Adventist church is not ignorant enough to claim that Constantine changed the Sabbath to Sunday, and they realize virtually no Christians were observing the Sabbath by AD150. Their observance is how I related in the earlier post.
By the way, there was no continuing Sabbath obligation after the Mosaic Covenant was initiated at the death of Christ, so man can't change something that no longer existed anyways.
As I said, Constantine's edict did not disallow individuals from observing the Sabbath. It only mandated Sunday rest for certain individuals, to give them a day to rest. Constantine is the scapegoat for not only Sabbathkeepers, but also anti-Trinitarians.
In addition, those "Sabbath-keeping" groups that you are claiming....many of them were heretical in nature, even denying the deity of Christ. Others didn't even keep the Saturday Sabbath, but called Sunday the Sabbath.
This type of thing is simply Sabbathkeeper myths. They try to construct an unending chain of Sabbatarians from the apostolic era to the current era, claiming that these individuals were the "true Christians" and everyone else is not. I was given such books as an Armstrongite to bolster my view in this regard. Looking at books like this since then, I realize the authors were a bunch of theological ignoramuses. For example, one of the books by Church of God - Seventh Day believers called Arius a "great defender of the true Faith". If you don't know this, Arius is the heretic whose view of Christ and his deity was adopted by the Jehovah's Witnesses.
You can read this book online to see the nonsense involved. Andrew Dugger is the author and the book is called A History of the True Church.
Like I've said before, though, it is nearly impossible to penetrate the Sabbatarian mindset. They think they have 'the truth' and everyone else is deceived. It takes a work of the Holy Spirit to help them to see the falsehoods.
Read his book From Sabbath To Sunday.
Here is what Wikipedia says. I have read from sources other than Wikipedia so I am not using them as my exclusive source of information:
{quote}
In 1977 Bacchiocchi published From Sabbath to Sunday, documenting the historical transition from the Saturday Sabbath to Sunday in the early Christian church due to social, pagan and political factors, and also the decline of standards for the day.[SUP][7][/SUP] The book made an impact on the wider academic community outside of Adventism, as well as within Adventism. Prior to his work, Seventh-day Adventists had focused on the role played by either the Pope, or by Roman Emperor Constantine I in the transition from Sabbath to Sunday, with Constantine's law declaring Sunday as a day of rest for those not involved in farming work. Subsequent to Bacchiocchi's work, Adventists have emphasized that the shift from Sabbath to Sunday was a more gradual process.
{quote ends}
So, even the Seventh Day Adventist church is not ignorant enough to claim that Constantine changed the Sabbath to Sunday, and they realize virtually no Christians were observing the Sabbath by AD150. Their observance is how I related in the earlier post.
By the way, there was no continuing Sabbath obligation after the Mosaic Covenant was initiated at the death of Christ, so man can't change something that no longer existed anyways.
As I said, Constantine's edict did not disallow individuals from observing the Sabbath. It only mandated Sunday rest for certain individuals, to give them a day to rest. Constantine is the scapegoat for not only Sabbathkeepers, but also anti-Trinitarians.
In addition, those "Sabbath-keeping" groups that you are claiming....many of them were heretical in nature, even denying the deity of Christ. Others didn't even keep the Saturday Sabbath, but called Sunday the Sabbath.
This type of thing is simply Sabbathkeeper myths. They try to construct an unending chain of Sabbatarians from the apostolic era to the current era, claiming that these individuals were the "true Christians" and everyone else is not. I was given such books as an Armstrongite to bolster my view in this regard. Looking at books like this since then, I realize the authors were a bunch of theological ignoramuses. For example, one of the books by Church of God - Seventh Day believers called Arius a "great defender of the true Faith". If you don't know this, Arius is the heretic whose view of Christ and his deity was adopted by the Jehovah's Witnesses.
You can read this book online to see the nonsense involved. Andrew Dugger is the author and the book is called A History of the True Church.
Like I've said before, though, it is nearly impossible to penetrate the Sabbatarian mindset. They think they have 'the truth' and everyone else is deceived. It takes a work of the Holy Spirit to help them to see the falsehoods.
Last edited:
S
Here is the pdf version of the book I quoted. You can see the ridiculous claims that are made by Sabbatarians who try to show that there was an unbroken chain of Sabbathkeepers who were the "true believers".
http://www.herbert-armstrong.org/Miscellaneous/History of the True Religion (Dugger).pdf
If you look up the details of the groups they claim were the true believers, you will find that many of them were heretics, quite often denying the full deity of Jesus Christ. In addition, some of them weren't even Sabbathkeepers, and their inclusion in this group was based on faulty reasoning. For instance, the Waldensians were called Sabati due to the peculiar sandals that they wore. Sabbathkeepers took this to be a reference to the Sabbath because of the similar word. They were not Sabbathkeepers at all.
Maybe Sabbathkeepers are fine with such faulty logic and inclusion of heretical, Christ-denying groups into their ranks...I would not be. As an ignorant, indoctrinated 22 year old it worked with me, though.
http://www.herbert-armstrong.org/Miscellaneous/History of the True Religion (Dugger).pdf
If you look up the details of the groups they claim were the true believers, you will find that many of them were heretics, quite often denying the full deity of Jesus Christ. In addition, some of them weren't even Sabbathkeepers, and their inclusion in this group was based on faulty reasoning. For instance, the Waldensians were called Sabati due to the peculiar sandals that they wore. Sabbathkeepers took this to be a reference to the Sabbath because of the similar word. They were not Sabbathkeepers at all.
Maybe Sabbathkeepers are fine with such faulty logic and inclusion of heretical, Christ-denying groups into their ranks...I would not be. As an ignorant, indoctrinated 22 year old it worked with me, though.
what happened in the lost century in history ?
as Edward Gibbon wrote in
The History of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire
"The scanty materials of ecclesiastical history seldom enable us to dispel
the cloud that hangs over the first age of the church .
Jesse Lyman Hurlbert in
The story of the christian church
the age just after the book of acts he calls "..the age of shadows.."
"of all the periods in the churches history, it is the one about which we know
the least about. For fifty years after St. Paul's life a curtain hangs over the church,
through which we strive vainly to look;
William McLaughlin in
The Course of Christian History
"But Christianity itself had been in the process of transformation as it progressed
and at the close of the period was in many respects quite different from the apostolic
Christianity."
Samuel G. Green in
A handbook of church History
"The thirty years which followed the close of the New Testement canon and the
destruction of Jerusalem, are in truth the most obscure in the history of the church.
When we emerge in the second century, we are to a great extent in a changed world."
William fitzgerald in
lectures on ecclesiastical History
"over this period of transition, which immediatly succeeds upon
the era properly called apostolic, great obscurity hangs."
Philip Schaff in
History of the Christian Church
"The remaining thirty years of the first century are involved in mysterious darkness,
illuminated only by the writings of John. This is a period of church history about which
we know least and would like to know most."
"Simon Magus unquestionably adulterated Christianity with pagon ideas and practices
and gave himself out for an emanation of God."
"This heresy in the second century spread over the whole church, east and west,
in the various schools of agnosticism."
--Satan was doing everything he could to destroy the Work of God, and in
little more than two decades, God’s people were turning to another gospel.
I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you
into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
-this was the time of the Roman Empire , and in around 117 AD, at its greatest extent.
streched from Britian clear to modern day Turkey, and it ruled with the rod of iron.
Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years
I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.
as Edward Gibbon wrote in
The History of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire
"The scanty materials of ecclesiastical history seldom enable us to dispel
the cloud that hangs over the first age of the church .
Jesse Lyman Hurlbert in
The story of the christian church
the age just after the book of acts he calls "..the age of shadows.."
"of all the periods in the churches history, it is the one about which we know
the least about. For fifty years after St. Paul's life a curtain hangs over the church,
through which we strive vainly to look;
William McLaughlin in
The Course of Christian History
"But Christianity itself had been in the process of transformation as it progressed
and at the close of the period was in many respects quite different from the apostolic
Christianity."
Samuel G. Green in
A handbook of church History
"The thirty years which followed the close of the New Testement canon and the
destruction of Jerusalem, are in truth the most obscure in the history of the church.
When we emerge in the second century, we are to a great extent in a changed world."
William fitzgerald in
lectures on ecclesiastical History
"over this period of transition, which immediatly succeeds upon
the era properly called apostolic, great obscurity hangs."
Philip Schaff in
History of the Christian Church
"The remaining thirty years of the first century are involved in mysterious darkness,
illuminated only by the writings of John. This is a period of church history about which
we know least and would like to know most."
"Simon Magus unquestionably adulterated Christianity with pagon ideas and practices
and gave himself out for an emanation of God."
"This heresy in the second century spread over the whole church, east and west,
in the various schools of agnosticism."
--Satan was doing everything he could to destroy the Work of God, and in
little more than two decades, God’s people were turning to another gospel.
I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you
into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
-this was the time of the Roman Empire , and in around 117 AD, at its greatest extent.
streched from Britian clear to modern day Turkey, and it ruled with the rod of iron.
Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years
I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.
S
By the way, I don't know how many of those who proselytize others to false doctrines are saved or not, but if I were them, I would not want to show up before God in the judgment, having wasted years defending a false teaching that did not emphasize Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice.
I was saved as an Armstrongite, despite their abysmal theology, but I consider the ten years I wasted believing their foolishness to be grievous. I would have pursued seminary in a sound organization had I been saved while attending a sound church. I think being a theology professor would have been an ideal career for me. At age 52, though, I think it's unwise to start a journey like that. There are so many more young and zealous people who are doing that.
Anyways, if I were a Sabbathkeeper, I'd seriously evaluate whether you are more zealous for the Sabbath or for proclaiming Jesus Christ. The ones I see here focus on the Sabbath continually, and I don't remember them mentioning much about Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice. It should be a constant theme that is in their minds.
This is one of the main things I realized with Armstrongism..their focus is not on Jesus Christ, but proclaiming the teachings of their founder. Jesus Christ was put on a back-burner. In fact, they ridiculed the gospel that was related to the "person of Jesus Christ" instead focusing on one aspect of the "kingdom of God", which is the Millennial reign of Jesus Christ.
By the way, in case you guys don't realize it, prove-all is an Armstrongite and that is why he nips at my heels continually. He follows my posts like a puppy dog and posts information from Armstrongite websites continually. Armstrongites believe that they are literally going to be God in the resurrection, just like God the Father and Jesus Christ are God. I have him on ignore so if I don't answer his remarks, that is the reason why. He doesn't accept the answers anyways but continues to cut and paste remarks from Armstrongite websites. He thinks he's going to be ruling over non-Armstrongites in the Millennium, who he considers to be spiritually blinded now. These things all come from the teachings of Herbert Armstrong.
I was saved as an Armstrongite, despite their abysmal theology, but I consider the ten years I wasted believing their foolishness to be grievous. I would have pursued seminary in a sound organization had I been saved while attending a sound church. I think being a theology professor would have been an ideal career for me. At age 52, though, I think it's unwise to start a journey like that. There are so many more young and zealous people who are doing that.
Anyways, if I were a Sabbathkeeper, I'd seriously evaluate whether you are more zealous for the Sabbath or for proclaiming Jesus Christ. The ones I see here focus on the Sabbath continually, and I don't remember them mentioning much about Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice. It should be a constant theme that is in their minds.
This is one of the main things I realized with Armstrongism..their focus is not on Jesus Christ, but proclaiming the teachings of their founder. Jesus Christ was put on a back-burner. In fact, they ridiculed the gospel that was related to the "person of Jesus Christ" instead focusing on one aspect of the "kingdom of God", which is the Millennial reign of Jesus Christ.
By the way, in case you guys don't realize it, prove-all is an Armstrongite and that is why he nips at my heels continually. He follows my posts like a puppy dog and posts information from Armstrongite websites continually. Armstrongites believe that they are literally going to be God in the resurrection, just like God the Father and Jesus Christ are God. I have him on ignore so if I don't answer his remarks, that is the reason why. He doesn't accept the answers anyways but continues to cut and paste remarks from Armstrongite websites. He thinks he's going to be ruling over non-Armstrongites in the Millennium, who he considers to be spiritually blinded now. These things all come from the teachings of Herbert Armstrong.
S
Yea, I learned a lot from Chuck Swindoll during my teens from his "Insight for Living" radio program aired in one of local broadcasting network here in the Philippines.
There used to be a Filipino restaurant here and I have been able to taste Filipino food such as barbecue, pancit chicken, chicken adobo, lumpia, menudo, and ube hayalel. The restaurant closed, though, so no more Filipino food.
I talk to a Filipino missionary on facebook a lot. She is in Marabut, Samar.
-agan flat out a known [lie] by you on this subject,
and you post does nothing but trying to discredit me and others,
this is the way satan works, not Gods saints.
have I not told you over and over, I was never in his church ?
and you again claim this and label me , and say I'm an Armstrongites.
and then you go on to explain there doctrine in a sly and miss quoted view.
and refuse to listen, or call foul when shown the proper view they hold.
or you go study and try find another loophole to attack, yes [attack you do].
your view of me is if I read from a book or artical, I belong to that org.,
and I am only sticking up for them because I go there. wrong you would be.
but me and my house, we will serve the Lord, you do as pleased, but
-I will stickup for [Gods holy statues] over [mans] tradations anyday.
about every thread and post you accuse [sabbaths keepers] to have [wonky doctrine].
I find that an insult to God, and tramples on the very Holy things of God
several times [you] have violated the cc chat rules, [remember]
trying to get me banned , the same time you where breaking several rules.
the bible says
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: a good understanding
have all they that do his commandments: his praise endureth for ever.
a good study to do is on how to get [wisdom and understanding]
-also very convenient to never answer my questions.
like why did God give Israel, [jews preserved them] [His oracles] to give to [us]?
are they not [a statue to Israel forever], and all the convenents belong to them?
-have I ever told you or others, you would go to hell for sabbath breaking?
you have so much [hatred] for your former church, that [is not] God inspired,
and bad fruit shows. so if you want to keep treating Gods Sabbaths as dung,
I will keep pointing out [the bible] and error in your views about it.
and you post does nothing but trying to discredit me and others,
this is the way satan works, not Gods saints.
have I not told you over and over, I was never in his church ?
and you again claim this and label me , and say I'm an Armstrongites.
and then you go on to explain there doctrine in a sly and miss quoted view.
and refuse to listen, or call foul when shown the proper view they hold.
or you go study and try find another loophole to attack, yes [attack you do].
your view of me is if I read from a book or artical, I belong to that org.,
and I am only sticking up for them because I go there. wrong you would be.
but me and my house, we will serve the Lord, you do as pleased, but
-I will stickup for [Gods holy statues] over [mans] tradations anyday.
about every thread and post you accuse [sabbaths keepers] to have [wonky doctrine].
I find that an insult to God, and tramples on the very Holy things of God
several times [you] have violated the cc chat rules, [remember]
trying to get me banned , the same time you where breaking several rules.
the bible says
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: a good understanding
have all they that do his commandments: his praise endureth for ever.
a good study to do is on how to get [wisdom and understanding]
-also very convenient to never answer my questions.
like why did God give Israel, [jews preserved them] [His oracles] to give to [us]?
are they not [a statue to Israel forever], and all the convenents belong to them?
-have I ever told you or others, you would go to hell for sabbath breaking?
you have so much [hatred] for your former church, that [is not] God inspired,
and bad fruit shows. so if you want to keep treating Gods Sabbaths as dung,
I will keep pointing out [the bible] and error in your views about it.
where in the bible does it say to do this on sunday or any normal work days?
was this act not rebuked for doing so as you say?,
the lords supper was done [on passover] only back then.
1 Corinthians 11:20 (KJV)
When ye come together therefore into one place,
this is not to eat the Lord's supper.
a [new testement] not a new covenent, Jesus changed [the symbles], not the day.
and because of sheading his blood, [A Feast ] is commanded to be keep.
an this would be the first day of unleavened bread, now not to remove bread you eat.
one symble now is commanded to remove false doctrine[test and prove everything].
1Co 11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you,
That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
1Co 11:24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat:
this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
1Co 11:25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped,
saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it,
in remembrance of me.
referring back to this...
Luk 22:15 And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat
this passover with you before I suffer: For I say unto you, I will not
any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.
Luk 22:17 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said,
Take this, and divide it among yourselves:
Luk 22:18 For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine,
until the kingdom of God shall come.
Luk 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them,
saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
Luk 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying,
This cup is [the new testament] in my blood, which is shed for you.
Do what in remembrance of me? They were taking the Passover.
The Passover service also consists of the foot washing...
Joh 13:12 So after he had washed their feet, and had taken his garments,
and was set down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done to you?
Joh 13:13 Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am.
Joh 13:14 If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet;
ye also ought to wash one another's feet.
Joh 13:15 For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.
Joh 13:16 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord;
neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him.
Joh 13:17 If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them.
and then Paul says this...
1Co 5:6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth
the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump,
as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
1Co 5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast,
not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness;
but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
And he said that to a Gentile church, to keep the feast of unleavened bread.
Nowhere is a Sunday morning Ishtar sunrise service taught in scripture
but the Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread are taught.
yes a focus on what Jesus said and did.
For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
Therefore [let us keep the feast],
do you really do what Jesus commanded about his atoning sacrifice?
or do you just like to talk bad about those who love and listen to him.
Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance, that ye commit not any one of these abominable customs,
which were committed before you, and that ye defile not yourselves therein: I am the Lord your God.
which were committed before you, and that ye defile not yourselves therein: I am the Lord your God.
Paul , like Jesus custom was, preached on the 7th day sabbath
about 83 recorded times, sometimes whole citys to new gentials [only]
also working as tent maker, keeping sabbath for year and half.
and the 8 times the phrase "first day of the week" is a normal [work day]
Should we not follow what Jesus and Paul did, more so in there absence?
or should we follow the edits of man, and his tradations?
is there a command not to keep the Sabbath Holy now?
about 83 recorded times, sometimes whole citys to new gentials [only]
also working as tent maker, keeping sabbath for year and half.
and the 8 times the phrase "first day of the week" is a normal [work day]
Should we not follow what Jesus and Paul did, more so in there absence?
or should we follow the edits of man, and his tradations?
is there a command not to keep the Sabbath Holy now?
Polycarp
After the death of the apostle John, a disciple of his, Polycarp,
waged a controversy over the Passover-Easter question with the
bishop of Rome, by then leader of the church started by Simon.
Still later, another disciple of Christ’s true Christianity,
Polycrates, waged a still hotter controversy over the same
Passover-Easter question with another bishop of Rome.
This theological battle was called the Quartodeciman Controversy.
Polycrates contended, as Jesus and the original apostles taught,
that the Passover should be observed in the new Christian form
introduced by Jesus and by the apostle Paul (1 Corinthians 11),
using unleavened bread and wine instead of sacrificing a lamb,
on the eve of the 14th Nisan (first month in the sacred calendar,
occurring in the spring). a memoral forever, and twice stated, not a shadow
But [the Rome church] insisted that it be observed on a Sunday.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quartodecimanism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_controversy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycarp
he was a disciple of John the Apostle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycrates_of_Ephesus
those who keeped the oracles of God, the sabbath keepers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaizers
After the death of the apostle John, a disciple of his, Polycarp,
waged a controversy over the Passover-Easter question with the
bishop of Rome, by then leader of the church started by Simon.
Still later, another disciple of Christ’s true Christianity,
Polycrates, waged a still hotter controversy over the same
Passover-Easter question with another bishop of Rome.
This theological battle was called the Quartodeciman Controversy.
Polycrates contended, as Jesus and the original apostles taught,
that the Passover should be observed in the new Christian form
introduced by Jesus and by the apostle Paul (1 Corinthians 11),
using unleavened bread and wine instead of sacrificing a lamb,
on the eve of the 14th Nisan (first month in the sacred calendar,
occurring in the spring). a memoral forever, and twice stated, not a shadow
But [the Rome church] insisted that it be observed on a Sunday.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quartodecimanism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_controversy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycarp
he was a disciple of John the Apostle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycrates_of_Ephesus
those who keeped the oracles of God, the sabbath keepers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaizers
Last edited:
S
You're right that he never changed it. It no longer applies whatsoever to anyone, and it only applied to the nation of Israel under the Old Covenant.
Colossians 2:16-17 groups it with other irrelevant things, including food and drink offerings and New Moons. It is called a shadow, just like the ceremonial law in Hebrews 10:1-2 and like the food and drink offerings, ended with Christ's coming, as Hebrews 9:9-11 says.
If you claim the Old Covenant still applies, you have a real problem, because the only way you can enter into the Old Covenant is through physical circumcision, and Paul says if you are physically circumcised you have fallen from grace, in Galatians 5:1-4. The whole book of Galatians is about those who claimed the Old Covenant was still applicable to New Covenant believers.
Additionally, if Sabbath-breaking and eating unclean meats are sins, then why weren't they listed on the sin lists to the Gentiles? There's so many holes and inconsistencies in this argument that it's comical to see you guys insisting that these things still apply.
Colossians 2:16-17 groups it with other irrelevant things, including food and drink offerings and New Moons. It is called a shadow, just like the ceremonial law in Hebrews 10:1-2 and like the food and drink offerings, ended with Christ's coming, as Hebrews 9:9-11 says.
If you claim the Old Covenant still applies, you have a real problem, because the only way you can enter into the Old Covenant is through physical circumcision, and Paul says if you are physically circumcised you have fallen from grace, in Galatians 5:1-4. The whole book of Galatians is about those who claimed the Old Covenant was still applicable to New Covenant believers.
Additionally, if Sabbath-breaking and eating unclean meats are sins, then why weren't they listed on the sin lists to the Gentiles? There's so many holes and inconsistencies in this argument that it's comical to see you guys insisting that these things still apply.
S
Here's a revised version of my standard warning about some of the Sabbath/festival/clean unclean meat advocates here:
If anyone wants to dialogue with a former Sabbath/festival/clean and unclean meat law observer who changed from that view, feel free to contact me through christianchat email here. In addition, I have made a lot of remarks regarding this topic in my profile if you care to read them.
I observed the Saturday Sabbath, annual festivals of Leviticus 23, and clean/unclean meat laws of Deuteronomy 11 from about 1985 to 1995 as a 22-32 year old member of Worldwide Church of God. I am no longer an observer and attend an Evangelical Free Churches of America (EFCA) congregation. My doctrinal position is that of an ordinary, evangelical Christian.
The comments below are a warning about those on this forum who claim that Sabbathkeeping is a requirement or condition or necessary fruit of salvation, or teach that non-observers are sinning, disobedient or unsaved due to non-observance.
These comments are not addressing Sabbathkeepers who observe Saturday as a matter of individual preference, without claiming these things. Romans 14 gives Christians liberality to observe Sabbaths, festivals, and observe clean/unclean meat laws if they do so in a non-contentious, non-judgmental manner. I find that the first group is more prominent amongst Sabbathkeepers, though, and that second group is the minority.
In general, it's a waste of time to argue with the first kind of Sabbathkeepers. They are already indoctrinated into a worldview which is impossible to penetrate, except through the power of the Holy Spirit. They are convinced that they are the ones who know "the truth" (their worldview), that they are part of the enlightened, special ones, and that everyone else is deceived. I dialogue with such individuals occasionally on the forum, for the benefit of those who are reading the interaction, but there are some individuals I simply ignore because it’s hopeless. They are like a broken record which keeps repeating the teachings of their organization. I was exactly the same way, but I was the deceived one.
I express my perspective on these topics to avoid others being misled into their teachings. The focus of Christianity is squarely on Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice, and I don’t want anyone getting misled in this regard and spending years believing false teachings like I did. In addition, I have been a part of organizations that are observers, and organizations that are non-observers. I know that the latter group bears the fruits of the Spirit more clearly than the former group. In fact, it angers me to see observing groups slandering other Christians, implying that they are spiritually inferior or unsaved. Such claims are simply lying, slanderous propaganda from Satan.
These groups generally fail to understand the difference between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. They think that the Old Covenant is applicable to New Covenant Christians, whereas the Old Covenant was made with ancient Israel. In addition, they fail to understand that the Old Covenant doesn’t even apply to Israelites now.
Usually, their claims are limited to the Sabbath, festivals, and clean/unclean meat laws, and not the entire Old Covenant. Almost none of them claim that their wives or daughters must live outside of the home during their menstrual period, or discard any furniture as unclean that a menstrual woman sat upon during this time. This is just one example of their inconsistencies.
The evangelistic ones attempt to lead you down the path of a certain group of “proof texts” that convince you keeping the Sabbath/festivals/clean and unclean meat laws are a requirement for Christians, and that you are in sin for non-compliance. They may say, don’t believe me, believe your Bible (like my organization did) …but what they really mean is, let me take you by the nose and lead you through the Scriptures in a disingenuous manner that causes you to arrive at the same faulty conclusion I’ve arrived at. They imply a false context to verses that refute their position, and employ similar “rescue devices” in order to bolster their doctrines. Their reasoning sounds pretty scriptural on a surface level to those who are unacquainted with the context and problems with their proof-texts, but when studied at a deeper level they aren’t credible.
One example of their tomfoolery is related to I John 3:4. They think this verse defines sin as the “transgression of the law”. Note that they will always read this verse in the KJV. They try to convince you that “the law” is either the Ten Commandments (in the case of SDAs) or the entire Mosaic Covenant (in the case of the Torah observers). They never present the option of God’s moral law. In addition, the SDAs claim that the clean/unclean meat laws still apply, which are not part of the Ten Commandments, and the Torah observers don’t observe the laws regarding menstruous women, which are part of the Torah.
I don’t think I John 3:4 defines sin at all, else there are logical issues within Scripture. We know that physical circumcision is no longer applicable, and that was part of the Mosaic Covenant, so claiming it is referring to the Mosaic Covenant is not logically coherent. The verse is linking behavior (hamartia or sin) with motivation (anomia or lawlessness or rebellion). The logical leap that Sabbatarians and others have made is that anomia refers solely to breaking the Ten Commandments or the Mosaic Covenant. This view is consistent with the theme of the book of I John, which describes the children of God against the children of Satan or antichrists. Antichrists are individuals who are still in rebellion against God, like the rest of mankind before they come to faith. Those who are living a lifestyle of sin are still in this state of rebellion against God.
On this specific issue, I do not generally engage Sabbathkeepers or others because much of the Mosaic Covenant and nine of the Ten Commandments are moral in nature and thus are applicable, so I don’t think it’s worth the engagement, but it is necessary to clarify because of their use of this verse to suggest that the Sabbath is still applicable, and that non-observers are in sin.
So, this is a good example how faulty reasoning is employed in Sabbathkeeper arguments. Every argument of theirs has a logical counterargument that is more coherent from a Scriptural perspective.
Quite often, their assertions also include a faulty view of church history. They typically portray Constantine or the Roman Catholic Church as the villains in a conspiracy theory to do away with “God’s law”, combined with their faulty interpretation of prophecy. Their view does not correspond with reality, though. Sunday meetings within the church occurred much earlier and for different reasons than they claim.
Christians would attend Synagogue with the Jews to hear the Scriptures read, as access to Scripture was limited. They would then meet on Sunday to observe communion and to discuss the Scriptures from a Christian standpoint. Due to progressively worsening Jewish persecution following the destruction of the Temple in AD 70 and extending to AD 130, they gradually stopped attending the Synagogue, and instead continued to meet on Sunday. History is in agreement that the majority of Christians by AD 130 were not observing the Sabbath, and the few remaining were largely a heretical group called the Ebionites. This transition was long before Constantine’s edict of AD 325 or the Council of Laodicea in AD 363, the two main events that Sabbathkeepers tend to point to.
Also, it is notable that on the occasions when Christ appeared to his disciples after the Resurrection, when the day was mentioned, it was always on the first day of the week, and not on the Sabbath. If the Sabbath was a special day after the resurrection, one would expect to see him appearing to them on the Sabbath to reinforce this point, but we don’t see this. Neither do we see Sabbath-breaking and eating unclean meats mentioned in any of the sin lists of the Gentiles, although many obvious and non-obvious sins are mentioned on these lists.
They will also point to claims by Roman Catholics that they changed the Sabbath…these claims are just as bogus as the Roman Catholic claim to Peter being the first pope. No informed person takes these claims seriously.
It is plain what the focus of Christianity is; the focus is embedded in the name itself. It is about the unique God-man who came to die a substitutionary death on the behalf of the redeemed, so that those who repent and place their faith in Him can be forgiven and restored to a good relationship with God. In recognition of the monumental event of the crucifixion and the resurrection, which occurred on the first day of the week, it is appropriate for Christians to assemble on this day to celebrate and worship.
The Sabbath pointed to Jesus Christ and our life of faith in Him and his atonement as our spiritual rest (Matt 11:28-30, Hebrews 4:9-10, Colossians 2:16-17). It pointed to a restoration of the peace that mankind enjoyed through a face-to-face relationship with God, like they enjoyed in the Garden of Eden. The Sabbath was a type relating to this reality. It was a mere shadow (Colossians 2:16-17). We have the Reality now, in our relationship with Jesus Christ. This relationship is a continuing rest; not just a certain day. We have peace now through our Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 5:1).
In addition to their lack of focus on Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice, the Sabbath/festival/clean unclean meat observances are usually only the tip of the iceberg as far as doctrinal problems with organizations involved in these teachings. As an example of other doctrinal problems, the cultic group I was involved with, Armstrongism, deny the Trinity, claim they are going to be fully God in the resurrection, and deny the salvation of all other believers outside of their organization, claiming to be the “true church”. The Christian life, to them, is about proving one’s self obedient enough and to be worthy of being trusted with the full powers of Godhood. They considered Sabbath-breaking to be the Mark of the Beast.
Other organizations such as some Messianic Jew and Hebrew Roots groups deny the Trinity, the full deity of Jesus Christ, the writings of the apostle Paul, or follow extra-biblical writings such as their prophet or prophetess or the writings of Judaism such as the Talmud.
Many Sabbathkeepers are taught by people who are full of intellectual pride and vanity, and proclaim their superior knowledge to the world, just like the Armstrongites I belonged to. These teachers view everything within Christianity with evil suspicion, and seek to discredit it in any way they can to build themselves and their organizations up. As a result, they usually don’t hold just one aberrant theology but many. They are contentious, argumentative people who criticize other organizations on small details, while teaching massive errors themselves.
Control is sometimes part of their agenda, as well. Armstrongite organizations forbid their people to interact with other Christians, and project a false image that other Christians are ignorant and unable to teach them anything. Many Messianic Jew and Hebrew Roots congregations have a “rabbi” which establishes himself between God and the believer to “properly interpret” the Scriptures. Sometimes these individuals appeal to their alleged or real Jewish ancestry to lay claim to this authority.
There are members of some of these organizations on this forum, including Armstrongites such as Restored Church of God, United Church of God, Philadelphia Church of God, and Living Church of God. In addition, some Hebrew Roots Movement adherents and Messianic Jew groups have doctrinal issues like I mentioned. Seventh Day Adventists claim to be the “remnant church” which in essence is a claim that they are the true church, and that Sunday observance will be the Mark of the Beast in the end times. Few Seventh Day Adventists will reject Ellen G. White as a prophet, and many think her writings are inspired, referring to her constantly during sermons. One of my SDA friends said that about 30% of the messages in some SDA congregations are basically quoting Ellen G. White.
If you decide to visit one of these organizations, in spite of my advice, I would ask you to consider whether their message is focused on Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice. That is the clear focus of the New Testament. I am confident that they will fall short and won’t have this focus.
If you are troubled by this issue, I suggest reading the book “Sabbath in Christ” by Dale Ratzlaff to study the Sabbath and the Covenants before wasting years with the teachings of these organizations…years that could be spent proclaiming Jesus Christ.
I have seen the fruits of Sabbath/festival/clean unclean meat observers, and have seen the fruits of other Christians. I know that the fruits of the Spirit are manifested more clearly in the EFCA congregation that I attend rather than the Armstrongite group. So, on the basis of fruit alone, I know that the claims they made that other Christians were unsaved are untrue. There is no less dedication to obedience in this congregation. In fact, their attention is not diverted on judging other Christians on ceremonial and ritualistic aspects of the Old Covenant law, and every other doctrinal issue they can criticize, so they can focus it upon things that matter. They focus on works of love; for instance they sponsor an orphanage in India which houses, feeds and educates 60 children.
If anyone wants to dialogue with a former Sabbath/festival/clean and unclean meat law observer who changed from that view, feel free to contact me through christianchat email here. In addition, I have made a lot of remarks regarding this topic in my profile if you care to read them.
I observed the Saturday Sabbath, annual festivals of Leviticus 23, and clean/unclean meat laws of Deuteronomy 11 from about 1985 to 1995 as a 22-32 year old member of Worldwide Church of God. I am no longer an observer and attend an Evangelical Free Churches of America (EFCA) congregation. My doctrinal position is that of an ordinary, evangelical Christian.
The comments below are a warning about those on this forum who claim that Sabbathkeeping is a requirement or condition or necessary fruit of salvation, or teach that non-observers are sinning, disobedient or unsaved due to non-observance.
These comments are not addressing Sabbathkeepers who observe Saturday as a matter of individual preference, without claiming these things. Romans 14 gives Christians liberality to observe Sabbaths, festivals, and observe clean/unclean meat laws if they do so in a non-contentious, non-judgmental manner. I find that the first group is more prominent amongst Sabbathkeepers, though, and that second group is the minority.
In general, it's a waste of time to argue with the first kind of Sabbathkeepers. They are already indoctrinated into a worldview which is impossible to penetrate, except through the power of the Holy Spirit. They are convinced that they are the ones who know "the truth" (their worldview), that they are part of the enlightened, special ones, and that everyone else is deceived. I dialogue with such individuals occasionally on the forum, for the benefit of those who are reading the interaction, but there are some individuals I simply ignore because it’s hopeless. They are like a broken record which keeps repeating the teachings of their organization. I was exactly the same way, but I was the deceived one.
I express my perspective on these topics to avoid others being misled into their teachings. The focus of Christianity is squarely on Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice, and I don’t want anyone getting misled in this regard and spending years believing false teachings like I did. In addition, I have been a part of organizations that are observers, and organizations that are non-observers. I know that the latter group bears the fruits of the Spirit more clearly than the former group. In fact, it angers me to see observing groups slandering other Christians, implying that they are spiritually inferior or unsaved. Such claims are simply lying, slanderous propaganda from Satan.
These groups generally fail to understand the difference between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. They think that the Old Covenant is applicable to New Covenant Christians, whereas the Old Covenant was made with ancient Israel. In addition, they fail to understand that the Old Covenant doesn’t even apply to Israelites now.
Usually, their claims are limited to the Sabbath, festivals, and clean/unclean meat laws, and not the entire Old Covenant. Almost none of them claim that their wives or daughters must live outside of the home during their menstrual period, or discard any furniture as unclean that a menstrual woman sat upon during this time. This is just one example of their inconsistencies.
The evangelistic ones attempt to lead you down the path of a certain group of “proof texts” that convince you keeping the Sabbath/festivals/clean and unclean meat laws are a requirement for Christians, and that you are in sin for non-compliance. They may say, don’t believe me, believe your Bible (like my organization did) …but what they really mean is, let me take you by the nose and lead you through the Scriptures in a disingenuous manner that causes you to arrive at the same faulty conclusion I’ve arrived at. They imply a false context to verses that refute their position, and employ similar “rescue devices” in order to bolster their doctrines. Their reasoning sounds pretty scriptural on a surface level to those who are unacquainted with the context and problems with their proof-texts, but when studied at a deeper level they aren’t credible.
One example of their tomfoolery is related to I John 3:4. They think this verse defines sin as the “transgression of the law”. Note that they will always read this verse in the KJV. They try to convince you that “the law” is either the Ten Commandments (in the case of SDAs) or the entire Mosaic Covenant (in the case of the Torah observers). They never present the option of God’s moral law. In addition, the SDAs claim that the clean/unclean meat laws still apply, which are not part of the Ten Commandments, and the Torah observers don’t observe the laws regarding menstruous women, which are part of the Torah.
I don’t think I John 3:4 defines sin at all, else there are logical issues within Scripture. We know that physical circumcision is no longer applicable, and that was part of the Mosaic Covenant, so claiming it is referring to the Mosaic Covenant is not logically coherent. The verse is linking behavior (hamartia or sin) with motivation (anomia or lawlessness or rebellion). The logical leap that Sabbatarians and others have made is that anomia refers solely to breaking the Ten Commandments or the Mosaic Covenant. This view is consistent with the theme of the book of I John, which describes the children of God against the children of Satan or antichrists. Antichrists are individuals who are still in rebellion against God, like the rest of mankind before they come to faith. Those who are living a lifestyle of sin are still in this state of rebellion against God.
On this specific issue, I do not generally engage Sabbathkeepers or others because much of the Mosaic Covenant and nine of the Ten Commandments are moral in nature and thus are applicable, so I don’t think it’s worth the engagement, but it is necessary to clarify because of their use of this verse to suggest that the Sabbath is still applicable, and that non-observers are in sin.
So, this is a good example how faulty reasoning is employed in Sabbathkeeper arguments. Every argument of theirs has a logical counterargument that is more coherent from a Scriptural perspective.
Quite often, their assertions also include a faulty view of church history. They typically portray Constantine or the Roman Catholic Church as the villains in a conspiracy theory to do away with “God’s law”, combined with their faulty interpretation of prophecy. Their view does not correspond with reality, though. Sunday meetings within the church occurred much earlier and for different reasons than they claim.
Christians would attend Synagogue with the Jews to hear the Scriptures read, as access to Scripture was limited. They would then meet on Sunday to observe communion and to discuss the Scriptures from a Christian standpoint. Due to progressively worsening Jewish persecution following the destruction of the Temple in AD 70 and extending to AD 130, they gradually stopped attending the Synagogue, and instead continued to meet on Sunday. History is in agreement that the majority of Christians by AD 130 were not observing the Sabbath, and the few remaining were largely a heretical group called the Ebionites. This transition was long before Constantine’s edict of AD 325 or the Council of Laodicea in AD 363, the two main events that Sabbathkeepers tend to point to.
Also, it is notable that on the occasions when Christ appeared to his disciples after the Resurrection, when the day was mentioned, it was always on the first day of the week, and not on the Sabbath. If the Sabbath was a special day after the resurrection, one would expect to see him appearing to them on the Sabbath to reinforce this point, but we don’t see this. Neither do we see Sabbath-breaking and eating unclean meats mentioned in any of the sin lists of the Gentiles, although many obvious and non-obvious sins are mentioned on these lists.
They will also point to claims by Roman Catholics that they changed the Sabbath…these claims are just as bogus as the Roman Catholic claim to Peter being the first pope. No informed person takes these claims seriously.
It is plain what the focus of Christianity is; the focus is embedded in the name itself. It is about the unique God-man who came to die a substitutionary death on the behalf of the redeemed, so that those who repent and place their faith in Him can be forgiven and restored to a good relationship with God. In recognition of the monumental event of the crucifixion and the resurrection, which occurred on the first day of the week, it is appropriate for Christians to assemble on this day to celebrate and worship.
The Sabbath pointed to Jesus Christ and our life of faith in Him and his atonement as our spiritual rest (Matt 11:28-30, Hebrews 4:9-10, Colossians 2:16-17). It pointed to a restoration of the peace that mankind enjoyed through a face-to-face relationship with God, like they enjoyed in the Garden of Eden. The Sabbath was a type relating to this reality. It was a mere shadow (Colossians 2:16-17). We have the Reality now, in our relationship with Jesus Christ. This relationship is a continuing rest; not just a certain day. We have peace now through our Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 5:1).
In addition to their lack of focus on Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice, the Sabbath/festival/clean unclean meat observances are usually only the tip of the iceberg as far as doctrinal problems with organizations involved in these teachings. As an example of other doctrinal problems, the cultic group I was involved with, Armstrongism, deny the Trinity, claim they are going to be fully God in the resurrection, and deny the salvation of all other believers outside of their organization, claiming to be the “true church”. The Christian life, to them, is about proving one’s self obedient enough and to be worthy of being trusted with the full powers of Godhood. They considered Sabbath-breaking to be the Mark of the Beast.
Other organizations such as some Messianic Jew and Hebrew Roots groups deny the Trinity, the full deity of Jesus Christ, the writings of the apostle Paul, or follow extra-biblical writings such as their prophet or prophetess or the writings of Judaism such as the Talmud.
Many Sabbathkeepers are taught by people who are full of intellectual pride and vanity, and proclaim their superior knowledge to the world, just like the Armstrongites I belonged to. These teachers view everything within Christianity with evil suspicion, and seek to discredit it in any way they can to build themselves and their organizations up. As a result, they usually don’t hold just one aberrant theology but many. They are contentious, argumentative people who criticize other organizations on small details, while teaching massive errors themselves.
Control is sometimes part of their agenda, as well. Armstrongite organizations forbid their people to interact with other Christians, and project a false image that other Christians are ignorant and unable to teach them anything. Many Messianic Jew and Hebrew Roots congregations have a “rabbi” which establishes himself between God and the believer to “properly interpret” the Scriptures. Sometimes these individuals appeal to their alleged or real Jewish ancestry to lay claim to this authority.
There are members of some of these organizations on this forum, including Armstrongites such as Restored Church of God, United Church of God, Philadelphia Church of God, and Living Church of God. In addition, some Hebrew Roots Movement adherents and Messianic Jew groups have doctrinal issues like I mentioned. Seventh Day Adventists claim to be the “remnant church” which in essence is a claim that they are the true church, and that Sunday observance will be the Mark of the Beast in the end times. Few Seventh Day Adventists will reject Ellen G. White as a prophet, and many think her writings are inspired, referring to her constantly during sermons. One of my SDA friends said that about 30% of the messages in some SDA congregations are basically quoting Ellen G. White.
If you decide to visit one of these organizations, in spite of my advice, I would ask you to consider whether their message is focused on Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice. That is the clear focus of the New Testament. I am confident that they will fall short and won’t have this focus.
If you are troubled by this issue, I suggest reading the book “Sabbath in Christ” by Dale Ratzlaff to study the Sabbath and the Covenants before wasting years with the teachings of these organizations…years that could be spent proclaiming Jesus Christ.
I have seen the fruits of Sabbath/festival/clean unclean meat observers, and have seen the fruits of other Christians. I know that the fruits of the Spirit are manifested more clearly in the EFCA congregation that I attend rather than the Armstrongite group. So, on the basis of fruit alone, I know that the claims they made that other Christians were unsaved are untrue. There is no less dedication to obedience in this congregation. In fact, their attention is not diverted on judging other Christians on ceremonial and ritualistic aspects of the Old Covenant law, and every other doctrinal issue they can criticize, so they can focus it upon things that matter. They focus on works of love; for instance they sponsor an orphanage in India which houses, feeds and educates 60 children.
Last edited:
G
Keeping the Sabbath is a Commandment of Yehovah. The Sabbath is the 7th day (Saturday). The Sabbath=7th Day=Saturday is a holy convocation, it is sanctified and is unchanged through all generations. Yehovah "Hallowed" the seventh day. You can not find any scripture that the seventh day was UN-HALLOWED.
Gen 2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and hallowed it, because that on it he rested from all his work which God had created in making it.
Lev_16:31 A sabbath of rest shall it be unto you, and ye shall afflict your souls: it is an everlasting statute.
Lev_23:3 Six days shall work be done; but on the seventh day is the sabbath of rest, a holy convocation; no manner of work shall ye do: it is the sabbath to Jehovah in all your dwellings.
Gen 2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and hallowed it, because that on it he rested from all his work which God had created in making it.
Lev_16:31 A sabbath of rest shall it be unto you, and ye shall afflict your souls: it is an everlasting statute.
Lev_23:3 Six days shall work be done; but on the seventh day is the sabbath of rest, a holy convocation; no manner of work shall ye do: it is the sabbath to Jehovah in all your dwellings.
Many will argue that the Sabbath is Old Covenant and as the old covenant is finished we no longer need to keep the Sabbath.
The problem with this argument is the assumption that the Sabbath only applied to the Old Covenant given Moses and that it had no place anywhere else. In other words they assume that the Sabbath itself originates with the covenant as an inseparable part of the covenant.
However this is clearly not the case as the scripture shows clearly where the Sabbath is first instigated by God as it is written:
Gen 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
Gen 2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
Gen 2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
God made the 7th day Holy and rested on it and blessed it and set it apart from other days/sanctified it. This is most clearly before the covenant given to through Moses, In fact it is before any known covenant between God and man existed as at this point all is very good and exactly how God wanted it to be.
That this day was observed by man even then is clear when one reads the words of Jesus as it is written:
Mar 2:27 And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:
Mar 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Notice carefully that Jesus is claiming to be Lord of the Sabbath making Him the one who instigated it and when was that?
"the sabbath was made" Jesus is referring to its origin which we have already seen when it was made in Genesis. And he tells us who it was made for, Man. Not Jews only, not gentiles only but all mankind. Jesus did not bless it and set it apart for his own benefit but as a gift for man did he make it in respect to his finished work.
what have we seen from these few scriptures?
The Sabbath most clearly does not originate in the covenant given to Israel. Thus any argument suggesting that because the covenant is finished so is the Sabbath is ludicrous at best. This can be easily seen by simply looking at how much of the old covenant stipulations are exactly the same as the new.
Love the lord your God, love your neighbour, do not commit adultery. etc. Why? because they are changeless principles that apply to any who follow God no matter what covenant they are under. God does not change himself when he changes the covenants. Therefor what God has done and expects remains in many ways the same.
So why was the Sabbath in the old Covenant? Because God making a covenant with Israel does not change the fact that He made that day holy for man in the beginning. Thus it stands to reason that when Israel agrees to covenant with God that God puts His ways and standards within the agreement. not that they solely belong to that agreement but that they belong to the God who is making that agreement.
The problem with this argument is the assumption that the Sabbath only applied to the Old Covenant given Moses and that it had no place anywhere else. In other words they assume that the Sabbath itself originates with the covenant as an inseparable part of the covenant.
However this is clearly not the case as the scripture shows clearly where the Sabbath is first instigated by God as it is written:
Gen 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
Gen 2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
Gen 2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
God made the 7th day Holy and rested on it and blessed it and set it apart from other days/sanctified it. This is most clearly before the covenant given to through Moses, In fact it is before any known covenant between God and man existed as at this point all is very good and exactly how God wanted it to be.
That this day was observed by man even then is clear when one reads the words of Jesus as it is written:
Mar 2:27 And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:
Mar 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Notice carefully that Jesus is claiming to be Lord of the Sabbath making Him the one who instigated it and when was that?
"the sabbath was made" Jesus is referring to its origin which we have already seen when it was made in Genesis. And he tells us who it was made for, Man. Not Jews only, not gentiles only but all mankind. Jesus did not bless it and set it apart for his own benefit but as a gift for man did he make it in respect to his finished work.
what have we seen from these few scriptures?
The Sabbath most clearly does not originate in the covenant given to Israel. Thus any argument suggesting that because the covenant is finished so is the Sabbath is ludicrous at best. This can be easily seen by simply looking at how much of the old covenant stipulations are exactly the same as the new.
Love the lord your God, love your neighbour, do not commit adultery. etc. Why? because they are changeless principles that apply to any who follow God no matter what covenant they are under. God does not change himself when he changes the covenants. Therefor what God has done and expects remains in many ways the same.
So why was the Sabbath in the old Covenant? Because God making a covenant with Israel does not change the fact that He made that day holy for man in the beginning. Thus it stands to reason that when Israel agrees to covenant with God that God puts His ways and standards within the agreement. not that they solely belong to that agreement but that they belong to the God who is making that agreement.