S
I am not going to respond in detail to the multiple posts, as it would require too much time and likely would not be of interest to the rest of those reading the thread. I presented my case clearly with my initial post. Judge whether the responses are coherent if this is a subject that concerns you.
Again, I would recommend reading the book "Sabbath In Christ" by Dale Ratzlaff as well. Dale is a former Seventh Day Adventist teacher/pastor, for four generations, and the book is very helpful in regards to understanding the differences between the covenants. An additional book which is good on this topic is "Treaty of the Great King" by Meredith Kline, as it helps to understand why the Sabbath is in the Ten Commandments. It was the sign of the covenant, and the sign of the covenant related to the typical structure of such agreements at that time.
I doubt inJC has read Dale Ratzlaff's book so he is unable to determine whether he is a dependable source of information or not. Sabbathkeepers are unlikely to read a book that proposes something different than what they already believe anyways...I know that from experience as a prideful Armstrongite.
Regarding SDA historian Samuele Bacchiocchi, the real mystery is how he remains a SDA, seeing as his work conclusively refuted Ellen G. White's claim (based on one of her visions which proves she's a false prophetess) that the pope changed the Sabbath to Sunday, seeing as virtually no Christian was observing the Sabbath after AD140, over 300 years before the Roman Catholic church existed, and WAY before they had any such power to exact such a change...they were a mere bishopric of the Church until about 600 AD, and even then they didn't yield that kind of power over the whole church. It's a common joke that only the SDAs and the Roman Catholic church believe that they changed the Sabbath to Sunday...I'd add some other Sabbathkeepers to the list though as many of them still believe the Roman Catholic church (or Constantine) caused Christians to stop keeping the Sabbath.
Concerning the way radical Sabbathkeepers read the words "commandments" or "law", realize that they choose the meaning which best fits their presuppositions and supports their doctrine. In some places in the NT, commandments or law are referring to the moral law of God, which is more flexible than the list that SDAs or Torah observers allow for. In other places, commandments or law is referring to the entire Torah, and not just the Ten Commandments. I think it is very rare that the law or commandments refers EXCLUSIVELY to the Ten Commandments. Even when Jesus lists some commandments when speaking to the young ruler, he included at least one other commandment in the Torah that is not in the Ten Commandments..it is listed as a separate commandment (Leviticus 19:18).
In regards to commandments or laws that apply to me, the Sabbath is not one of those, as it is a sign of the Mosaic Covenant between God and Israel, and I am not an ancient Israelite. His inclusion of the Sabbath or clean/unclean laws in those commandments makes as much sense to me as including physical circumcision.
I did another thread comparing physical circumcision with the Sabbath..virtually the same language is used with regards to the two practices:
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/117464-sabbath-circumcision-comparison.html
I would also note that nowhere in the sin lists of the Gentiles is Sabbath-breaking or eating unclean meats mentioned. This is a notable exception, seeing as base and obvious sins are mentioned. Neither is any instruction given to Gentiles with regards to Sabbath-keeping. In addition, one must assume that no slaves with unkind Gentile masters were saved in the New Testament church, if Sabbath-keeping is a requirement of salvation. Does inJC seriously think that all Gentile masters would allow their Christian slaves to take a day off, and that conflicts relating to this would never be mentioned by anyone? These are questions I had to ask myself as a ex Sabbathkeeper.
I will warn others that a lot of these "lawkeeping" groups are cultic in nature. Read the above comments. The individual relates those who are not observers to followers of Lucifer. The cultic Sabbathkeeping organizations view the Sabbath as being a test commandment that defines who is and who is not a true follower of God. This is based on Exodus 16 where God used the Sabbath as a test for the ancient nation of Israel. As I have said, we are not Israelites under the Mosaic Covenant and it is not in effect anyways.
Sabbath, festivals, clean/unclean laws, and other items were "boundary markers" which differentiated Israelites from the surrounding Gentile nations. The Mosaic Covenant was engineered in a manner to highlight these distinctions clearly to separate Israelites from Gentiles. These regulations were removed with the Cross (Ephesians 2:13-15).
The confusing thing is that inJC addresses me as Brother Sparkman and then informs me that those who don't do these things follow Lucifer. That's a contradictory claim. As an Armstrongite, I was consistent. If someone didn't observe the Sabbath, festivals, and clean laws, I considered him an unbeliever. Period. In fact, if he wasn't part of my organization, he was an unbeliever to me. That is part of why I will never belong to such an organization again. The observances are less of an issue to me than the accompanying attitude.
A related teaching of many of these groups is that the entire Christian church (except for them) is part of the "great prostitute" of Revelation 17. They relate this great prostitute to the Roman Catholic church, and claim that the descendants of this great prostitute are the Sunday observing Protestant churches. There is also a claim that those who observe Sunday are under the "mark of the Beast", or will be under the Mark of the Beast in the end days.
Anyways, InJC, please do not call me brother and then tell me I am following Lucifer because I worship on the day of the resurrection. Followers of Lucifer are not brothers to those who follow God. I don't tolerate double-speak.
This is a paradigm the Seventh Day Adventists face. On one hand, they want to be considered part of the wider Christ body but on the other hand they believe we are following Satan's system, and actively attempt to evangelize other Protestants. They claim to be the true, "remnant" church and that ultimately we must become part of their group to be saved in the Great Tribulation or else..
I think I mentioned it in a previous post, but I was an observer for over a decade so I am not unacquainted with Scripture's teachings on these issues. I have had to work through a lot of false indoctrination on these topics personally. Their view largely depends upon a faulty view of church history, a conspiracy theory mentality, and misunderstandings regarding the different covenants.
By the way, I have no issue with people who think differently on the subject of days or food, if they are gracious toward those who do not agree with their position, per Romans 14. Claiming those who disagree are following Lucifer is not gracious, though. In addition, I know that many observers make no claims that these observances are requirements, conditions, or necessary fruits of salvation, and I have no issue with such believers, or even if they have personal convictions regarding them without condemning others.
This subject is only tangentially related to the OP's thread though so I apologize to her for bringing it up. If anyone has any questions relating to the Sabbath/festival/clean and unclean meat topics feel free to send me an cc email.
Again, I would recommend reading the book "Sabbath In Christ" by Dale Ratzlaff as well. Dale is a former Seventh Day Adventist teacher/pastor, for four generations, and the book is very helpful in regards to understanding the differences between the covenants. An additional book which is good on this topic is "Treaty of the Great King" by Meredith Kline, as it helps to understand why the Sabbath is in the Ten Commandments. It was the sign of the covenant, and the sign of the covenant related to the typical structure of such agreements at that time.
I doubt inJC has read Dale Ratzlaff's book so he is unable to determine whether he is a dependable source of information or not. Sabbathkeepers are unlikely to read a book that proposes something different than what they already believe anyways...I know that from experience as a prideful Armstrongite.
Regarding SDA historian Samuele Bacchiocchi, the real mystery is how he remains a SDA, seeing as his work conclusively refuted Ellen G. White's claim (based on one of her visions which proves she's a false prophetess) that the pope changed the Sabbath to Sunday, seeing as virtually no Christian was observing the Sabbath after AD140, over 300 years before the Roman Catholic church existed, and WAY before they had any such power to exact such a change...they were a mere bishopric of the Church until about 600 AD, and even then they didn't yield that kind of power over the whole church. It's a common joke that only the SDAs and the Roman Catholic church believe that they changed the Sabbath to Sunday...I'd add some other Sabbathkeepers to the list though as many of them still believe the Roman Catholic church (or Constantine) caused Christians to stop keeping the Sabbath.
Concerning the way radical Sabbathkeepers read the words "commandments" or "law", realize that they choose the meaning which best fits their presuppositions and supports their doctrine. In some places in the NT, commandments or law are referring to the moral law of God, which is more flexible than the list that SDAs or Torah observers allow for. In other places, commandments or law is referring to the entire Torah, and not just the Ten Commandments. I think it is very rare that the law or commandments refers EXCLUSIVELY to the Ten Commandments. Even when Jesus lists some commandments when speaking to the young ruler, he included at least one other commandment in the Torah that is not in the Ten Commandments..it is listed as a separate commandment (Leviticus 19:18).
In regards to commandments or laws that apply to me, the Sabbath is not one of those, as it is a sign of the Mosaic Covenant between God and Israel, and I am not an ancient Israelite. His inclusion of the Sabbath or clean/unclean laws in those commandments makes as much sense to me as including physical circumcision.
I did another thread comparing physical circumcision with the Sabbath..virtually the same language is used with regards to the two practices:
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/117464-sabbath-circumcision-comparison.html
I would also note that nowhere in the sin lists of the Gentiles is Sabbath-breaking or eating unclean meats mentioned. This is a notable exception, seeing as base and obvious sins are mentioned. Neither is any instruction given to Gentiles with regards to Sabbath-keeping. In addition, one must assume that no slaves with unkind Gentile masters were saved in the New Testament church, if Sabbath-keeping is a requirement of salvation. Does inJC seriously think that all Gentile masters would allow their Christian slaves to take a day off, and that conflicts relating to this would never be mentioned by anyone? These are questions I had to ask myself as a ex Sabbathkeeper.
I will warn others that a lot of these "lawkeeping" groups are cultic in nature. Read the above comments. The individual relates those who are not observers to followers of Lucifer. The cultic Sabbathkeeping organizations view the Sabbath as being a test commandment that defines who is and who is not a true follower of God. This is based on Exodus 16 where God used the Sabbath as a test for the ancient nation of Israel. As I have said, we are not Israelites under the Mosaic Covenant and it is not in effect anyways.
Sabbath, festivals, clean/unclean laws, and other items were "boundary markers" which differentiated Israelites from the surrounding Gentile nations. The Mosaic Covenant was engineered in a manner to highlight these distinctions clearly to separate Israelites from Gentiles. These regulations were removed with the Cross (Ephesians 2:13-15).
The confusing thing is that inJC addresses me as Brother Sparkman and then informs me that those who don't do these things follow Lucifer. That's a contradictory claim. As an Armstrongite, I was consistent. If someone didn't observe the Sabbath, festivals, and clean laws, I considered him an unbeliever. Period. In fact, if he wasn't part of my organization, he was an unbeliever to me. That is part of why I will never belong to such an organization again. The observances are less of an issue to me than the accompanying attitude.
A related teaching of many of these groups is that the entire Christian church (except for them) is part of the "great prostitute" of Revelation 17. They relate this great prostitute to the Roman Catholic church, and claim that the descendants of this great prostitute are the Sunday observing Protestant churches. There is also a claim that those who observe Sunday are under the "mark of the Beast", or will be under the Mark of the Beast in the end days.
Anyways, InJC, please do not call me brother and then tell me I am following Lucifer because I worship on the day of the resurrection. Followers of Lucifer are not brothers to those who follow God. I don't tolerate double-speak.
This is a paradigm the Seventh Day Adventists face. On one hand, they want to be considered part of the wider Christ body but on the other hand they believe we are following Satan's system, and actively attempt to evangelize other Protestants. They claim to be the true, "remnant" church and that ultimately we must become part of their group to be saved in the Great Tribulation or else..
I think I mentioned it in a previous post, but I was an observer for over a decade so I am not unacquainted with Scripture's teachings on these issues. I have had to work through a lot of false indoctrination on these topics personally. Their view largely depends upon a faulty view of church history, a conspiracy theory mentality, and misunderstandings regarding the different covenants.
By the way, I have no issue with people who think differently on the subject of days or food, if they are gracious toward those who do not agree with their position, per Romans 14. Claiming those who disagree are following Lucifer is not gracious, though. In addition, I know that many observers make no claims that these observances are requirements, conditions, or necessary fruits of salvation, and I have no issue with such believers, or even if they have personal convictions regarding them without condemning others.
This subject is only tangentially related to the OP's thread though so I apologize to her for bringing it up. If anyone has any questions relating to the Sabbath/festival/clean and unclean meat topics feel free to send me an cc email.
Last edited:
Pick and choose legalism, then condemn everyone else who doesn't agree as following Lucifer, as you did on your previous post.
