| Progressive/Moderate Adventists A forum for Progressive/Moderate Adventists. |
 | | 
16th December 2008, 10:21 PM
|  | Junior Member
    
| | Join Date: 21st November 2008 Location: Georgia
Posts: 638
Blessings: 56,207 My Mood 
Reps: 230,132,764 (power: 230,136) | | Originally Posted by tall73  Actually it is not convincing that you quote someone who believes in Sunday Sabbath because
a. he still has an interest in upholding the Sabbath, just as transferred to another day.
b. he does not see that the Sabbath was clearly not Sunday, which means he is certainly not without flaws in his conclusions.
Now if a great scholar concludes that Sunday is to be observed, will you agree with him on the basis that he is a great scholar?
Indeed many of these great Bible teachers did see a need to in some way try to preserve God's 4th commandment.
In any case - I would still prefer to quote pro-Sunday scholars when making my case beyond my initial Bible arguments. I rather enjoy that.
I could also bring up the case of D.L. Moody and others. but you get the point.
in Christ,
Bob |
16th December 2008, 10:28 PM
| | Junior Member
| | Join Date: 21st November 2008 Location: Georgia
Posts: 638
Blessings: 56,207 My Mood
Reps: 230,132,764 (power: 230,136) | | Originally Posted by tall73 But while we are mentioning scholars on the other side of the argument, you might be surprised at some of the Adventist scholars who do not agree with you.
Ron Du Preez, an Adventist scholar, in his book "Putting the Sabbath to Rest" states that at least 15 Seventh-day Adventist scholars since 1985 have taken the view that the weekly Sabbath is in view based on the progression from yearly to weekly. Here are the ones I found to be most notable on that list: Rodriguez of the Biblical Research Institute, Bacchiocchi, Gerhard Hasel, Herbert E. Douglas, Alden Thompson, Erwin Gane, Wiliam Richardson. He also mentioned Desmond Ford, who is no longer officially an Adventist but is still a strong sabbatarian.
Agreed there are some Sabbath keeping scholars in your camp as well -- (they are wrong of course.  )
Still - aside from Bacchiochhi -- it would be nice to see a quote from "the others".
In Bacchiochi's case - he argues that nothing in Col 2 is being "done away with" by insisting on the "judge not that you be not judged" principle which corrects an abuse "of judging" regarding those worship practices. (An abuse already condemned pre-cross as we saw in Matt 7 -- when all agree they were in full force)
in Christ,
Bob
Last edited by BobRyan; 19th December 2008 at 12:34 PM.
|
17th December 2008, 12:38 AM
|  | Senior Contributor
    
| | Join Date: 17th July 2007 Location: Ellicott, MD
Posts: 11,668
Blessings: 612 My Mood 
Reps: 2,011,079,675,905,825,280 (power: 2,011,079,675,905,841) | | Originally Posted by tall73 An assumption supported by other statements by the same author, such as in Galatians 4.
Treating pastoral letters as if they were theological treatises can lead to strange conclusions. |
17th December 2008, 10:34 AM
| | Junior Member
| | Join Date: 21st November 2008 Location: Georgia
Posts: 638
Blessings: 56,207 My Mood
Reps: 230,132,764 (power: 230,136) | | Originally Posted by tall73 It could be all sabbaths, but the most likely is the weekly as the others were taken in by feast and the progression is from yearly to weekly.
...An assumption supported by other statements by the same author, such as in Galatians 4.
" A yearly to weekly argument" in Gal 4??? How so?
in Christ,
Bob |
17th December 2008, 11:14 AM
|  | The gospel is Jesus Christ!
| | Join Date: 3rd May 2007
Posts: 3,611
Blessings: 6,084,103
Reps: 10,986,165,904,026,884 (power: 10,986,165,904,034) | | | Where's the evidence?
Originally Posted by BobRyan The fact that this point is so clear that even a pro-Sunday Bible scholar ALSO agrees with me that Col 2 is a reference to feasts and annual Sabbaths -- is not as much a problem for my view as it is for yours, if you think about it.
I continue to wonder why Colossians 2 cannot be a reference to both weekly and annual sabbaths. You wrote, "in Lev 23 we see both annual feast days that are not Sabbaths (days of holy convocation) and those that are Sabbaths." Just to make sure we are on the same page, I note that there are three sabbaths listed in Leviticus 23. One is weekly and the other two are yearly. Clearly, the old testament lists more than one sabbath. Therefore, where is the evidence that Colossians 2 refers only to annual sabbaths? Are you merely relying on scholars' opinions?
You claim that the sabbaths in Colossians 2 must point forward. Is it your claim that Jesus Christ is not the source of rest? Is it your claim that Jesus Christ did not fulfill the sacrificial elements that were directly associated with Biblical sabbath observance? Is it your claim that the sabbath was not--in part--a memorial of the exodus from Egypt and/or that Jesus Christ is not the source of our exodus from slavery?
BFA
Last edited by Byfaithalone1; 17th December 2008 at 11:27 AM.
|
17th December 2008, 09:27 PM
| | Junior Member
| | Join Date: 21st November 2008 Location: Georgia
Posts: 638
Blessings: 56,207 My Mood
Reps: 230,132,764 (power: 230,136) | | Originally Posted by BobRyan  The fact that this point is so clear that even a pro-Sunday Bible scholar ALSO agrees with me that Col 2 is a reference to feasts and annual Sabbaths -- is not as much a problem for my view as it is for yours, if you think about it.
Originally Posted by Byfaithalone1 I continue to wonder why Colossians 2 cannot be a reference to both weekly and annual sabbaths.
Some people think it does.
As I noted at the start - the command Paul gives is the same one Christ gives pre-cross "Judge not that you be not judged" -- I have argued the points about the 7th day Sabbath not being in that list -- but I still don't think people are to judge others based on either their Passover keeping or their Sabbath keeping. God is the one who judges when it comes to worship. (Which was my opening argument).
As Tall73 points out - Sam Bacchiocchi also argues that the list includes the 7th-day Sabbath - and he does so because he claims that "correcting the abuse of service or worship practice does not delete the practice".
Which is of course a good point about the fact that Col 2 is not deleting anything but "judging". Originally Posted by Byfaithalone1
You wrote, "in Lev 23 we see both annual feast days that are not Sabbaths (days of holy convocation) and those that are Sabbaths." Just to make sure we are on the same page, I note that there are three sabbaths listed in Leviticus 23. One is weekly and the other two are yearly. Clearly, the old testament lists more than one sabbath.
That is true. In Lev 23 we see that "these are my appointed times" in vs 2 -- and in some cases they call for "Holy Convocation" and in other cases they do not. In some cases we have "Feasts" and in some cases we do not. BFA
Therefore, where is the evidence that Colossians 2 refers only to annual sabbaths? Are you merely relying on scholars' opinions?
No. In my earlier arguments I pointed to the fact that the 7th day Sabbath is a memorial of creation "when given" and was not based on "animal sacrifice" as given in Gen 2:1-3 and as referenced and summarized in Ex 20:8-11.
But the annual "appointed times" are all based on animal sacrifice and so are all pointing "forward" to Christ.
The 7th day Sabbath is a prescriptive law (as are the rest of the Ten commandments) hence we see it continue for eternity in Isaiah 66.
The annual appointed times -- even the annual "Shaddow Sabbaths" are predictive laws --- pointing to Christ and based in animal sacrifice "when given". You claim that the sabbaths in Colossians 2 must point forward. Is it your claim that Jesus Christ is not the source of rest?
It is my claim that "context is everyting". The Shaddow Sabbaths "when first given" were based on animal sacrifice pointing to Christ.
No question that Christ the Creator was working in Gen 1-2:3 just as John says in John 1:1-4. I agree completely that the memorial of HIS work at creation is a form of worship that is centered on Christ the Creator. All is Christ. But not all are "Shaddows". Is it your claim that Jesus Christ did not fulfill the sacrificial elements that were directly associated with Biblical sabbath observance?
Actually it IS my point that those Sabbaths that when "made holy" are defined as centered in animal sacrifice -- are indeed shaddows.
But I would also argue that in Col 2 Paul is not arguing for the "end of something" he is only arguing that people should not "judge others" regarding worship practices -- as Christ also argued pre-cross "Judge not that you be not judged". Is it your claim that the sabbath was not--in part--a memorial of the exodus from Egypt and/or that Jesus Christ is not the source of our exodus from slavery?
No - I have argued repeatedly that this is an application that Moses adds 40 years after the Exodos 20 version of the 4th commandment was "written in stone" and over 2500 years after God MADE the Sabbath a "Holy Day" --- "MADE for mankind". So no question that this deliverance from Egypt was an added argument for why Israel should remember to honor Christ our Creator's work in making mankind. But I have yet to hear of anything IN the 7th day obervance of Jews that included a weekly reference to Egypt the way the Passover celebration repeatedly referred to Egypt. It is also true that nothing in Egypt was tied to a 7 day cycle -- as in -- they were not "delivered in 7 days" rather Moses' argument is that God's deliverance of that nation - made that nation even MORE obligated to remember HIS Holy Day.
As Isaiah 58 says it is to be considered as "the Holy Day of the Lord"
in Christ,
Bob
Last edited by BobRyan; 17th December 2008 at 09:33 PM.
|
18th December 2008, 12:38 AM
| | Sophia7's husband
 
| | Join Date: 24th September 2005
Posts: 15,461
Blessings: 153,594
Reps: 435,874,742,426,526,528 (power: 435,874,742,426,548) | | Originally Posted by sentipente Treating pastoral letters as if they were theological treatises can lead to strange conclusions.
Pastoral letters addressing theological issues are to be looked at for theology.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
18th December 2008, 12:39 AM
| | Sophia7's husband
| | Join Date: 24th September 2005
Posts: 15,461
Blessings: 153,594
Reps: 435,874,742,426,526,528 (power: 435,874,742,426,548) | | Originally Posted by BobRyan " A yearly to weekly argument" in Gal 4??? How so?
in Christ,
Bob
Actually it is not a yearly to weekly but a description of times kept that list the timeframe:
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
18th December 2008, 12:41 AM
| | Sophia7's husband
| | Join Date: 24th September 2005
Posts: 15,461
Blessings: 153,594
Reps: 435,874,742,426,526,528 (power: 435,874,742,426,548) | | Originally Posted by BobRyan Agreed there are some Sabbath keeping scholars in your camp as well -- (they are wrong of course. )
Still - aside from Bacchiochhi -- it would be nice to see a quote.
in Christ,
Bob
Unfortunately at the moment my copy is in storage. I had recorded that tidbit as part of my book review of Du Preez work. So I don't have any references right now. You could check Du Preez book yourself I suppose.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
18th December 2008, 12:28 PM
| | The gospel is Jesus Christ!
| | Join Date: 3rd May 2007
Posts: 3,611
Blessings: 6,084,103
Reps: 10,986,165,904,026,884 (power: 10,986,165,904,034) | | Which is of course a good point about the fact that Col 2 is not deleting anything but "judging".
Colossians 2 also establishes that sabbaths are a shadow and that Christ is the reality.
BFA | | |
| Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode |
| | |
