Ellen White on the mark of the beast for those that worship on Sunday

[SabbathBlessings]

So what God said in Deut. 1 is wrong?

I never said it was God expanded on this same event, both are true, Scripture does not delete Scripture and just because you don't like Eze20:15-16 where God said verbatim why the Israelites did not enter into their promised land of rest, doesn't make what God said plainly not true. The Bible is based on repeat and enlarge. Not every single thing has to be in every single verse or passage and if its said elsewhere in the Bible we can choose to just ignore/delete it. No wonder why so many people come up to different conclusions because they do not allow the Bible, in this case what God said, plain words that proceeded out of His own mouth, to explain Scripture.

And again, Sabbaths is plural in that verse so it doesn’t necessarily mean the weekly sabbath. You can’t be dogmatic about a verse where there could be optional definitions.

The context will let us know. In NKJV they capitalize the S weekly Sabbaths and a lower s with the annual sabbaths. God never put more emphasizes on the annuals sabbaths that had to do with animal and food offerings and sacrifices as He did to the weekly Sabbath that has to do with holy time with God on the holy day of the Lord Isa58:13. Why the weekly Sabbath started at Creation before sin Exo20:11, the other yearly sabbaths added after sin.

You don’t because I don’t read my pet doctrine into the verses like you do.

This is usually a sign when people do not have strong arguments, just go for the insults.

However, you are verse mining and not taking into account the actual context which begins in chapter 3.

“For we who have believed enter that rest, just as He has said, “As I swore in My anger, They certainly shall not enter My rest,” although His works were finished from the foundation of the world. For He has said somewhere concerning the seventh day: “And God rested on the seventh day from all His works”; and again in this passage, “They certainly shall not enter My rest.” Therefore, since it remains for some to enter it, and those who previously had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience,”
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭4‬:‭3‬-‭6‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Hebrews 4:6 Therefore, since it remains for some to enter it, and those who previously had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020) | Download The Bible App Now

Therefore, since it remains for some to enter it, and those who previously had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience

bible.com

Notice that in verse 3 the writer is talking about “that” rest which refers to the believers rest from verse 1. He is contrasting the believers rest with the sabbath rest.

No the context is what the writer refers to what David said. Hebrews 4 is mainly quoting OT. Hebrews 3 and some of 4 is quoting verbatim what David said, nothing about changing God's Sabbath commandment or today being the day that deletes the 4th commandment. He quotes what he means, so no need adding what's not there.

Heb 4:7 again He designates a certain day, saying in David, “Today,” after such a long time, as it has been said:

“Today, if you will hear His voice,
Do not harden your hearts.”

Heb 3:7 Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says:

“Today, if you will hear His voice,
8 Do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion,
In the day of trial in the wilderness,
9 Where your fathers tested Me, tried Me,
And saw My works forty years.
10 Therefore I was angry with that generation,
And said, ‘They always go astray in their heart,
And they have not known My ways.’
11 So I swore in My wrath,
‘They shall not enter My rest.’ ”



Psa 95:7 Today, if you will hear His voice:
8 “Do not harden your hearts, as in the [c]rebellion,
As in the day of [d]trial in the wilderness,
9 When your fathers tested Me;
They tried Me, though they saw My work.
10 For forty years I was [e]grieved with that generation,
And said, ‘It is a people who go astray in their hearts,
And they do not know My ways.’
11 So I swore in My wrath,
‘They shall not enter My rest.’ ”

If one doesn't look at the OT references that Heb 4 quotes from, will never understand this passage, it quotes at least 4 OT references and speaks of two rest, the one we enter through faith and obedience and the Sabbath rest which is on the seventh day Heb4:4,9-10. No one enters His rest by being in rebellion to God and His commandments hence why David is being quoted because this didn't work out for the Israelites and we are told plainly why Eze20:13 Eze20:15-16

“Therefore, since it remains for some to enter it, and those who previously had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience,”
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭4‬:‭6‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Hebrews 4:6 Therefore, since it remains for some to enter it, and those who previously had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020) | Download The Bible App Now

Therefore, since it remains for some to enter it, and those who previously had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience

bible.com

Look at the therefore. This is a conclusion from the first 5 verses of this chapter. These have been preached the gospel which had not been preached to those that Joshua (not Christ) brought into the promise land. The people that had the gospel preached to are the converted Jews that continue to try to force the law on the Christian church. This is the disobedience and the writer’s argument in the first 3 chapters of Hebrews.

Your commentary is not matching the Scriptures.

“But some of the sect of the Pharisees who had believed stood up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to direct them to keep the Law of Moses.””
‭‭Acts‬ ‭15‬:‭5‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Acts 15:5 (NASB2020) - But some of the sect of the Pharise | YouVersion

But some of the sect of the Pharisees who had believed stood up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to direct them to keep the Law of Moses.”

bible.com

Circumcision is not one of the Ten Commandments, its the law of Moses as the Text says, they were not debating if one should keep or not keep the Sabbath commandment in Acts 15, they were already keeping it in every city for many generations every Sabbath Acts 15:21

And,

“After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us; and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith. Since this is the case, why are you putting God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our forefathers nor we have been able to bear? But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are.””
‭‭Acts‬ ‭15‬:‭7‬-‭11‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Acts 15:7-11 (NASB2020) - After there had been much debate, P | YouVersion

After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gosp

bible.com

Nothing about the Sabbath commandment- God said it was a blessing and a delight Isa58:13-14 only those who don't want to spend time with God on the day God set aside made holy and sanctified would consider it a yoke of bondage. Those same people would not be very happy in heaven when the Sabbath continues for worship Isa66:22-23. God is love and would never force one for eternity to do something they feel is a yoke. Why His judgement will be one of love and if we love Him we will keep His commandments, His versions, not the man-made ones.

No yoke if the law, including sabbath keeping, for the gentiles.

You added that when the Scriptures did not, there is no Scripture that says the Sabbath is a yoke of bondage, God said blessed is the man who does not defile the Sabbath Isa56:2 hallow My Sabbaths and will be a sign between you and Me that you know I am the Lord your God who sanctifies you. Adding something to God's Testimony or Scriptures that is not there, I personally would be careful according to Scripture Pro30:6 but I think we are long past that at this point.

I am going to move on and won't be responding further to your posts, because we view Scripture much different and we are past the point of trying to reason. In the end it doesn't matter what you think or what I think, God will settle this debate period. I believe He has in His written and spoken Testimony Exo31:18 Deut 4:13 Psa89:34 Mat5:18-30 but I guess we shall see soon enough. We just need to accept the decisions we make because soon we will no longer be able to change them Rev22:11, why He is calling on us today to not harden our hearts in rebellion as in the trial of the wilderness when so many did not enter their rest because they also believed they could profane the holy day of the Lord thy God and replaced what God asked Eze20:12 Eze20:20 with something else Eze20:16

Be well.

 

[Hentenza]

I never said it was God expanded on this same event, both are true, Scripture does not delete Scripture

Strawman. No one has argued that. Scripture has to be understood in context not by reading doctrines into verses.

and just because you don't like Eze20:15-

I love Ezekiel but it does not say what you say it does.

where God said verbatim why the Israelites did not enter into their promised land of rest, doesn't make what God said plainly not true.

Not really. The sabbaths listed here is plural so it does not necessarily mean the weekly sabbath. In fact, if Ezekiel was talking about THE sabbath then it would not be plural. You continue to read your pet doctrine into scripture. The rest of your post I have already addressed many times before do not wasting my time.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Can you site references please so the context can be looked at.

Sure here are a few quotes I’ve presented before in a previous thread.

So at 46 minutes into this video she says that the people who died in the flood died because they ate meat which caused them to live a sinful life. What I find absolutely intriguing is that on the very day that Noah stepped off of the ark, God told him to eat anything alive that moves. So Ellen White is saying that God killed everyone on the earth except for Noah and his family because they ate meat and the first thing God does after the flood is tell Noah to eat meat. Lol wow I’m going to refrain from opinions at this time.

At 16:45 into the video Ellen White says this

All are required to do what they can to preserve healthy bodies and sound minds. If they will gratify a gross appetite, and by so doing blunt their sensibilities, and becloud their perceptive faculties so that they cannot appreciate the exalted character of God, or delight in the study of His word, they may be assured that God will not accept their unworthy offering any sooner than that of Cain. God requires them to cleanse themselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of the Lord. After man has done all in his power to ensure health, by the denying of appetite and gross passions, that he may possess a healthy mind, and a sanctified imagination, that he may render to God an offering in righteousness, then he is saved alone by a miracle of God's mercy, as was the ark upon the stormy billows.

At 18:40 into the video she says this

The sin of intemperate eating, eating too frequently, too much, and of rich, unwholesome food, destroys the healthy action of the digestive organs, affects the brain, and perverts the judgment, preventing rational, calm, healthy thinking and acting. And this is a fruitful source of church trials. Therefore, in order for the people of God to be in an acceptable state with Him, where they can glorify Him in their bodies and spirits, which are His, they must with interest and zeal deny the gratification of their appetites, and exercise temperance in all things. Then may they comprehend the truth in its beauty and clearness, and carry it out in their lives, and by a judicious, wise, straightforward course, give the enemies of our faith no occasion to reproach the cause of truth

Ok at 20:30 into the video she said this.

Some have sneered at this work of reform, and have said it was all unnecessary; that it was an excitement to divert minds from present truth. They have said that matters were being carried to extremes. Such do not know what they are talking about. While men and women professing godliness are diseased from the crown of their head to the soles of their feet, while their physical, mental, and moral energies are enfeebled through gratification of depraved appetite and excessive labor, how can they weigh the evidences of truth, and comprehend the requirements of God? If their moral and intellectual faculties are beclouded, they cannot appreciate the value of the atonement or the exalted character of the work of God, nor delight in the study of His word. How can a nervous dyspeptic be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh him a reason of the hope that is in him, with meekness and fear? How soon would such a one become confused and agitated, and by his diseased imagination be led to view matters in altogether a wrong light, and by a lack of that meekness and calmness which characterized the life of Christ, be caused to dishonor his profession while contending with unreasonable men? Viewing matters from high religious standpoint, we must be thorough reformers in order to be Christlike.

I saw that our heavenly Father has bestowed upon us the great blessing of light upon the health reform, that we may obey the claims which He has upon us, and glorify Him in our bodies and spirits, which are His, and finally stand without fault before the throne of God.

According to what she said here until we have received the reformed dietary laws, her dietary laws, we were unable to stand without fault before God.

At 22:22 into the video Ellen White makes this statement.

I saw that our heavenly Father has bestowed upon us the great blessing of light upon the health reform, that we may obey the claims which He has upon us, and glorify Him in our bodies and spirits, which are His, and finally stand without fault before the throne of God.

At 23:41 she also says this

There are but few as yet who are aroused sufficiently to understand how much their habits of diet have to do with their health, their characters, their usefulness in this world, and their eternal destiny.

Then there’s the quotes I posted in posts 29, 30, & 33.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Sure here are a few quotes I’ve presented before in a previous thread.

Thank you for the references. I am going to admit I am not an expert on Ellen Whites writings, I have read several of her books and the only thing I get from them is how much she loves Jesus and puts all emphasis on Him, His Word and how to glorify Him. I have read and watched other people who are experts on her writings where critics take a tiny bit of her writings out of context, trying to make her writings say something they don't.

I copied your exact concerns and put it in AI and this is what I got.

minutes into this video she says that the people who died in the flood died because they ate meat which caused them to live a sinful life. What I find absolutely intriguing is that on the very day that Noah stepped off of the ark, God told him to eat anything alive that moves. So Ellen White is saying that God killed everyone on the earth except for Noah and his family because they ate meat and the first thing God does after the flood is tell Noah to eat meat.

• “The inhabitants of the antediluvian world were intemperate in eating and drinking. They would have flesh meats, although God had at that time given man no permission to eat animal food. They ate and drank till the indulgence of their depraved appetite knew no bounds, and they became so corrupt that God could bear with them no longer. Their cup of iniquity was full, and He cleansed the earth of its moral pollution by a flood.” (Counsels on Diet and Foods, p. 373 in many editions; same paragraph appears in compilations) Ellen G. White Writings+1

So, she does not present it as a simple one-liner “God drowned them because they ate meat.” Her stated cause is moral corruption (“cup of iniquity was full”), with meat-eating presented as part of broader intemperance/self-indulgence.

2) Did she acknowledge that God permitted meat right after the Flood (Genesis 9:3)?​

Yes—she explicitly acknowledges that permission began after the Flood:

• “The diet appointed man in the beginning did not include animal food. Not till after the flood, when every green thing on the earth had been destroyed, did man receive permission to eat flesh.” (Counsels on Diet and Foods, in the same section on flesh foods) Ellen G. White Writings

That lines up with Genesis 9:3 (“Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you…”). Bible Hub

3) So is she saying God punished meat-eating, then immediately commands it?​

Her argument (in her own framing) is usually:

• Before the Flood: God gave no permission to eat animal food; people did it anyway as part of runaway appetite and corruption. Ellen G. White Writings+1
• After the Flood: God permitted flesh as a concession/necessity because vegetation had been devastated. Ellen G. White Writings
• She even makes an additional claim (whether one agrees or not) that permission functioned to shorten human lifespan: “He permitted that long-lived race to eat animal food to shorten their sinful lives…” Ellen G. White Writings

So, in her logic, the “tension” is resolved by distinguishing:

• unauthorized use before the Flood + overall wickedness, versus
• divinely permitted use after the Flood under different conditions.

4) A Bible-only observation you’re already noticing​

Your point from Scripture is solid: Genesis 9:3 is clearly a post-Flood permission. Bible Hub
So any claim phrased as “they died because they ate meat” is at least an oversimplification even of her paragraph, and it can miss the bigger stated reason: corruption/violence/iniquity.


Next claim:

All are required to do what they can to preserve healthy bodies and sound minds. If they will gratify a gross appetite, and by so doing blunt their sensibilities, and becloud their perceptive faculties so that they cannot appreciate the exalted character of God, or delight in the study of His word, they may be assured that God will not accept their unworthy offering any sooner than that of Cain. God requires them to cleanse themselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of the Lord. After man has done all in his power to ensure health, by the denying of appetite and gross passions, that he may possess a healthy mind, and a sanctified imagination, that he may render to God an offering in righteousness, then he is saved alone by a miracle of God's mercy, as was the ark upon the stormy billows.

Yep — that paragraph is in Counsels on Diet and Foods, and your summary of its thrust is basically right: she’s arguing that indulging “gross appetite” can dull spiritual perception, and she uses Cain as an analogy for an “unworthy offering.” Here’s how to read it fairly.

Where it appears / what it actually says​

In Chapter 2 — “Diet and Spirituality”, the book includes this line (you quoted it closely):

“If they will gratify a gross appetite… they may be assured that God will not accept their unworthy offering any sooner than that of Cain.” Ellen G. White Writings

And then it continues with the “cleanse themselves… perfecting holiness…” language and the closing thought comparing salvation to the ark preserved on stormy waters (often excerpted in some compilations, but the “gross appetite… Cain” sentence is definitely in the CD chapter). Ellen G. White Writings

What claim is she making (in plain terms)?​

She’s making three connected claims:

1. We’re responsible to do what we can to preserve health and mental clarity (stewardship framing). Ellen G. White Writings
2. Overindulgence / “gross appetite” can blunt conscience and make people less able to appreciate God’s character or enjoy Scripture. Ellen G. White Writings+1
3. If someone knowingly persists in that, they shouldn’t expect God to regard their “offering” as acceptable—she compares it to Cain (whose worship was unacceptable because his heart/obedience was wrong, per the Genesis story). Ellen G. White Writings

Is she teaching salvation by diet / works?​

That last line you quoted actually pushes the opposite direction: after saying “do all in your power,” she concludes that even then a person is “saved… by a miracle of God’s mercy,” like the ark riding out the Flood.

So, in her framing:

• human part = “deny appetite / gross passions” (sanctification & fitness language),
• God’s part = salvation still ultimately depends on mercy, not human achievement (her ark analogy).

That doesn’t mean everyone will agree with her theology, but the paragraph is not trying to say “diet earns salvation”; it’s saying appetite can damage spiritual receptivity, and salvation is still God’s mercy.

The big “Cain” comparison—what it means​

She isn’t saying “God rejects you because you ate X food one time.”
She’s using Cain as a warning about bringing worship to God while refusing known duty/light—and she’s applying that to people who knowingly keep indulging practices they believe are harming body/mind.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Continuing ....

The sin of intemperate eating, eating too frequently, too much, and of rich, unwholesome food, destroys the healthy action of the digestive organs, affects the brain, and perverts the judgment, preventing rational, calm, healthy thinking and acting. And this is a fruitful source of church trials. Therefore, in order for the people of God to be in an acceptable state with Him, where they can glorify Him in their bodies and spirits, which are His, they must with interest and zeal deny the gratification of their appetites, and exercise temperance in all things. Then may they comprehend the truth in its beauty and clearness, and carry it out in their lives, and by a judicious, wise, straightforward course, give the enemies of our faith no occasion to reproach the cause of truth

Yes—this is also a real idea/statement found in Counsels on Diet and Foods (in the early section on diet and spirituality / temperance). In that passage she makes a tight cause-and-effect argument:

What she’s claiming (in the quote you shared)​

1. Intemperate eating (too often, too much, rich/unwholesome foods) harms digestion, which then affects the brain, and then “perverts the judgment.”
2. That impaired judgment becomes a “fruitful source of church trials” (conflict, poor decisions, irritability, etc.).
3. Therefore, for God’s people to be in an “acceptable state” and to understand truth clearly and live it consistently, they should practice temperance and deny appetite.

That’s the internal logic of the paragraph.

What it does not say (important)​

• It does not say salvation is earned by diet.
• It does not single out meat in that sentence—she’s talking broadly about frequency/quantity/richness/unwholesomeness.

How to read it fairly (even if you disagree)​

Within her framework, this is more a sanctification/discipleship argument than a “you’re lost if you don’t eat like this” argument:

• She’s saying bodily habits can make spiritual life and church life harder by clouding the mind.
• And she’s urging temperance so believers can better “comprehend the truth… and carry it out.”

Quick Bible comparison (since you’ve been weighing things carefully)​

The Bible does connect sobriety/temperance with clearer spiritual judgment (even though it doesn’t map it to digestion the way she does):

• “Be sober… be vigilant” (1 Peter 5:8)
• “Let us be sober… putting on… faith and love” (1 Thessalonians 5:6–8)
• Self-control/temperance as part of Christian character (Galatians 5:22–23)

The next one...

Some have sneered at this work of reform, and have said it was all unnecessary; that it was an excitement to divert minds from present truth. They have said that matters were being carried to extremes. Such do not know what they are talking about. While men and women professing godliness are diseased from the crown of their head to the soles of their feet, while their physical, mental, and moral energies are enfeebled through gratification of depraved appetite and excessive labor, how can they weigh the evidences of truth, and comprehend the requirements of God? If their moral and intellectual faculties are beclouded, they cannot appreciate the value of the atonement or the exalted character of the work of God, nor delight in the study of His word. How can a nervous dyspeptic be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh him a reason of the hope that is in him, with meekness and fear? How soon would such a one become confused and agitated, and by his diseased imagination be led to view matters in altogether a wrong light, and by a lack of that meekness and calmness which characterized the life of Christ, be caused to dishonor his profession while contending with unreasonable men? Viewing matters from high religious standpoint, we must be thorough reformers in order to be Christlike.

I saw that our heavenly Father has bestowed upon us the great blessing of light upon the health reform, that we may obey the claims which He has upon us, and glorify Him in our bodies and spirits, which are His, and finally stand without fault before the throne of God.

According to what she said here until we have received the reformed dietary laws, her dietary laws, we were unable to stand without fault before God.

What you’re noticing is real: that paragraph uses very strong language. But the conclusion “therefore nobody can stand without fault before God unless they adopt Ellen White’s dietary laws” goes beyond what the paragraph actually says, especially once you read it in its own categories (health reform as light/stewardship vs the basis of salvation).

What the passage is actually arguing​

In the section you quoted (from Counsels on Diet and Foods material drawn from earlier “health reform” testimonies), she’s making a competency/clarity argument:

• Many professing Christians are “enfeebled” by appetite/excessive labor.
• That can “becloud” moral/intellectual faculties.
• A beclouded mind may struggle to:
  • “weigh the evidences of truth,”
  • “comprehend the requirements of God,”
  • “appreciate the value of the atonement,”
  • “delight in the study of His word,”
  • keep calm/meek while defending faith.
• Therefore “we must be thorough reformers” to be Christlike.

So the main thrust is: habits that damage health can damage spiritual perception and Christlike behavior, so reform matters.

The line that triggers your concern​

This sentence is the one that can sound like a salvation condition:

God gave “light upon the health reform… that we may… glorify Him… and finally stand without fault before the throne of God.”

Read strictly, she is saying: health-reform light is given for a purpose connected to readiness/character.


But that still doesn’t logically equal:
“Adopting her dietary program is the legal requirement that makes you saved.”


Why? Because in her own writings (including CD material you quoted earlier), she also says salvation is ultimately by God’s mercy, not by perfect performance.

A careful way to phrase what she is saying (strong—but narrower)​

A fair paraphrase of her position in these health reform appeals is:

• If God gives you light about harmful practices, and you knowingly cling to them, you may be dulling the very faculties you need to understand and live truth.
• Since the end-goal is a people who “stand without fault,” she urges that believers should respond seriously to that light, not mock it as “extreme.”

That’s about responsibility to light received and character formation, not “salvation by menu.”

Where your interpretation might be right (depending how someone uses it)​

If someone takes that paragraph and teaches:

• “No one can be saved unless they adopt this exact Adventist health message,”

…that’s a stronger claim than the paragraph itself explicitly states, and it conflicts with clear Bible statements that the basis of acceptance is Christ (e.g., Ephesians 2:8–9; Romans 5:1), with obedience flowing from salvation rather than purchasing it.

Bible guardrails that keep this from becoming “diet = sinless standing”​

The Bible does connect the end goal (“without fault/blameless”) to Christ’s work and sanctification, not a dietary code:

• Jude 24 — God is able to “present you faultless…”
• Colossians 1:22 — presented “holy and unblameable…”
• Ephesians 5:25–27 — Christ sanctifies/cleanses the church to present it glorious.
• Revelation 14:5 — the end-time description “without fault” is tied to integrity/loyalty, not an explicit food test.

So a Bible-only checkpoint would be: standing “without fault” is a gospel/character reality centered in Christ, even if health habits can help or hinder clarity and self-control.

So what should you conclude about her quote?​

• Yes, she’s saying health reform is spiritually important and connected (in her view) to end-time readiness.
• No, the quote does not require the conclusion that “until we accept Ellen White’s dietary laws we cannot be right with God.”
• The most accurate reading is: she’s urging believers to respond to health light as part of sanctification and witness—because appetite can cloud the mind and damage Christlike conduct.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Regarding our diet this is what God said after giving a list of animal meats not to eat, He deemed them an abomination to Him.

God Himself relates what we eat as being holy.

Lev 11: 43 Do not defile yourselves by any of these creatures. Do not make yourselves unclean by means of them or be made unclean by them. 44 I am the Lord your God; consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy. Do not make yourselves unclean by any creature that moves along the ground. 45 I am the Lord, who brought you up out of Egypt to be your God; therefore be holy, because I am holy.

Eze 22:26 Her priests have [a]violated My law and profaned My holy things; they have not distinguished between the holy and unholy, nor have they made known the difference between the unclean and the clean; and they have hidden their eyes from My Sabbaths, so that I am profaned among them.


Many believe Jesus changed His mind and read things in the NT out of context, but this again is God speaking at His Second Coming, His mind was not changed.

Isa 66:15 For behold, the Lord will come with fire
And with His chariots, like a whirlwind,
To render His anger with fury,
And His rebuke with flames of fire.
16 For by fire and by His sword
The Lord will judge all flesh;
And the slain of the Lord shall be many.
17 “Those who sanctify themselves and purify themselves,
To go to the gardens
After an idol in the midst,
Eating swine’s flesh and the abomination and the mouse,
Shall [b]be consumed together,” says the Lord.

While we are saved by grace through faith, because we all have sinned, sadly many people mistake faith as continuing to be disobedient to God, when its the opposite.

Salvation has to do with anything God's asks of us.

• Heb 5: 9 And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him,
• Acts 5:32 And we are His witnesses to these things, and so also is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey Him.”
• Luke 6:46 “But why do you call Me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and not do the things which I say? 47 Whoever comes to Me, and hears My sayings and does them, I will show you whom he is like: 48 He is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid the foundation on the rock. And when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently against that house, and could not shake it, for it was [j]founded on the rock. 49 But he who heard and did nothing is like a man who built a house on the earth without a foundation, against which the stream beat vehemently; and immediately it [k]fell. And the ruin of that house was great.”
• Rev22:14 Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city.

Regarding Ellen White and Heath- in the Blue Zone study Adventists lived 11 years longer than the average person. Due to lifestyle, faith, food choices, keeping the Sabbath.

Even a Sunday pastor spoke of this and did the math that God gave back to the day of how many Sabbaths was kept to years added on ones life. This video is about 3 minutes long

 

[Studyman]

The writings of Ellen White, a prophet of the Seventh Day Adventist church, teach that those who worship on Sunday will receive the mark of the beast and will reject the seal of God. In other words, the vast majority of Christians are doomed for worshipping our Lord on Sunday instead of Saturday.

While I do not adopt the teaching of Calvin, Wesley, Council of Nicaea, Miller, Russell, Smith or White or any of the "many" preachers credited as founders of this world's many religious sects and businesses, it does seem prudent to address the error in your post. I have yet to hear an SDA preacher or promoter teach that those who worship God on Sunday will receive the "mark of the beast". And in your copy and paste AI generated post, there is nothing written therein that supports your accusation that they do. As far as I can tell, pretty much all of these religious sects promote worshipping God every day. The Pharisees also promoted worshipping God every day, and the Bible most certainly promotes that God's People are to worship God every day. For you to make such a false accusation against any of these religious sects, is a reflection on your adopted religion, not theirs.

The issue it seems, is that one of these huge religious sects, arguably the oldest and wealthiest religious corporation of the world, to come in Christ's Name, took it upon themselves to re-write several of God's Commandments, including but not limited to the 4th Commandment of the 10 Commandments of God given in Exodus 20. A commandment in which God identifies a Day HE esteems above other days, and Commands that we remember to esteem it in the same way. And that many of this world's religious sects and businesses that broke away from this huge religious corporation, have adopted this specific "re-write" as their own, while the religious sect of the SDA did not.

I find nowhere in the commandment of God, nor in the re-writing of it, where the worship of God is forbidden on any day of the week, and certainly not a teaching that those who worship on a specific day will receive the Mark of the Beast.

You really should amend your post to reflect a honest position.

 

[Hentenza]

And in your copy and paste AI generated post, there is nothing written therein that supports your accusation that they do.

I’m going to cut your post off because it is disingenuous. No AI was used. Go back to my OP and open the link that I supplied which will bring you to Ellen White’s actual writings. Maybe reading posts more carefully will help you avoid embarrassing errors like this.

 

[Hentenza]

Regarding our diet this is what God said after giving a list of animal meats not to eat, He deemed them an abomination to Him.

These dietary laws were given to Israel as part of the Mosaic laws. So now your sect is picking and choosing which laws to obey.

“For all who are of works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all the things written in the book of the Law, to do them.””
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭3‬:‭10‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Galatians 3:10 For all who are of works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written: “CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT ABIDE BY ALL THE THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, TO DO THEM.” | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020) | Download

For all who are of works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written: “CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT ABIDE BY ALL THE THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, TO DO THEM.”

bible.com

 

[SabbathBlessings]

These dietary laws were given to Israel as part of the Mosaic laws. So now your sect is picking and choosing which laws to obey.

“For all who are of works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all the things written in the book of the Law, to do them.””
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭3‬:‭10‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Galatians 3:10 For all who are of works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written: “CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT ABIDE BY ALL THE THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, TO DO THEM.” | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020) | Download

For all who are of works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written: “CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT ABIDE BY ALL THE THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, TO DO THEM.”

bible.com

God makes no distinction between Jews and Gentiles at His Second Coming and Judgement He says "Those who" not Jews. Isa66:17 two groups saved Rev22:14 and lost Rev22:15

and Gal3:10 does not say

These dietary laws were given to Israel as part of the Mosaic laws.

God wants everyone to be holy and clean, not just Jews.

 

[Studyman]

I’m going to cut your post off because it is disingenuous.

Yes, I can see why you wouldn't want to discuss the actual post, it is an embarrassing error, and an unforced one.

Go back to my OP and open the link that I supplied which will bring you to Ellen White’s actual writings.

I know what White teaches, it was your incorrect statements concerning her teaching that I was addressing.

Maybe reading posts more carefully will help you avoid embarrassing errors like this.

Go back and read your own words, and you should be embarrassed for being so dishonest in in them. " the Seventh Day Adventist church, teach that those who worship on Sunday will receive the mark of the beast and will reject the seal of God". You should be embarrassed, and amend your error.

SDA isn't teaching folks not to worship God on a Wednesday or a Sunday.

Just how far will you go to justify such foolishness.

 

[Hentenza]

Yes, I can see why you wouldn't want to discuss the actual post, it is an embarrassing error, and an unforced one.



I know what White teaches, it was your incorrect statements concerning her teaching that I was addressing.



Go back and read your own words, and you should be embarrassed for being so dishonest in in them. " the Seventh Day Adventist church, teach that those who worship on Sunday will receive the mark of the beast and will reject the seal of God". You should be embarrassed, and amend your error.

No. Why did you cut off the first part of my post? Here it is again.

“The writings of Ellen White, a prophet of the Seventh Day Adventist church, teach that those who worship on Sunday will receive the mark of the beast and will reject the seal of God. In other words, the vast majority of Christians are doomed for worshipping our Lord on Sunday instead of Saturday.”

Why did you cut off the bold part of my post? You are quote mining by taking out the context? Did I say that the SDA teaches what your prophet teaches or that your prophet teaches what I posted? This is a perfect example of changing a post for disingenuous selfish purposes and you did it on purpose.
You just lowered yourself and my initial opinion of you and your posts was correct.

SDA isn't teaching folks not to worship God on a Wednesday or a Sunday.

Never said that. I only mentioned Sunday not Wednesday.

Just how far will you go to justify such foolishness.

Apparently you are willing to go to the fully disingenuous side. The fact is that you cannot argue that Ellen White did not teach that those that worship in Sunday will receive the mark of the beast because it is in her writings and it is right there in her teachings. It is funny though how you folks pick and choose what you want believe from her writings and yet elevate her to the level of prophet.

You have lost all credibility here.

 

[Hentenza]

God makes no distinction between Jews and Gentiles at His Second Coming and Judgement He says "Those who" not Jews. Isa66:17 two groups saved Rev22:14 and lost Rev22:15

Once again reading your doctrine into verses. The dietary laws are part of the Torah that was given to ONLY Israel. I’m still waiting for you to provide a verse that shows that the laws were given to the gentiles collectively. And, of course, you totally ignore Acts 15.

and Gal3:10 does not say

lol The law followers are indeed Israel.

God wants everyone to be holy and clean, not just Jews.

Jesus declared all foods clean. You do know that your beliefs and those of your church are at the fringes of Christianity right?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

What AI said about the accusation.

“The writings of Ellen White, a prophet of the Seventh Day Adventist church, teach that those who worship on Sunday will receive the mark of the beast and will reject the seal of God. In other words, the vast majority of Christians are doomed for worshipping our Lord on Sunday instead of Saturday

She did not teach it in that blunt, blanket form (“the vast majority of Christians are doomed for worshipping on Sunday”). That wording reads like an anti-EGW paraphrase.


What she did teach, in her own writings, is closer to this:

What EGW actually says (her real position)​

1) A future enforcement issue, not “Sundaykeepers are automatically lost right now”​

She repeatedly frames the “mark of the beast”/Sunday issue as applying when there is light and then compulsion/enforcement, and people make a conscious choice against what they understand to be God’s command. In that setting, she connects:

• Sunday observance under enforcement + rejection of Sabbath truth = aligning with “the beast,” and
• faithful Sabbath-keeping = connected with God’s “seal.”

2) She explicitly denies that everyone who keeps Sunday now has the mark​

In The Great Controversy she is very direct that Sunday keeping by itself, while people are ignorant of the Sabbath obligation, is not yet “the mark of the beast.” The “mark” comes with willful choice when the issue is clearly made known and enforced.

3) She also says there are sincere Christians in Sunday churches​

She teaches that God has genuine, sincere believers in other communions and that the final separation happens later as light increases and choices harden.

So is the quote you gave a real EGW quote?​

Almost certainly no:

• It calls her “a prophet of the Seventh Day Adventist church” in a way that reads like an outside summary.
• It uses emotionally loaded phrasing (“vast majority of Christians are doomed”) that is not her usual style when making the “final test” argument.
• It collapses her conditional framework (light + enforcement + deliberate choice) into a universal present-tense condemnation.

The most accurate EGW-summary in one sentence​

EGW’s view is: Sunday observance becomes connected with the “mark of the beast” when it is enforced and chosen in conscious opposition to God’s Sabbath, not merely because someone worships on Sunday in ignorance.

 

[Studyman]

No. Why did you cut off the first part of my post? Here it is again.

“The writings of Ellen White, a prophet of the Seventh Day Adventist church, teach that those who worship on Sunday will receive the mark of the beast and will reject the seal of God. In other words, the vast majority of Christians are doomed for worshipping our Lord on Sunday instead of Saturday.”

Here, let me amend my post.

"Go back and read your own words, and you should be embarrassed for being so dishonest in in them. “The writings of Ellen White, a prophet of the Seventh Day Adventist church, teach that those who worship on Sunday will receive the mark of the beast and will reject the seal of God. In other words, the vast majority of Christians are doomed for worshipping our Lord on Sunday instead of Saturday.”

You should be embarrassed, and amend your error.

SDA isn't teaching folks not to worship God on a Wednesday or a Sunday.

Just how far will you go to justify such foolishness.

The truth remains, and you have not, nor can not provide any evidence that the SDA, or it's founders, teach that people who worship on Wednesday, or Sunday or whatever day of the week, "will receive the mark of the beast". Ellen White, John Wesley, John Calvin, Pope Pius X, Charles Russell, all promoted that men should worship God every day of the Week. I pointed out the issue SDA has concerning the 7th Day Sabbath Commandment, which has nothing at all to do with "Worshipping God" on a certain day of the week, and you are afraid to even acknowledge, much less have an actual, honest discussion about what I posted.

Ex. 20: 8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

There is nothing here that forbids worshipping God on another day of the week, as God's People worship Him every day of the week.

The issue isn't about what day to Worship God. The issue is about whether to obey God's Commandments or man's Commandments.

Your statement, “The writings of Ellen White, a prophet of the Seventh Day Adventist church, teach that those who worship on Sunday will receive the mark of the beast" is a falsehood.

This is a falsehood, and you have not provided any evidence to the contrary. Your AI copy and past sermon does not teach that folks that worship God on Sunday with receive the "mark of the beast".


You are embarrassing yourself. But it is your choice, and I will leave you with it.

 

[Hentenza]

Here, let me amend my post.

To late. You already showed your trickery.

The truth remains, and you have not, nor can not provide any evidence that the SDA, or it's founders, teach that people who worship on Wednesday, or Sunday or whatever day of the week, "will receive the mark of the beast".

Ellen does. Open the link to her writings that I provided.

The founders of the SDA were even worse as they proved to be false prophets by failing in their prediction of Christ return in 1844.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

To late.

Ellen does. Open the link to her writings that I provided.

The founders of the SDA were even worse as they proved to be false prophets by failing in their prediction of Christ return in 1844.

The facts are the SDA was not even founded until 1863 almost 20 years after 1844. In 1844 EGW was a Methodist. William Miller is the one who predicted 1844 and he was a baptist minster. EGW nor the SDA has ever set a date for the return of Jesus Christ.

 

[Hentenza]

The facts are the SDA was not even founded until 1863 almost 20 years after 1844. In 1844 EGW was a Methodist. William Miller is the one who predicted 1844 and he was a baptist minster. EGW nor the SDA has ever set a date for the return of Jesus Christ.

LAYING THE GROUNDWORK FOR ADVENTISM: THE “MILLERITES” AND THE SECOND COMING​

In the 1830s, a farmer, military veteran, and devout Baptist named William Miller continued the fervor of the spiritual “awakening” and sought to deepen his Bible study. Especially after returning from war and being frequently reminded of the fragility of life and the mystery of beyond, he focused on studying prophecy in Daniel and Revelation.

He eventually concluded Christ’s Second Coming would be a literal event rather than a figurative or spiritual event, which had been the popular reasoning at the time.

As he continued to study the “2300-day prophecy” in Daniel 8 and 9, he became convinced this predicted exactly when the Second Coming would be. Based on the events described in these passages, he believed the 23002 days began in 457 BC with the call to rebuild the city of Jerusalem, and concluded at some point between 1843-1844.

https://adventist.org/identity/history

If you are going to draw the line in the sand at the 1860’s then tell your church not to claim earlier groundwork.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

LAYING THE GROUNDWORK FOR ADVENTISM: THE “MILLERITES” AND THE SECOND COMING​

In the 1830s, a farmer, military veteran, and devout Baptist named William Miller continued the fervor of the spiritual “awakening” and sought to deepen his Bible study. Especially after returning from war and being frequently reminded of the fragility of life and the mystery of beyond, he focused on studying prophecy in Daniel and Revelation.

He eventually concluded Christ’s Second Coming would be a literal event rather than a figurative or spiritual event, which had been the popular reasoning at the time.

As he continued to study the “2300-day prophecy” in Daniel 8 and 9, he became convinced this predicted exactly when the Second Coming would be. Based on the events described in these passages, he believed the 23002 days began in 457 BC with the call to rebuild the city of Jerusalem, and concluded at some point between 1843-1844.

https://adventist.org/identity/history

If you are going to draw the line in the sand at the 1860’s then tell your church not to claim earlier groundwork.

It still doesn;t say the SDA church or EGW predicted 1844 or changes any fact in the post you are replying to, it just further establishes the fact he was a Baptist minister, EGW was 17years old, she was a Methodist at the time and no SDA church until almost 20 years later. Your claim was the SDA and/or EGW had a failed prediction of 1844 and that is not true.

 

[Studyman]

To late. You already showed your trickery.

Ellen does. Open the link to her writings that I provided.

The founders of the SDA were even worse as they proved to be false prophets by failing in their prediction of Christ return in 1844.

I agree that, as Jesus said, men should "take heed" of the founders and promoters of this world's religious sects and businesses, and as I told you from the beginning, I don't follow the teaching of any of them. But there is nothing in your AI copy and post, that supports your accusation that SDA preaches that a man that worships on Sunday receives the "mark of the beast".

Prove me wrong, and Show me in your AI Copy and paste post, where White says men who "worship God on Sunday" receive the mark of the beast.

For once, just provide some actual evidence of your accusations.