• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

THE GREAT CONTROVERSY in Baltimore, Maryland

jas3

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2023
1,289
929
The South
✟92,086.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
All we need to do is look in our Bibles
All you need to do is engage with my questions honestly and not try to dodge behind an irrelevant wall of text. If your beliefs are true, why does their case need to be made with falsehoods?
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,606
5,576
USA
✟721,503.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
All you need to do is engage with my questions honestly and not try to dodge behind an irrelevant wall of text. If your beliefs are true, why does their case need to be made with falsehoods?
Which part of the Testimony of God and Jesus who is God made flesh that I quoted in the post you are replying to, do you believe is is irrelevant or falsehood? Can you point out where God sanctified the first day and made it a commandment of God? written by His finger, that is placed under His mercy seat in the Most Holy of His temple.

You made a statement that SDA's are believing a falsehood about Sunday worship but Jesus in His own words relates worship to obedience. False worship He defined as laying aside the commandments of God- quoting directly from the Ten Commandments and following the commandments of man. Mark 7:7-13 Mat 15:3-14 He said this is worshipping Him in vain. So it stands to reason, where is the commandment that God gave to keep the first day holy? Where did He ordain and sanctify the first day.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

jas3

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2023
1,289
929
The South
✟92,086.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Which part of the Testimony of God and Jesus who is God made flesh that I quoted in the post you are replying to, do you believe is is irrelevant or falsehood?
All of it is irrelevant to claims EGW made about the 1st millennium church in her book.

Did Sunday worship begin with Constantine? No.

Did Christians hold a memorialist view of the Eucharist prior to the 11th century?
No.
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,606
5,576
USA
✟721,503.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
All of it is irrelevant to claims EGW made about the 1st millennium church in her book.

Did Sunday worship begin with Constantine? No.

Did Christians hold a memorialist view of the Eucharist prior to the 11th century?
No.

I appreciate your opinion.

Still doesn't change the Scriptures, which has everything to do with the Sunday/Sabbath issue. Someone changed God's Sabbath and it wasn't God Dan 7:25 There is clear history of Sunday worship becoming formalized by Constantine from the tradition of sun worship.. But I find it odd one would be more fixated on what EGW says over what God and Jesus said plainly. Even if EGW is wrong, it still doesn't change the fact that Sunday is not a commandment of God, not sanctified by God and is nothing more than a tradition of man leading people away from one of God's commandments- which is His will Psa 40:8 and Testimony. Exo 31:18 Deut 4:13 Rev 14:12 Rev 22:14 Isa 8:20

The Conversion of Constantine

By the time Constantine was established as the emperor of Rome in the early fourth century, there was a decided division in the church as a result of all these factors. I think most of you know that Constantine was the first so-called Christian emperor of the Roman Empire. The story of his conversion has become very well known to students of ancient history. He was marching forth to fight the battle of Milvian Bridge when he had some kind of vision, and saw a flaming cross in the sky. Underneath the cross were the Latin words meaning “In this sign conquer.” Constantine took this as an omen that he should be a Christian, and his army as well. He declared all his pagan soldiers to be Christians, and became very zealous to build up the power and prestige of the church. Through his influence great blocks of pagans were taken into the Christian ranks. But, friends, they were still pagan at heart, and they brought in much of the paraphernalia of sun-worship to which they continued to be devoted. We mentioned in a previous broadcast about the adoption of Christmas and Easter into the church. At the same time, many other customs were Christianized and appropriated into the practice of the church as well.

Sun Worship

You see, at that time the cult of Mithraism or sun-worship was the official religion of the Roman Empire. It stood as the greatest competitor to the new Christian religion. It had its own organization, temples, priesthood, robes—everything. It also had an official worship day on which special homage was given to the sun. That day was called “The Venerable Day of the Sun.” It was the first day of the week, and from it we get our name Sunday. When Constantine pressed his pagan hordes into the church they were observing the day of the sun for their adoration of the sun god. It was their special holy day. In order to make it more convenient for them to make the change to the new religion, Constantine accepted their day of worship, Sunday, instead of the Christian Sabbath which had been observed by Jesus and His disciples. Remember that the way had been prepared for this already by the increasing anti-Jewish feelings against those who were accused of putting Jesus to death. Those feelings would naturally condition many Christians to swing away from something which was held religiously by the Jews. It is therefore easier to understand how the change was imposed on Christianity through a strong civil law issued by Constantine as the Emperor of Rome. The very wording of that law, by the way, can be found in any reliable encyclopedia. Those early Christians, feeling that the Jews should not be followed any more than necessary, were ready to swing away from the Sabbath which was kept by the Jews.

Historical Accounts

Some of you may be greatly surprised by the explanation I’ve just made, and I’m not going to ask you to believe it blindly. I have before me a multitude of authorities to verify what has been said. Here are historians, Catholics and Protestants, speaking in harmony about what actually took place in the fourth century. After Constantine made the initial pronouncement and legal decree about the change, the Catholic Church reinforced that act in one church council after another. For this reason, many, many official statements from Catholic sources are made, claiming that the church made the change from Saturday to Sunday. But before I read those statements I shall refer to one from the Encyclopedia Britannica under the article, Sunday. Notice: “It was Constantine who first made a law for the proper observance of Sunday and who appointed that it should be regularly celebrated throughout the Roman empire.” Now you can check these statements in your own encyclopedias or go to the library and look into other historical sources.

Here is a statement from Dr. Gilbert Murray, M.A., D.Litt., LLD, FBA, Professor of Greek at Oxford University, who certainly had no ax to grind concerning Christian thought on the Sabbath question. He wrote: “Now since Mithras was the sun, the Unconquered, and the sun was the Royal Star, the religion looked for a king whom it could serve as a representative of Mithras upon earth. The Roman Emperor seemed to be clearly indicated as the true king. In sharp contrast to Christianity, Mithraism recognized Caesar as the bearer of divine grace. It had so much acceptance that it was able to impose on the Christian world its own sun-day in place of the Sabbath; its sun’s birthday, the 25th of December, as the birthday of Jesus.” History of Christianity in the Light of Modern Knowledge.

Looking a bit further into historical statements, Dr. William Frederick says: “The Gentiles were an idolatrous people who worshipped the sun, and Sunday was their most sacred day. Now in order to reach the people in this new field, it seems but natural as well as necessary to make Sunday the rest day of the church. At this time it was necessary for the church to either adopt the Gentile’s day or else have the Gentiles change their day. To change the Gentiles day would have been an offense and stumbling block to them. The church could naturally reach them better by keeping their day.” There it is, friends, a clear explanation by Dr. Frederick as to how this change happened. Another statement very parallel to this one is found in the North British Review.

But let’s move on to a statement from the Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, p. 153. “The church after changing the day of rest from the Jewish Sabbath or seventh-day of the week to the first, made the third commandment refer to Sunday as the day to be kept holy as the Lord’s day.”

Catholicism Takes Credit for the Change

Now a quote from the Catholic Press newspaper in Sidney, Australia. “Sunday is a Catholic institution and its claims to observance can be defended only on Catholic principles. From the beginning to end of Scripture there is not a single passage that warrants the transfer of weekly public worship from the last day of the week to the first.”

The Catholic Mirror of September 23, 1894, puts it this way: “The Catholic Church for over one thousand years before the existence of a Protestant by virtue of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday.”

To point up the claims we’re talking about, I want to read from two Catechisms. First, from the Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine by Reverend Peter Giermann. “Question: Which is the Sabbath day? Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day. Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday? Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church in the Council of Laodicea transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.”

Second, from Reverend Steven Keenan’s Doctrinal Catechism we read this: “Question: Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept? Answer: Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday, the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday, the seventh day; a change for which there is no Scriptural authority.”

Then from Cardinal Gibbons’ book, The Question Box, p.179, “If the Bible is the only guide for the Christian, then the Seventh-day Adventist is right in observing Saturday with the Jew. Is it not strange that those who make the Bible their only teacher should inconsistently follow in this matter the tradition of the Catholic Church?”

One more statement taken from the book, The Faith of Millions, p. 473. “But since Saturday, not Sunday, is specified in the Bible, isn’t it curious that non-Catholics who profess to take their religion directly from the Bible and not from the Church, observe Sunday instead of Saturday? Yes, of course, it is inconsistency but this change was made about fifteen centuries before Protestantism was born, and by that time the custom was universally observed. They have continued the custom even though it rests upon the authority of the Catholic Church and not upon an explicit text from the Bible. That observance remains as a reminder of the Mother Church from which the non-Catholic sects broke away like a boy running away from home but still carrying in his pocket a picture of his mother or a lock of her hair.”

That is a most interesting statement, is it not, friends? And it is a very true statement. There is some inconsistency somewhere along the line, because we have examined the statements of history, and you can check them for yourself in any library. I’m not reading anything one-sided here at all. I’ve tried to give you an unbiased picture. Although we have seen the claims made by the Catholic Church in their publications, we are not reading them to cast any reflection upon anyone, by any means. We are simply bringing you a recital of what has been written and what claims have been made.

- From the Joe Crews Radio Sermon Library


 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

jas3

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2023
1,289
929
The South
✟92,086.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
There is clear history of Sunday worship becoming formalized by Constantine from the tradition of sun worship
Nope. This is just wrong and an English speaker with internet access has no excuse for this kind of willful ignorance. Go read the Didache. Go read Ignatius. Go read Justin Martyr. It takes less than a minute to be disabused of this notion if you care at all about truth and are proficient enough with a computer to be using a forum.
But I find it odd one would be more fixated on what EGW says over what God and Jesus said plainly.
The subject of this thread is The Great Controversy specifically, so yes, the text of the book is relevant.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: tampasteve
Upvote 0

tampasteve

Not everyone who says, “Lord, Lord,” will be saved
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Site Supporter
May 15, 2017
27,581
8,007
Tampa
✟961,059.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: JSRG and jas3
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,606
5,576
USA
✟721,503.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Nope. This is just wrong and an English speaker with internet access has no excuse for this kind of willful ignorance. Go read the Didache. Go read Ignatius. Go read Justin Martyr. It takes less than a minute to be disabused of this notion if you care at all about truth and are proficient enough with a computer to be using a forum.
The subject of this thread is The Great Controversy specifically, so yes, the text of the book is relevant.
Thanks, but I am going to stick with the Bible. Isa 8:20
 
Upvote 0

jas3

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2023
1,289
929
The South
✟92,086.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Thanks, but I am going to stick with the Bible. Isa 8:20
If you want to bury your head in the sand, that's your prerogative, but you then have no business talking about post-apostolic Christian history.
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,606
5,576
USA
✟721,503.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
If you want to bury your head in the sand, that's your prerogative, but you then have no business talking about post-apostolic Christian history.
I keep pointing back to God’s word, which Jesus told us to live by Mat 4:4 you keep quoting everyone but and you tell me my head is buried. As if any other book, or person trumps what God said. His Testimony that He personally wrote. Deut 4:13 Exo 31:18 Rev 11:19 Rev 15:5.

Guess all will sort itself out soon enough.
 
Upvote 0

jas3

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2023
1,289
929
The South
✟92,086.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I keep pointing back to God’s word, which Jesus told us to live by Mat 4:4 you keep quoting everyone but and you tell me my head is buried. As if any other book, or person trumps what God said.
No, you point to fraudulent histories of Rome subscribing to Mithraism and Constantine merging sun worship with Christianity, then when called out on the errors in the texts you've copied, try to redirect the discussion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JSRG
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,606
5,576
USA
✟721,503.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
No, you point to fraudulent histories of Rome subscribing to Mithraism and Constantine merging sun worship with Christianity, then when called out on the errors in the texts you've copied, try to redirect the discussion.
Ok, if you say so, but you haven’t provided anything but your word. And sadly this teachings goes against what God said, which we seem to be forgetting that should be the most important part of all of this. Even if everyone was doing one thing, but God said to do something different- whose voice are we going to listen to? Whose voice did Jesus say to listen to Mat 4:4. God destroyed everyone but 8 people for this exact scenario. Jesus indicated His Second Coming would be like the days of Noah. Following the majority has never been fruitful to anyone in Scripture. I do not believe its going to be at His Second Coming either Rev 11:18-19 Mat 7:21-23 Rev 22:14-15 1 John 2:3-4 its why the Holy Spirit keeps calling on us daily if we hear His voice Heb 3:7-19

I understand this is what has been taught in most churches for centuries, but the great controversy started in heaven with Lucifer deceiving 1/3 of the holy angles and then deceived our first parents. The only safeguard we have is God’s holy word Psa 119:105 Isa 8:20 We were told what would happen after the death of apostles Acts 20:29 2 Thes 2 and what Jesus warned us about. Mat 24:4-5 I think it’s important to get back to what God said. It’s what faith is all about. Hearing, believing, doing.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

jas3

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2023
1,289
929
The South
✟92,086.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Ok, if you say so, but you haven’t provided anything but your word.
“But every Lord's day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure.” (Didache 14 [A.D. 70])

“[T]hose who were brought up in the ancient order of things [i.e. Jews] have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord’s day, on which also our life has sprung up again by him and by his death” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Magnesians 9 [A.D. 110]) (EGW claims the connection of Sunday to our Lord's resurrection is a post hoc 2nd millennium rationalization. Oops.)

“But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead.” (St. Justin Martyr, First Apology 67 [A.D. 155])
We were told what would happen after the death of apostles Acts 20:29 2 Thes 2 and what Jesus warned us about. Mat 24:4-5
Indeed, people would come along centuries later, even as late as 18 centuries later, and claim to be prophets and invent strange new doctrines.
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,606
5,576
USA
✟721,503.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
“But every Lord's day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure.” (Didache 14 [A.D. 70])

“[T]hose who were brought up in the ancient order of things [i.e. Jews] have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord’s day, on which also our life has sprung up again by him and by his death” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Magnesians 9 [A.D. 110]) (EGW claims the connection of Sunday to our Lord's resurrection is a post hoc 2nd millennium rationalization. Oops.)

“But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead.” (St. Justin Martyr, First Apology 67 [A.D. 155])

Indeed, people would come along centuries later, even as late as 18 centuries later, and claim to be prophets and invent strange new doctrines.
Like I said one has to go outside the Bible to make a case for Sunday sacredness. It never came from the word of God.
Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

Jesus said to live by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God mat 4:4 God said the Sabbath day is My holy day, the holy day of the Lord Isa 58:13, meaning there is no other, only what we were warned would happen Dan 7:25, that sadly most have followed.

If one believes there is someone above the Testimony of God- than thats where one should place their faith. If you believe keeping the Sabbath commandment that was written personally by God, His Testimony Exo 31:18 is a “strange doctrine” than take the advice of Joshua.

Jos 24:15 And if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”

I believe our God is one of love and He will never force once to obey Him, it has to come from love. I believe His judgement is one of love too and not everyone will be happy in the new heaven and new earth keeping the Sabbath for eternity Isa 66:22-23. Many prefer man-made laws over obeying God’s commandments through love and faith. 1 John 5:3 John 14:15 Exo 20:6 Life is full of choices and we will all have to live with the choice we make someday soon. Rev 22:11.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

jas3

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2023
1,289
929
The South
✟92,086.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Like I said one has to go outside the Bible to make a case for Sunday sacredness.
I'm not making a case for "Sunday sacredness," I'm making a case for pre-Constantinian attestation of Sunday worship. I was hoping you might be able to stay on topic for two posts in a row, or that someone else might come in with an intelligent defense for the main SDA apologetic document, but it looks like that was asking too much.
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,606
5,576
USA
✟721,503.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I'm not making a case for "Sunday sacredness," I'm making a case for pre-Constantinian attestation of Sunday worship. I was hoping you might be able to stay on topic for two posts in a row, or that someone else might come in with an intelligent defense for the main SDA apologetic document, but it looks like that was asking too much.
They all go against the word of God so they hold no value to me. The didache for example, was ‘found‘ late 1800’s and it goes away from the word of God. I personally would never use that as something to take serious over what God says so plainly. I would not consider as a valid historical document.

Does it really matter when weekly Sunday worship started, if we can’t find it in our Bibles. Again, thats what I would be more concerned about.

There are other Adventists who can probably speak more about these documents, than I am able to, I tend to spend most my time in the Scriptures over historical documents. Hopefully they will comment.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Site Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
32,762
6,151
Visit site
✟1,062,536.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
But that then raises the question of why SDAs continue to promote falsehoods about early Christian beliefs by distributing an edition of the book containing historical claims that are known to be untrue.

Ah yes, found what I was looking for. This is by J.N. Andrews, in 1873. It discusses quotes by Justin Martyr, etc. so you can see how one of the earlier Adventist scholars viewed the question.

 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,606
5,576
USA
✟721,503.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I'm not making a case for "Sunday sacredness," I'm making a case for pre-Constantinian attestation of Sunday worship. I was hoping you might be able to stay on topic for two posts in a row, or that someone else might come in with an intelligent defense for the main SDA apologetic document, but it looks like that was asking too much.
In the council of Laodicea this was stated in late 300's.
Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ.
So if Christians were keeping Sunday, in lieu of God's Sabbath commandment, no need for this decree. Much like the decree of the days of Daniel and his friends, when a decree went out against one of God's commandments that led to persecution of God's people. Is this exact scenario on the brink of happening again?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Amo2

Active Member
Feb 3, 2024
376
90
64
Campobello
✟26,518.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The narrative pertaining to Christian history presented in the Great Controversy is inaccurate and not accepted by scholars regardless of religious background. It is basically a variant on the “trail of blood” concept of the Landmark Baptists, which is also irrelevant.
To the contrary, it is largely based upon and even filled quoted historical record and facts. Believed, accepted, expounded upon, and presented as authentic and factual history by many millions throughout history, including more than just a few scholars. Of course, who is a scholar, and who is not, is often simply a matter of opinion regarding one's personal preferences.

I would of course consider it a personal responsibility, to address any specific inaccuracies depicted in the book. I am not afraid of and or certainly above learning something, are you?
 
Upvote 0

Amo2

Active Member
Feb 3, 2024
376
90
64
Campobello
✟26,518.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Insofar as they believed a similar view of past events, but not the same, one can’t say the Landmark Baptists adhered to the narrative of The Great Controversy. The work rather should be understood as a religious text, essentially sacred scripture, to the SDAs, who regard it as infallible inspired prophecy albeit without formally adding it to the scriptural canon.

That said I do find it difficult to stomach when Adventists criticize the Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox, among others, for using books in the Old Testament which are not universally accepted, particularly since the early church never was able to agree on a canon for the Old Testament (indeed, there are five canons in use among the Oriental Orthodox, including two among the Ethiopians, and the Greek Orthodox and Slavonic churches have a slight difference in how the canon is structured and if memory serves, the Slavonic churches accept one book the Greeks do not.

Also concerning the Masoretic canon, even John Calvin did not accept this, for he regarded Baruch as protocanon, and Martin Luther clearly did not accept it given that he would have deleted Esther if possible (it is probable he never read the superior version found in the LXX, which has an element of prayer lacking in the version in the MT and Vulgate).
The word of God alone is infallible. No SDA considers the Great Controversy to be infallible, though a great deal is in fact established history. Again, please do bring forth your suggested inaccuracies to be examined. Maybe we can both learn a thing or two.
 
Upvote 0

Amo2

Active Member
Feb 3, 2024
376
90
64
Campobello
✟26,518.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I read chapters 2 and 3 of the book because of this thread, and the nicest possible description I can give of the historical claims is "profoundly ignorant and totally unsubstantiated." Maybe EGW was limited by the books and people she had access to at the time. Modern SDAs do not have such an excuse for distributing falsehoods about the historicity of Sunday worship and belief in the Real Presence of our Lord in the Eucharist.

And at least The Trail of Blood puts some effort into identifying theoretical Baptist predecessors. EGW just kind of hand waves the problem and says there were anonymous true Christians throughout history who didn't venerate icons or worship on Sunday, without anything to back up the claim.

Specifics please. Blanket declarations by individuals are of course no sign of authentic enlightenment upon any subject. Nor do they represent any substantiation of personally professed views as those expressed above.
 
Upvote 0