Ellen White on the Sabbath

[bugkiller]

Not spam--when it is read and not just glanced over.

Thank you very much. I ead by the letter about half the post and briefly scanned the rest in which I recognized this is nothing more than a repeat of presented material.

When presented as though the material has not been covered it is spam.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

Call the FBI----subversive hymns!!!

Is it really not ecognized who or what is being sung to?

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

I do not understand how you get to that conclusion from what Lysimachus wrote about the new covenant--it was stated before Christs death--He said what was needed to be said to replace the animal sacrifce with His--Christ did not change the sabbath day to sunday before His death so it is still in effect.

This is what I responed to from his post -

If nothing can be added or subtracted to the covenant after the covenant has gone into effect according to Galatians 3:15, then Sunday came 3 days too late. The New Covenant was in effect on Friday--and by what according to Hebrews 9:16-22? According to the shedding of the blood of the testator. Not the resurrection.

This is a double standard in that the same is not being applied to both. Furthermore if what he said was true there is no need of any other Scripture.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

Then you're obviously not reading what he said wrote.

gimme a break. I have been here longer than him and have read almost every letter he has posted in GT. I know exactly what he said and what he meant. I have an SDA neighbor who has tried to convert me for 12 years and behaves the very same way. Very predictible.

bugkiller

 

[mmksparbud]

gimme a break. I have been here longer than him and have read almost every letter he has posted in GT. I know exactly what he said and what he meant. I have an SDA neighbor who has tried to convert me for 12 years and behaves the very same way. Very predictible.

bugkiller

Well, that's only 12 years--there's hope for you yet!

 

[bugkiller]

Your problem is that you still do not comprehend the points I have presented. Perhaps you may want to go back and read them again. I am persuaded you are wearing false lenses when reading the verses, therefore, the plain meanings are not being perceived.

The Ten Commandments are fully in place, and valid, for Jesus was an example and kept all 10. Yet he fully illustrated how the festivals pointed to Himself, showing that "this is my body". Paul is very clear that the handwriting of ordinances were wiped away, not the Ten Commandments. Paul quotes the validity of the Ten Commandments several times in Romans and Ephesians.

The Lord's Supper and Baptism were instituted BEFORE Christ's Death--BEFORE the New Covenant went into effect.

Sunday Sacredness was instituted AFTER Christ's Death---this is squarely in contradiction to Hebrews 9:16-22 and Galatians 3:9 and Psalms 89:34 and Exodus 24:1-8.

(1) Before either of the two Covenants is put into effect, the conditions of the Covenants are made known (Ex. 24:1-8 );

(2) Wherever there is a Covenant, the Covenant is sealed by the blood of the Testator (Heb. 9:16-22);

(3) Once the Covenant has been sealed by the blood, nothing can be added or subtracted from the covenant (Psalms 89:34; Gal. 3:15)
​

Sunday was "added" too late.

I should not fail to mention that Christ was very clear when He instituted the Lord's Supper prior to His death (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor 11:24,25), and John the Baptist also instituted Baptism. Neither of them even so much as hinted as to the abrogation of the Ten Commandment laws. But He did not even so much as "HINT" at instituting any Sunday sacredness or celebration in honor of His resurrection. We celebrate His resurrection through the sacrament of Baptism (See Romans 6:3-6; 1 Peter 3:20, 21), not the keeping of a day.

Bottom line:

The evangelical/Christian world is WRONG. They do not understand or grasp these spiritual principles.

The Catholic Church is WRONG. They do not understand or grasp these spiritual principles, and live based on the traditions of men, not the traditions of Christ and the Apostles.

Adventism has it RIGHT. Their teachings are in line with the Bible.

The Catholic Church and the Sunday Keeping Evangelical world has it WRONG. They do not go by the scriptures, and have been infected by Roman Jesuit teachings. Thanks to John Nelson Darby and Scoffield and the Plymouth Brethren as to why so many evangelicals today are so confused---these are Catholic teachings cloaked in false garb of Protestantism.

True Adventists do have it right according to the Bible, whether part of a denomination or not.

I am not part of any denomination, yet I label myself as "SDA" simply for the fact that the Bible has FORCED me to subscribe to the same beliefs that Adventist-Historicist theology and eschatology supports.

The SDA Church happens to subscribe to the same Biblical beliefs I do, and I happen to subscribe to the same Biblical beliefs that the SDA Church subscribes to.

But I do not subscribe to SDA theology. I subscribe to Biblical theology that the SDA Church happens to subscribe to. True Biblical Adventism of the heart is God's remnant--whether denominationally tied or not--because it represents a body of people who go by the Bible, and live up to what it actually says.

Plain and simple.

Opps!

Where was baptism instituted before the cross? There is no such command till after the resurretion in my Bible.

Yes I comprehend exactly what was written. We do not agree if that is what comprehension means.

The 10 Cs are ordinances and even hand written ordinances at that. Remember they were written with the very finger of God, Himself. Furthermore God instructed Moses to write the rest of them. Moses did not make them up. They are not his doing in that they came from him. They are from God the Father and have the same exact bearing on the Isrealites and anyone who joins themselves to the Lord thru that covenant.

Paul recognized the 10 Cs but does not teach them as an obligation to the Christian. This is waht Acts 15 is about.

Ah since Jesus did not write the NT none of it is valid. A testator writes a will and testament prior to death. So since we have no such thing attributable to Jesus nothing in the NT is vaild according to the presented argument.

That covenant mentioned inGal 3:9 has nothing to do with the covenant made with Israel. Sorry.

So reconcile Ps 89:34 with Jer 31:31-34 and Jesus' testimony in 3 Gospels that the NC is the current covenant. Jer says specifically it is not according to the covenant made with their fathers. That does not mean the covenant was moved. It clearly says a new (chadash pronounced khä·däsh' H2319) covenant. It is not chadash pronounced khä·dash' (no mark over the a in the dash part of the word) H2318.

The quote of this verse in Hebrews is even better using the word kainos and not neos. There can be no mistake from the Hebrews 8 rendition.

Well maybe that is what you cleebrate by baptism. With my knowledge of baptism in the SDA church I woudl say definitaly not. But neither do I. I clebrate and signify the new life I have no in Christ Jesus. The old man subject to the law is dead and I have been raised to new life in Christ Jesus.

John the Baptist did not institute the rite of baptism. It is a ceremonial washing rite under the law. If John the Baptist instituted water baptism your baptism is not valid as it does not follow suit (done as John the Baptist preformed the rite).

If the evangelical protestant world is wrong why does your church seek recognition as part of it?

Are we talking about the Bible or religions? I could care less what the RCC or the SDA oragization state. Does it line up with God's Word? Neither of those organizations have any authority over me.

I will simply stay out of trouble by not responding to the remainder of your post. Sorry.

No you do not have my tongue tied. I can refute anything you claim with Scripture.

bugkiller

 

[weariedsoul]

Arguing that people should observe sabbath is not helpful to the Gospel. And its not even commanded by the apostles, or the Lord.

 

[Lysimachus]

Arguing that people should observe sabbath is not helpful to the Gospel. And its not even commanded by the apostles, or the Lord.

Neither is it commanded to abstain from Beastiality either.

It is actually commanded by example. A command is implied BY EXAMPLE. All the Apostles and Jesus came together and rested on every Sabbath day. Luke 23:56 is clear, that they rested on the Sabbath day ACCORDING to the commandment. In 1 Peter 2:21, we are "left an example" by Jesus Christ, that we "walk in his steps".

The 4th commandment of the Ten Commandments is just as valid as all other 9 commandments. It is inconsistent to say we keep 9, and then break one, the 4th. That is contrary to the scriptures.

The Sabbath is the largest commandment of the Ten. It was made for mankind, not the Jews alone. It was to be a "perpetual covenant" says the scriptures.

The Sabbath is not an Old Covenant command, but part of the Everlasting Covenant, which encompasses both the Old and the New. It began in Genesis 2:2,3, long before there was a Jew and before any sin entered the world.

If Christians want to do what is right, they will keep all 10 commandments. This is an identifying mark of God's end-time remnant in Revelation 14, that they "keep the commandments of God, and have the faith of Jesus".

Hebrews 4 makes it very clear that there "remains a Sabbath keeping to the people of God". The weekly Sabbath rest is a weekly reminder of our perpetual rest in Christ, and continually reminds us of the upcoming heavenly Canaan. It is the Sabbath that helps us not forget who Created us.

The Sabbath is the Mark, Sign or Seal of the Living God in the book of Revelation.

The Sunday is the Sign or Mark of the Beast, the Mark of Papal Power.

The Sabbath vs. Sunday controversy is the very last test for God's people. Those who worship the Beast and keep Sunday will be lost forever. Those who worship God, and keep His Sabbath Holy will be saved at last.

Not because the day saved them. But because their keeping of the right day only proved their allegiance to Jehovah. They are willing to die for His law, and keep His commandments, because they LOVE HIM.

The Sabbath is intrinsically tied to the Gospel. They cannot be separated:

"And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the EVERLASTING GOSPEL to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and WORSHIP him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters." (Revelation 14:6, 7)​

Question: Where is this underlined red portion being quoted from? Where is it first found in the Bible?

Answer: The Ten Commandments!

"Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 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: 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." (Exodus 20:8-11)​

The 4th commandment is a commandment that has to do with "WORSHIP".

The Sabbath Message will be the Sign of TRUE worship of God's end-time people. All those who refuse, will end up siding with the Beast.

THE THIRD ANGEL'S MESSAGE: The Mark of the Beast 666 (HD) - YouTube

Let's not keep resisting the Sabbath. Start keeping it holy if you want to obey God and be saved at last.

Honoring the Sunday = False Worship (like Cain with his false sacrifice)

Honoring the Sabbath = True Worship (like Abel with his true sacrifice)

History will be repeated on a global scale: The issue has to do with WORSHIP, and the Sabbath helps to DISTINGUISH those who worship God, and those who worship the Beast.

Just like God put a piece of fruit, that seemed so insignificant, to test Eve, likewise, God uses a day, that seems so "insignificant" to test God's people in the last days to see if we really love Him.

If we are faithful in the little things, we will be faithful in the bigger things.

 

[weariedsoul]

Neither is it commanded to abstain from Beastiality either.

Its taught clearly. If we cant join with a prostitute neither can we do something as nasty as that.

We are the temple of His spirit.

 

[Lysimachus]

Its taught clearly. If we cant join with a prostitute neither can we do something as nasty as that.

We are the temple of His spirit.

Likewise, it is implied that we must keep the Sabbath Holy. Jesus even said to pray that we do not flee on the Sabbath day in Matthew 24:20. The apostles leave us NUMEROUS examples of Sabbath keeping. Numerous. An example IS a command, for we are told to follow their example.

 

[weariedsoul]

Likewise, it is implied that we must keep the Sabbath Holy. Jesus even said to pray that we do not flee on the Sabbath day in Matthew 24:20. The apostles leave us NUMEROUS examples of Sabbath keeping. Numerous. An example IS a command, for we are told to follow their example.

Its not implied, its allowed but not commanded.

 

[weariedsoul]

And the debate between Saturday and sunday seems wrong. How do we obey the command to love each other by debating and even arguing over what day sabbath falls on? If its not even commanded why should we fight over it? We should love each other.

 

[MoreCoffee]

7th day Sabbath fights are such fun

 

[MoreCoffee]

And the debate between Saturday and sunday seems wrong. How do we obey the command to love each other by debating and even arguing over what day sabbath falls on? If its not even commanded why should we fight over it? We should love each other.

Conflict and debate do not preclude love. Jesus had conflict and debate with the apostles on various occasions yet he loved them and they loved him.

 

[Elder 111]

Nobody has an original manuscript (is manuscript what you meant?) but we do have Greek manuscripts that show Paul did mean the weekly sabbaths and monthly new moons and annual feasts. All of which are past and gone, none of which is binding on Christians.

You need to read Hebrews chapters three and four if you (mistakenly) think that the weekly sabbath did not point to something that is now fulfilled in Christ. Haven't you read these verses?

For he has spoken somewhere about the seventh day in this manner, "And God rested on the seventh day from all his works"; and again, in the previously mentioned place, "They shall not enter into my rest." Therefore, since it remains that some will enter into it, and those who formerly received the good news did not enter because of disobedience, he once more set a day, "today," when long afterwards he spoke through David, as already quoted: "Oh, that today you would hear his voice: 'Harden not your hearts.'" Now if Joshua had given them rest, he would not have spoken afterwards of another day. Therefore, a sabbath rest still remains for the people of God. And whoever enters into God's rest, rests from his own works as God did from his. Therefore, let us strive to enter into that rest, so that no one may fall after the same example of disobedience. (Hebrews 4:4-11)
​

I have highlighted the area for you that seems to be ignored. How did God rest in the example He gave us if not on the Seventh day Sabbath? How is it disobedience if not breaking the 10 commandments of which the Sabbath is a part?
No matter how much you seek to avoid it, it will always be there for God,s truth will not be hid.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I have highlighted the area for you that seems to be ignored. How did God rest in the example He gave us if not on the Seventh day Sabbath? How is it disobedience if not breaking the 10 commandments of which the Sabbath is a part?
No matter how much you seek to avoid it, it will always be there for God,s truth will not be hid.

It does not say "a sabbath day rest still remains" it says "a sabbath rest still remains" and since sabbath means rest it is in fact referring to the rest that Christians enjoy in Christ.

ἄρα απολείπεται σαββατισμος τω λαω του Θεου.
ara apoleipetai sabbatismos to lao tou theou.
​

 

[MoreCoffee]

Nothing here except meaningless denominational religious diatribe, rant and discourse.

bugkiller

Very true. Very true indeed.

The massively misleading comments called "answers" to the artificial "questions" are taken from standard SDA books, things like "Bible readings for the home" and "answers to objections".

I do not criticise SDAs for having books that present their beliefs, nor for having apologists who compose answers to objections raised against their denomination's views. Those are a normal response to opposition. But it is altogether different to compose misleading "answers" by wresting scriptures out of context to make them serve a denominational agenda and ignoring the common usage of the phrase "the Lord's day" in ancient Christian literature.

SDA writers use the same techniques that I see in Watchtower magazine articles that try to prove that Jehovah's witnesses are teaching what the bible says and everybody else is biased or ignorant or even wicked.

 

[bugkiller]

I have highlighted the area for you that seems to be ignored. How did God rest in the example He gave us if not on the Seventh day Sabbath? How is it disobedience if not breaking the 10 commandments of which the Sabbath is a part?
No matter how much you seek to avoid it, it will always be there for God,s truth will not be hid.

I suggest a word study would be proper.

bugkiller

 

[Lysimachus]

It does not say "a sabbath day rest still remains" it says "a sabbath rest still remains" and since sabbath means rest it is in fact referring to the rest that Christians enjoy in Christ.

ἄρα απολείπεται σαββατισμος τω λαω του Θεου.
ara apoleipetai sabbatismos to lao tou theou.
​

I think the issue has more to do with the true meaning the Sabbath entails. In other words, Sabbath keeping is not just about resting on a day. It's about resting on the day, because the actual resting on that day symbolizes our rest in Christ.

Goldstein said it better than I could have:

New Covenant Rest

Clifford Goldstein

"So then, a Sabbath rest still remains for the people of God; for those who enter God’s rest also cease from their labors as God did from his. Let us therefore make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one may fall through such disobedience as theirs" (Heb. 4:9-11, NRSV).

Over the past few years some folks have questioned the seventh-day Sabbath. Their argument (as I understand it) goes like this: our true rest is found in Jesus Christ and in His completed work of salvation for us. Because our rest has been fulfilled in Christ, the seventh-day Sabbath, a symbol from the old covenant, has been superseded and, thus, abolished. It is now a legalistic work that robs us of the rest Christ offers us in the new covenant doctrine of grace.

Besides the obvious questions that this move, by default, raises—such as the seventh-day rest existing prior to the old covenant (Gen. 2:1-3), and the need to chisel out the fourth commandment from the Decalogue (while leaving the other nine firmly in stone)—there’s another one. How is it that the one commandment devoted to rest, the one commandment that specifically expresses rest, the one commandment that gives us a special opportunity to rest, has been turned into the universal "new covenant" symbol of works? The only commandment that, by its nature, is all about rest has become the iconic metaphor for salvation by works?

What’s wrong with this picture?

Far from being a symbol of works, the Sabbath is the Bible’s archetypical symbol of the rest that God’s people have always had in Him. From the pre-Fall world of Adam and Eve’s Eden, to the new covenant rest that God’s followers have in Christ’s work of redemption for them ("So then, a Sabbath rest still remains for the people of God" [Heb. 4:9]), the Sabbath is a real-time manifestation of the rest that Christ offers to all (Matt. 11:28).

Anyone can say they are resting in Christ; anyone can say they are saved by grace. But the keeping of the seventh-day Sabbath is a visible expression of that rest, a living parable of what it means to be covered by His grace. Our weekly rest from our secular, worldly works stands as a symbol of our rest in the completed work of Jesus for us. "For those who enter God’s rest also cease from their labors as God did from his." Our obedience to this commandment is a way of saying: "Hey, we’re so sure of our salvation in Jesus, we’re so firm and secure in what Christ has done for us, we can—in a special way—rest from any of our works because we know what Christ has accomplished for humanity through His death and resurrection."

It would seem that by firmly adhering to the commandments against adultery, or against stealing, or covetousness, or idolatry, we could be accused, at least a little more logically and reasonably, of legalism, of salvation by works (that is, if one could be accused of legalism for obeying any of the commandments). But we are legalists because we rest (rest!) on the seventh-day Sabbath?

The irony of it all: by resting we are accused of trying to work our way to heaven—an argument that makes about as much sense as a parricide pleading for mercy because he’s an orphan.

Somehow, Seventh-day Adventists have lost control of the dialogue and have found ourselves defending this weekly rest we have in Christ from the opprobrium of being antithetical to grace, of being an attempt at salvation by works. Yet by resting from our works according to the commandment we reveal just how real that grace is in our lives. We just don’t say we have that rest; we live it. The burden of proof, then, should be on those who—though claiming to rest in Christ’s grace—are missing out on the New Testament’s most obvious and practical expression of that grace, the seventh-day Sabbath.​

I will venture to further say that the author of Hebrews, which I believe was most likely Paul, is using the literal Sabbath day as a Symbol of our eternal rest in Christ Jesus, similarly to how he uses the Baptism as a symbol of our death, burial, and resurrection in Christ Jesus in Romans 6.

Just as the Sabbath Day is a symbol of our relationship and eternal rest in Christ Jesus, likewise, Baptism is a symbol of our rebirth experience, and death to the old man of sin.

But Paul's illustration is not in any way hinting that the physical keeping of the Sabbath is "eclipsed" by this eternal rest, anymore than the physical act of the ordinance of Baptism is eclipsed by the spiritual meaning of dying to self and walking in newness of life.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Lysimachus, it is okay to have symbols that tell us about Jesus Christ and the mysteries associated with his birth, life, ministry, death, resurrection, ascension, and reign in heaven. These are all helpful in their own way because they help to summarise the stories about Jesus that we have in the gospels and other new testament writings. But this idea that the sabbath is a symbol of the rest we have in Christ, a sabbath for which there was a commandment given to Israel and about which many rules were also given to Israel, is not helpful and it is not biblical. The passage I quoted for Elder 111 tells us that Christ is himself the one in whom we find our rest. What would be the point of retaining an old testament sign that pointed to Christ once Christ has already come and we need no signs to point to him because we know him?