Focused discussion--Are the Sabbaths of Col 2 weekly or yearly?

[tall73]

1. As we both know - the Deut 5 incident is 40 years AFTER sinai and merely adds to what God spoke from the mountain -- it is not a replacement.

Exo 20:2 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.

The theme of God being the one who brought them out of slavery, and therefore imposing covenant requirements on them was also in Exodus.

And whether you think it was in addition or not is not really the point. The point is that the Sabbath, like the passover, pointed backwards and forwards. Backward to creation and redemption from Egypt, and forwards to rest in salvation and eventual restoration of the rest of Eden.

2. There is no way God could have 'made sabbath holy in Gen 2 by telling Adam about deliverance from Egypt" Which means that the "holy Day" of Gen 2:1-3 had only one application for "all mankind" when it was "Made for mankind" not "mankind Made for it".

There is no mention of God tellng Adam ANYTHING about the day in Eden. God rested on the 7th day of creation and blessed it because HE rested from His labors. No doubt He spent that holy day with His creation. No doubt there was wonderful fellowship with Adam and Eve on their first day of life. But there was no mystery about why it was holy-because God finished the creation.

Nor was there any command to commemorate it at that point every week. God rested, and the day on which He rested the 7th of creation, was blessed and holy.

Later God made a memorial of this as a covenant sign with Israel and it involved both the release from Egypt (as a reminder of God's provision) and God as Creator.

Now as for the sabbath being made there is no reference to the sabbath being made until Exodus.

The sabbath made for man not man for the sabbath is indicative of the purpose of the Sabbath. The rules that had been piled around it by the pharisees made it seem as though man had been made to honor the sabbath, rather than the sabbath to be a time of rest for man. But it is still very much in the context of the dispute between Jesus' disciples and pharisees. And Jesus point is the purpose of the Sabbath, not the scope of the Sabbath being for all mankind. He simply says that they misunderstood the rest in the first place.

Now there was a rest in Eden, no doubt. But it did not end. God has been at rest since:

Heb 4:1 Therefore, while the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us fear lest any of you should seem to have failed to reach it.
Heb 4:2 For good news came to us just as to them, but the message they heard did not benefit them, because they were not united by faith with those who listened.
Heb 4:3 For we who have believed enter that rest, as he has said, "As I swore in my wrath, 'They shall not enter my rest,'" although his works were finished from the foundation of the world.
Heb 4:4 For he has somewhere spoken of the seventh day in this way: "And God rested on the seventh day from all his works."
Heb 4:5 And again in this passage he said, "They shall not enter my rest."
Heb 4:6 Since therefore it remains for some to enter it, and those who formerly received the good news failed to enter because of disobedience,
Heb 4:7 again he appoints a certain day, "Today," saying through David so long afterward, in the words already quoted, "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts."
Heb 4:8 For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken of another day later on.
Heb 4:9 So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God,
Heb 4:10 for whoever has entered God's rest has also rested from his works as God did from his.

Adam and Eve at first enjoyed that rest, but then lost it through sin. It is open to each person "today." It is the rest that God entered from all His work. And we too may enter it and be with Him. But it is not the once per week symbol of creation that God gave to Israel. It is the rest of salvation, of Eden restored, which was never meant to be lost.

The problem is that you cannot show any command of God or any suggestion by God that there was any ongoing weekly memorial every 7th day until He Himself instituted it in Exodus.

The command in Exodus hearkens back to God's rest and blessing of that 7th day of creation. But the sign based on that is one for Israel.

Exo 31:16 Therefore the people of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, observing the Sabbath throughout their generations, as a covenant forever.
Exo 31:17 It is a sign forever between me and the people of Israel that in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed.'"
Exo 31:18 And he gave to Moses, when he had finished speaking with him on Mount Sinai, the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written with the finger of God.

It was a sign with Israel, given by God, in the midst of the covenant document, as a reminder of His provision for them.

But you cannot point to any such observance before then of the Sabbath on a weekly commemorative basis and no mention of it was made in Eden at all.

3. Ex 20:8-11 does not say "Now I make the 7th day holy" rather it says that in Eden God "made it Holy"

Yes, and it also says on the 6th day He did such and such, and on the fifth day, etc.

He made the 7th day of creation holy as a time to rejoice in His completed creation work. Please show where it says He made a commemorative law for man that would come around every week on the 7th day, would involve all the regulations that the Sabbath law in Exodus had, etc. It is not there. There is not the slightest mention of it. God rested on, made holy, and blessed the 7th day of Creation. And His rest continued from there. We were meant to remain in it and now can enter into it by faith, "today."

We gentiles still use that same application - but we have no idea that God was telling Adam about a future Redeemer in Gen 2:1-3 which is why we see no reference to it in Ex 20:8-11 as God Himself speaks it from Sinai.

There is not doubt that Moses is correct in stating that Israel had an additional reason to honor Christ's Holy out of special national gratitude for deliverance from Egypt (that had nothing to do with a 7 day cycle at all)

Indeed the exodus explanation had nothing to do with a weekly cycle. It is a sign with Israel in the middle of their covenant. God was their Creator and Redeemer, and He made a sign for them to remind them of their relationship to Him.

How so?

Do we "judge people on image worship"?? I don't think so.

Do we "judge people on praying to the dead"?? I don't think so.

Do we "judge people for breaking God's memorial of His Creative work" - no.

We simply point to what the Bible says and let each person decide for themselves.



They are not to judge because as Christ said in Matt 7 PRE-CROSS "judge not that you be not judged".

The "judge not" argument of Paul is in perfect harmony with the pre-cross position on this error.

in Christ,

Bob

Now, as to Jesus' statement of judge not lest ye be judged, does not Paul say to expel the wicked brother among you? But members of the church were to go to someone who was sinning. Paul says that the Corinthians were to judge the wicked among them who called themselves brothers. But Paul says here not to let any man judge you because these are shadows.

The weekly Sabbath here is lumped right in with the feasts etc. which were not bound on gentiles. Therefore there is no reason to judge them on it.

 

[tall73]

The 7th-day Sabbath in Lev 23 is said to be a Sabbath of "holy convocation" but is not called a feast in Lev 23 and in fact is not a feast.

The Day of Atonement in Lev 23 is said to be a "Sabbath of holy convocation" but is not said to be a "feast" in Lev 23.

The Jubilie rest every 7th year is a Sabbath that is also not a "feast" as John Gill points out.

The translators of NASB and Young's Literal Translation appear to be correct in Lev 23:2, 4 with the term "appointed times" (translit - Miqra') and then in vs 6 "FEAST of Unleavened Bread" (translit - Chag) for that which is actually a feast day.

in Christ,

Bob

There are both Hebrew and Greek terms to look at here.

First of all please note that Miqra (Hebrew) and chag(Hebrew) are both types of moed (Hebrew) at the beginning of the chapter. And moed (Hebrew) is rendered εορται (Greek) in Leviticus 23, which is the listing of all the εορται of the Lord .

All of the appointed times are called moed(Hebrew)/εορται(Greek) in verse 4:

Lev 23:4 "These are the appointed feasts (εορτα&#953(moed) of the LORD, the holy convocations, which you shall proclaim at the time appointed for them.

Moed is translated εορται in verse 4 in the Greek. All of the moed, the appointed times for Israel, are εορται.

Lev 23:4 Αὗται αἱ ἑορταὶ τῷ κυρίῳ, κληταὶ ἅγιαι, ἃς καλέσετε αὐτὰς ἐν τοῖς καιροῖς αὐτῶν.

All of the appointed times after verse 4 in the whole chapter are called εορται which is the word we see in Colossians.

Col 2:16 Μὴ οὖν τις ὑμᾶς κρινέτω ἐν βρώσει ἢ ἐν πόσει ἢ ἐν μέρει ἑορτῆς ἢ νεομηνίας ἢ σαββάτων,

Therefore the Day of Atonement is one of the εορται of the Lord. They are all the appointed times of the Lord.

 

[Adventtruth]

3. Ex 20:8-11 does not say "Now I make the 7th day holy" rather it says that in Eden God "made it Holy"

Here's a very good example of those adding to what is already written. This is a good example of how we lose sight of the truth.

AT

 

[tall73]

By the way Bob, you said elsewhere that there was no requirement for gentiles to keep feasts in the OT but that is not entirely true.


(Lev 16:29) And this shall be a statute for ever unto you: that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, ye shall afflict your souls, and do no work at all, whether it be one of your own country, or a stranger that sojourneth among you:
Lev 16:30 For on that day shall the priest make an atonement for you, to cleanse you, that ye may be clean from all your sins before the LORD.

Here we see the stranger sojourning with them was required to afflict his soul and not do any work, taking part in the day of atonement just as the stranger sojourning kept the Sabbath.

 

[Restin]

Here's a very good example of those adding to what is already written. This is a good example of how we lose sight of the truth.

AT

Are we 'adding to what is written' ......?

No doubt He spent that holy day with His creation. No doubt there was wonderful fellowship with Adam and Eve on their first day of life. But there was no mystery about why it was holy-because God finished the creation.

From traditional views, EGW and growing up as SDA, I thought of Adam and Eve as this describes!
But, where is scripture evidence about Adam and Eve 'fellowshiping with God' on their 'first day'
before they sinned... Question - Is the church like mother Eve? -- it adds to the word of God.

Adam and Eve at first enjoyed that rest, but then lost it through sin.

Sorry, scripture does not say or even refer to the point of Adam and Eve 'enjoying' any 'rest'!
It does say they were put outside the garden gate, after eating the forbidden fruit.

Not picking on tall73 or EGW, I have done the same, many times past, for which, I repent!

Peace...Restin

 

[BobRyan]

By the way Bob, you said elsewhere that there was no requirement for gentiles to keep feasts in the OT but that is not entirely true.


(Lev 16:29) And this shall be a statute for ever unto you: that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, ye shall afflict your souls, and do no work at all, whether it be one of your own country, or a stranger that sojourneth among you:
Lev 16:30 For on that day shall the priest make an atonement for you, to cleanse you, that ye may be clean from all your sins before the LORD.

Here we see the stranger sojourning with them was required to afflict his soul and not do any work, taking part in the day of atonement just as the stranger sojourning kept the Sabbath.

Agreed. A Gentile who just so happens to stay with a Jew on ANY of those Holy Days in the OT - could not violate the protocol of his host. They would have to behave in a way that did not delete the observance being honored by their host.

We are also told in Ex 20:8-11 that the stranger that is staying in your house each WEEK would have to refrain from violating the Sabbath.

A careful review of Acts 15 will reveal that "gentiles visiting Jewish homes" was totally not the subject of that chapter.



in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

3. Ex 20:8-11 does not say "Now I make the 7th day holy" rather it says that in Eden God "made it Holy"

In fact you get that BOTH in Ex 20 AND in Gen 2:1-3
​

Here's a very good example of those adding to what is already written.

AT

How so?

(Exegesis please)

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Bob
The 7th-day Sabbath in Lev 23 is said to be a Sabbath of "holy convocation" but is not called a feast in Lev 23 and in fact is not a feast.

The Day of Atonement in Lev 23 is said to be a "Sabbath of holy convocation" but is not said to be a "feast" in Lev 23.

The Jubilie rest every 7th year is a Sabbath that is also not a "feast" as John Gill points out.

The translators of NASB and Young's Literal Translation appear to be correct in Lev 23:2, 4 with the term "appointed times" (translit - Miqra') and then in vs 6 "FEAST of Unleavened Bread" (translit - Chag) for that which is actually a feast day.

There are both Hebrew and Greek terms to look at here.

First of all please note that Miqra (Hebrew) and chag(Hebrew) are both types of moed (Hebrew) at the beginning of the chapter. And moed (Hebrew) is rendered εορται (Greek) in Leviticus 23, which is the listing of all the εορται of the Lord .

All of the appointed times are called moed(Hebrew)/εορται(Greek) in verse 4:

Lev 23:4 "These are the appointed feasts (εορτα&#953(moed) of the LORD, the holy convocations, which you shall proclaim at the time appointed for them.


Moed is translated εορται in verse 4 in the Greek. All of the moed, the appointed times for Israel, are εορται.

Lev 23:4 Αὗται αἱ ἑορταὶ τῷ κυρίῳ, κληταὶ ἅγιαι, ἃς καλέσετε αὐτὰς ἐν τοῖς καιροῖς αὐτῶν.

All of the appointed times after verse 4 in the whole chapter are called εορται which is the word we see in Colossians.

Col 2:16 Μὴ οὖν τις ὑμᾶς κρινέτω ἐν βρώσει ἢ ἐν πόσει ἢ ἐν μέρει ἑορτῆς ἢ νεομηνίας ἢ σαββάτων,

Therefore the Day of Atonement is one of the εορται of the Lord. They are all the appointed times of the Lord.

1. You are mixing the LXX with the Hebrew. I have no problem at all admitting that the Hebrew in this instance contains a greater range of meaning. And thus the NASB, Youngs, Holman and CEV translators (from Hebrew) are ALL correct in rendering the whole set "Appointed times" while differentiating vs 6 "Feast" or "Festival" of unleavened bread.

NASB

2"Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, 'The LORD'S appointed times which you shall proclaim as holy convocations--My appointed times are these:
3'For six days work may be done, but on the seventh day there is a sabbath of complete rest, a holy convocation. You shall not do any work; it is a sabbath to the LORD in all your dwellings.
4'These are the appointed times of the LORD, holy convocations which you shall proclaim at the times appointed for them.
5'In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at twilight is the LORD'S Passover. 6'Then on the fifteenth day of the same month there is the Feast of Unleavened Bread to the LORD; for seven days you shall eat unleavened bread.

2. Mow'ed vs 4 - does not argue that they can only be feasts - so again the NASB is correct in selecting consisently differentiating Mow'ed "Appointed Times" -- vs Chaq (Feasts) in the chapter.

Mow'ed



appointed place, appointed time, meeting

1. appointed time
   1. appointed time (general)
   2. sacred season, set feast, appointed season
2. appointed meeting
3. appointed place
4. appointed sign or signal
5. tent of meeting

This is particularly signifcant when you notice the way the Hebrew writers are also consistent in switching to much more restricted Chaq - when Feast is what is actually happening.

Chaq

festival, feast, festival-gathering, pilgrim-feast

1. feast
2. festival sacrifice

3. If your position requires that you take on these Bible translators and recommend the LXX over Hebrew - so be it. I am not comfortable going that route but I can understand why you may feel you have to take on that task.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan

1. As we both know - the Deut 5 incident is 40 years AFTER sinai and merely adds to what God spoke from the mountain -- it is not a replacement.
​

Tall73

Exo 20:2 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.

The theme of God being the one who brought them out of slavery, and therefore imposing covenant requirements on them was also in Exodus.

True. And yet it is instructive that when God Himself speaks the 4th commandment He makes no mention at all of that slavery-in-Egypt fact to explain or define the 7th day of the week as a Holy Day. (good lesson on thought inspiration vs verbal inspiration I guess)

Deut 5 is clearly a paraphrase 40 years "after the fact" where the paraphrase itself is clearly taking liberties -- KNOWING that the reader also has the book of Exodus.

As in the case with all Bible topics - the added "memorial" information for Sabbath is being added not replaced. And in this case it is being added for Israel who alone experienced that release from Egypt. Moses is not arguing that Adam in the Gen 2:3 time would have viewed the 7th day of the week - The Holy Day of God this way.

And whether you think it was in addition or not is not really the point.

How so? If we are looking at the "scope and purpose" of the day in Gen 2:1-3 then having Moses coming along 2000 years later and add additional significance to the day for Israel is an important "detail" but does not revise the context that Adam would have had for the "Sabbath MADE for mankind" when both the Sabbath and Mankind were Made.

The point is that the Sabbath, like the passover, pointed backwards and forwards.

1. By adding "yet another backward memorial" for Sabbath (release from Egypt) Moses did nothing to delete the permanent memorial of the Creation event. It was not a replacement of the Sabbath commandment - because the Sabbath commandment REMAINED in the Ex 20:8-11 form -- as it does today.

2. The Sabbath was not based in shadow-sacrifices as given in Gen 2:3 or in Ex 16 or in Ex 20.

3. By contrast - the Passover from it's very inception and definition is based in forward-pointing shaddow sacrifice. So it is that deleting the Animal sacrifice pointing to Christ in the Passover -- deletes passover.

This detail is also instructive for the reader I would think.

The scope of obligatory observance for Sabbath was from Gen 2:3 "All mankind" as Christ affirms in Mark chapter 2 (and will continue in that way as we see in Isaiah 66 for all eternity) - so again there is a distinction for a day that is not a feast day, not a feastival - but is a day of "Holy Convocation" and does point back in time.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[sentipente]

I want someone to give me a good reason why it cannot be both. I think we run into problems because we over-interpret "let no one judge you."

 

[Byfaithalone1]

I want someone to give me a good reason why it cannot be both.

I was wondering the same thing.

BFA

 

[tall73]

1. You are mixing the LXX with the Hebrew. I have no problem at all admitting that the Hebrew in this instance contains a greater range of meaning. And thus the NASB, Youngs, Holman and CEV translators (from Hebrew) are ALL correct in rendering the whole set "Appointed times" while differentiating vs 6 "Feast" or "Festival" of unleavened bread.



2. Mow'ed vs 4 - does not argue that they can only be feasts - so again the NASB is correct in selecting consisently differentiating Mow'ed "Appointed Times" -- vs Chaq (Feasts) in the chapter.



This is particularly signifcant when you notice the way the Hebrew writers are also consistent in switching to much more restricted Chaq - when Feast is what is actually happening.




3. If your position requires that you take on these Bible translators and recommend the LXX over Hebrew - so be it. I am not comfortable going that route but I can understand why you may feel you have to take on that task.

in Christ,

Bob

Huh? Bob, the word in Col. is is Greek. We have no choice but to look at the Greek. Col. was not written in Hebrew.

 

[tall73]

2. The Sabbath was not based in shadow-sacrifices as given in Gen 2:3 or in Ex 16 or in Ex 20.

3. By contrast - the Passover from it's very inception and definition is based in forward-pointing shaddow sacrifice. So it is that deleting the Animal sacrifice pointing to Christ in the Passover -- deletes passover.

The passover was given to remember the Exodus.

Exo 12:14 And this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast to the LORD throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever.
Exo 12:15 Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses: for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel.
Exo 12:16 And in the first day there shall be an holy convocation, and in the seventh day there shall be an holy convocation to you; no manner of work shall be done in them, save that which every man must eat, that only may be done of you.
Exo 12:17 And ye shall observe the feast of unleavened bread; for in this selfsame day have I brought your armies out of the land of Egypt: therefore shall ye observe this day in your generations by an ordinance for ever.



We know from later texts it also pointed forward to Jesus. And we know from Jesus' account at the last supper that it still had another application pointing forward to the kingdom.


Just as the Sabbath in Ex. was given to remember the Sabbath. But we know from later texts it also pointed to the Exodus. And we know from Hebrews that God's rest was also indicative of salvation.

The scope of obligatory observance for Sabbath was from Gen 2:3 "All mankind" as Christ affirms in Mark chapter 2 (and will continue in that way as we see in Isaiah 66 for all eternity) - so again there is a distinction for a day that is not a feast day, not a feastival - but is a day of "Holy Convocation" and does point back in time.

in Christ,

Bob

Isaiah 66 talks about offerirings, levites, priests and new moons. Which you conveniently overlook.


Now as for the feat term, again, you look at the Hebrew, but Col. was not written in Hebrew but in Greek. Therefore there is no avoiding looking at the Greek. And the same term in the Greek in Col. refers to all of the appointed times in Lev. 23.

 

[tall73]

I want someone to give me a good reason why it cannot be both. I think we run into problems because we over-interpret "let no one judge you."

It could be all sabbaths, but the most likely is the weekly as the others were taken in by feast and the progression is from yearly to weekly.

 

[BobRyan]

Huh? Bob, the word in Col. is is Greek. We have no choice but to look at the Greek. Col. was not written in Hebrew.

True enough. But in Lev 23 we have the luxury of translating directly from Hebrew to English - and there as we see in NASB, and Holman and Young's and CEV ... etc the "appointed times" designation is clearly seen vs those subset of days in that Lev 23 list where "feasts" are actually occuring.

Therefore it is not too surprising that a list would use the same formual of "feasts and Sabbaths" that to reference that list of annual "appointed times" just as that same phrase is used in the OT.

What I find interesting is that we have Sunday-keeping Bible scholars like J-F-B agreeing that the Col 2 reference is to the feasts and Sabbaths of the Lev 23 annual "Appointed times" and not the 7th day Sabbath of the Ten Commandments.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Bob said -

Adam Clarke –

Col 2:16-17

Verse 16
Let no man-judge you in meat, or in drink

The apostle speaks here in reference to some particulars of the hand-writing of ordinances, which had been taken away, viz., the distinction of meats and drinks, what was clean and what unclean, according to the law; and the necessity of observing certain holydays or festivals, such as the new moons and particular sabbaths, or those which should be observed with more than ordinary solemnity; all these had been taken out of the way and nailed to the cross, and were no longer of moral obligation.
There is no intimation here that the Sabbath was done away, or that its moral use was superseded, by the introduction of Christianity
I have shown elsewhere that, Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy, is a command of perpetual obligation, and can never be superseded but by the final termination of time. As it is a type of that rest which remains for the people of God, of an eternity of bliss, it must continue in full force till that eternity arrives; for no type ever ceases till the antitype be come. Besides, it is not clear that the apostle refers at all to the Sabbath in this place, whether Jewish or Christian; his σαββατων, of sabbaths or weeks, most probably refers to their feasts of weeks, of which much has been said in the notes on the Pentateuch.

Bob,

Clarke himself says that the Sabbath points forward to the rest to come. Remember the text is speaking of shadows of things to come.

But Clarke really is not on your side in any case. Notice what he says about Rev. 1:

Verse 10. I was in the Spirit] That is, I received the Spirit of prophecy, and was under its influence when the first vision was exhibited.
The Lord's day] The first day of the week, observed as the Christian Sabbath, because on it Jesus Christ rose from the dead; therefore it was called the Lord's day, and has taken place of the Jewish Sabbath throughout the Christian world.

He thought that Sunday took over the Sabbath rest.
.

The fact that this point is so clear that even a pro-Sunday Bible scholar ALSO agrees with me that Col 2 is a reference to feasts and annual Sabbaths -- is not as much a problem for my view as it is for yours, if you think about it.

In fact that is "why" I bring people like that up as examples -- rather than quoting a fellow Sabbath-keeping source.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[sentipente]

It could be all sabbaths, but the most likely is the weekly as the others were taken in by feast and the progression is from yearly to weekly.

You are making an assumption about how the writer was thinking.

 

[tall73]

You are making an assumption about how the writer was thinking.

An assumption supported by other statements by the same author, such as in Galatians 4.

 

[tall73]

The fact that this point is so clear that even a pro-Sunday Bible scholar ALSO agrees with me that Col 2 is a reference to feasts and annual Sabbaths -- is not as much a problem for my view as it is for yours, if you think about it.

In fact that is "why" I bring people like that up as examples -- rather than quoting a fellow Sabbath-keeping source.

in Christ,

Bob

Actually it is not convincing that you quote someone who believes in Sunday Sabbath because

a. he still has an interest in upholding the Sabbath, just as transferred to another day.

b. he does not see that the Sabbath was clearly not Sunday, which means he is certainly not without flaws in his conclusions.

Now if a great scholar concludes that Sunday is to be observed, will you agree with him on the basis that he is a great scholar?

 

[tall73]

But while we are mentioning scholars on the other side of the argument, you might be surprised at some of the Adventist scholars who do not agree with you.

Ron Du Preez, an Adventist scholar, in his book "Putting the Sabbath to Rest" states that at least 15 Seventh-day Adventist scholars since 1985 have taken the view that the weekly Sabbath is in view based on the progression from yearly to weekly. Here are the ones I found to be most notable on that list: Rodriguez of the Biblical Research Institute, Bacchiocchi, Gerhard Hasel, Herbert E. Douglas, Alden Thompson, Erwin Gane, Wiliam Richardson. He also mentioned Desmond Ford, who is no longer officially an Adventist but is still a strong sabbatarian.