Hypothetical Question

[EastCoastRemnant]

If there does come an enforced Sunday Law, what wouldl that mean to you? Would you chalk it up to coincidence and stay with your current beliefs (assuming they are non Sabbath keeping) or would you re-evaluate your non SDA beliefs?

 

[Byfaithalone1]

If there does come an enforced Sunday Law, what wouldl that mean to you? Would you chalk it up to coincidence and stay with your current beliefs (assuming they are non Sabbath keeping) or would you re-evaluate your non SDA beliefs?

According to SDA theology, it would be too late at that point -- wouldn't it? The midnight cry would have already happened and the foolish virgins would be without any oil in their lamps. If SDA theology is correct, it will be too late for us foolish virgins who spent our lives believing that salvation will always be by grace through faith and never by keeping the law.

Your post raises a question in my mind. What current events would lead us to believe that world governments are moving toward an enforced, worldwide law prohibiting worship on Saturday and requiring worship solely on Sunday?

BFA

 

[VictorC]

If there does come an enforced Sunday Law, what wouldl that mean to you? Would you chalk it up to coincidence and stay with your current beliefs (assuming they are non Sabbath keeping) or would you re-evaluate your non SDA beliefs?

The premise that you assume before the "if" is one that we have endeavored to satisfy in our theological perspective. That is, "if" a national Sunday law ever came to pass, what impact would it have on us?

None.

In order for a national Sunday law to have an effect, it would need to violate some law. The sabbath is reliant on the law ordained in the first covenant taken away by the Hand of God (see Hebrews 10:9 and its context), and a Sunday law is unable to violate the sabbath. That's for the simple reason that there is no sabbath commandment in the new covenant that Christianity affirms.

You cannot change a commandment unless that commandment has current jurisdiction. If you are to claim that you're bound to the sabbath, then it becomes necessary for you to be bound to the entire law that ordained it. The entrance fee is circumcision into that covenant, for it was given to no other people.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

You cannot change a commandment unless that commandment has current jurisdiction.

Seems reasonable. As I understand it, 2 Corinthians 3 seems to confirm that there is no current jurisdiction.

BFA

 

[VictorC]

Seems reasonable. As I understand it, 2 Corinthians 3 seems to confirm that there is no current jurisdiction.

BFA

That chapter reads like a commentary on Exodus 34, when Moses brought down the second issue of the covenant from Mount Sinai, the Ten Commandments. It concludes that former covenant to be the former glory that is exceeded by the ministry of the Spirit.

2 Corinthians 3 KJV
12 Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech:
13 And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished.​

Since the sabbath existed as a component of that former covenant, it met the same disposition as the covenant itself.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Then why would there be a need of a sunday Law... we already know of the blue laws and that there was before the senate or congress in the 1880's a bill to impose Sunday observance. The question was if it happened would it impact you, not to arge the merits of it happening.

BFA, the SDA understanding of the Sunday Law is that Adventists propbation would be closed unpon the implementation in the USA but that the time for the midnight cry. the third angels message would still be in effect for others until the law was made worldwide.

It follows the same pattern as probation on the Jews, first it was the corporate closing of probation in 34 AD, as fulfilled by prophesy, and then the destruction in 70 AD for those individuals that didn't heed the message of the abomination of desolation.

 

[VictorC]

Then why would there be a need of a sunday Law... we already know of the blue laws and that there was before the senate or congress in the 1880's a bill to impose Sunday observance. The question was if it happened would it impact you, not to arge the merits of it happening.

It would not affect anyone: "where there is no law there is no transgression" (Romans 4:15). That is the premise we're trying to get you to evaluate.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

I believe the Law is still in effect and therefore my belief is based on that.

So I guess I have you down as wouldn't change a thing...

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

It would not affect anyone: "where there is no law there is no transgression" (Romans 4:15). That is the premise we're trying to get you to evaluate.

That quote from Romans 4 I see differently than you... I guess thats what happens when the premise you are applying it against is different.

I see it as meaning that if I gain an advantage over another in a business transaction through intelligence or savvy, then that cannot be counted as transgression against me because there is no law against it. As long as I don't violate the tenets of the sixth, eighth or ninth commandment then it is lawful.

 

[VictorC]

That quote from Romans 4 I see differently than you... I guess thats what happens when the premise you are applying it against is different.

I see it as meaning that if I gain an advantage over another in a business transaction through intelligence or savvy, then that cannot be counted as transgression against me because there is no law against it. As long as I don't violate the tenets of the sixth, eighth or ninth commandment then it is lawful.

Romans 4 is one of the most important chapters in the Bible, because it expands on the lessons gained in the Law 430 years before the covenant from Mount Sinai was issued (that was the Ten Commandments and the book of the law). I feel that quoting the entire chapter would be best, but I will constrain myself to a paragraph to show what the author intended.

9 ¶ Does this blessedness then come upon the circumcised only, or upon the uncircumcised also? For we say that faith was accounted to Abraham for righteousness.
10 How then was it accounted? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised.
11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all those who believe, though they are uncircumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also,
12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also walk in the steps of the faith which our father Abraham had while still uncircumcised.
13 For the promise that he would be the heir of the world was not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
14 For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise made of no effect,
15 because the law brings about wrath; for where there is no law there is no transgression.
16 Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all...​

This chapter describes how righteousness was imputed to Abraham - by faith in God's promise, and not by compliance to any law.

Where we depart and see the meaning of a passage "differently" is because of the perceived relationship the children of Israel had with the covenant law that was given to them.

• The way I see it is that people didn't keep the law, but rather the law kept the people during its tenure. This is affirmed in Romans 7:6 and Galatians 3:23, using phrases such as "we were kept under the law" to describe what kept who.
• The way you see it appears to regard the law as a guide to abide by, rather than the tenor of a binding covenant that it was conveyed in. It isn't possible to transgress a guide, and there is no penalty for transgressions. That is not consistent with the constant on-demand rites of atonement used to reconcile individual transgressions done in ignorance (Leviticus 4), and the death penalty against those who willfully violated the law (Hebrews 10:28).

Having this departure of opinion regarding what kept who in the law mediated by Moses causes departures in conclusions. You're looking for an excuse to perform evil, and Romans 3:8 contains some strong words to address that charge. Your sin is imputed to you as long as you transgress the law, "but sin is not imputed when there is no law" as Romans 5:13 states. As long as the law retains jurisdiction over you, it concludes you "guilty before God" (Romans 3:19).

That's because the law keeps you.
You don't keep the law.
That was God's conclusion that there is no argument against: "God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all" (Romans 11:32).

God's redemption changed our relationship to the law as one in the past-tense.

Galatians 4:4-5
But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.​

If the law was only a mere guide for clean living, then this change from the law keeping those who are lost to God's adoption of those who are saved as His own children would not exist.

 

[from scratch]

If there does come an enforced Sunday Law, what wouldl that mean to you? Would you chalk it up to coincidence and stay with your current beliefs (assuming they are non Sabbath keeping) or would you re-evaluate your non SDA beliefs?

I am not sure if you are addressing the SDA or the non SDA. My answer is No I would not reconsider the SDA position.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

In another thread I laid out my reasonings for my belief in keeping the Law...

Proof: New Testament endorses Sabbath (Saturday): post #30

Basically, no one can keep the Law for it is perfect and we are not. Only Christ can bridge the difference... but that doesn't mean we aren't to follow the precepts of the Law. Not to be justified by keeping them but to reveal our sinful nature and to repent of our deep hidden sins as the Holy Spirit makes them known to us by the standard of the Law.


It's interesting that it is so clear to me yet foolishness to you...

 

[from scratch]

Then why would there be a need of a sunday Law... we already know of the blue laws and that there was before the senate or congress in the 1880's a bill to impose Sunday observance. The question was if it happened would it impact you, not to arge the merits of it happening.

BFA, the SDA understanding of the Sunday Law is that Adventists propbation would be closed unpon the implementation in the USA but that the time for the midnight cry. the third angels message would still be in effect for others until the law was made worldwide.

It follows the same pattern as probation on the Jews, first it was the corporate closing of probation in 34 AD, as fulfilled by prophesy, and then the destruction in 70 AD for those individuals that didn't heed the message of the abomination of desolation.

See Victor's first post.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

I am not sure if you are addressing the SDA or the non SDA.

Both really... for the person that doesn't believe the truth of the significance of the Sunday law. Would they question that belief...

 

[VictorC]

In another thread I laid out my reasonings for my belief in keeping the Law...

Proof: New Testament endorses Sabbath (Saturday): post #30

Basically, no one can keep the Law for it is perfect and we are not. Only Christ can bridge the difference... but that doesn't mean we aren't to follow the precepts of the Law. Not to be justified by keeping them but to reveal our sinful nature and to repent of our deep hidden sins as the Holy Spirit makes them known to us by the standard of the Law.


It's interesting that it is so clear to me yet foolishness to you...

But you don't keep the law, and you admit it when you state that no one can keep it.

And no, the New Testament does not endorse the sabbath - it endorses our entrance into God's rest instead.

I am sorry that you have not entered into God's rest, and have chosen to remain in the sabbath shadow that pointed to God's rest. That shadow exists only in the first covenant mediated by Moses (the ten commandments) and not outside of it. Those who remain in Sinai will expire, just like that covenant did when it was replaced by God's new covenant in the Blood of Jesus: "Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.”" (Galatians 4:30).

Those retained unredeemed by the law have no claim to eternal life. That was apparent in Romans 4:13-14, quoted in the longer post I addressed to you, as they appeal to works by which righteousness is not imputed to them.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

Then why would there be a need of a sunday Law...

There is no need. That's why we've never seen a worldwide Sunday law and we've seen no indications that the world is heading toward adopting one.

BFA, the SDA understanding of the Sunday Law is that Adventists propbation would be closed unpon the implementation in the USA but that the time for the midnight cry. the third angels message would still be in effect for others until the law was made worldwide.

I have heard this explanation, but many SDAs view the chronology differently.

BFA

 

[Princessdi]

Being born and raised SDA, I know the doctrine as far as the sunday law is concerned. However, that law is based only on the activities and mergin of the church and governments. What it idoesn't take into account is the power of big business.

A little known fact is that it is common knowledge in retail that Sunday edges out Saturday as the biggest shopping day on a regular basis...I don't see retailerw giving that up. Not to mention sunday is the day of professional football, major league baseball(they all have games other days, but we all know that Sundays are big days), etc. I really don't see them even trying to move to another day.

Whenever we call oursleves having a big scare in the area of the Sunday Blue Law, I listen to see if big business is on board. if not, we're good.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

When satan appears as an angel of light, to impersonate Christ, and advocates for the observance of Sunday, it will happen.

 

[VictorC]

When satan appears as an angel of light, to impersonate Christ, and advocates for the observance of Sunday, it will happen.

Where do you make up this junk?

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Where do you make up this junk?

As I've said before, non SDA's won't understand what we believe... this isn't my personal theory
.