OT Feasts

[visionary]

Manuscript Releases Volume Eight, page 244, paragraph 2
Chapter Title: The Investigative Judgment
When speaking to congregations, there is always before me the final judgment, which is to be held in the presence of the world, when the law of God's government is to be vindicated, His name glorified, His wisdom acknowledged and testified of as just to believers and unbelievers. This is not the judgment of one person, nor of a nation, but of a whole world of intelligent beings, of all orders, of all characters. The judgment takes place first upon the dead, then upon the living, then the whole universe will be assembled to hear the sentence. I feel as if I were in the presence of the whole universe of heaven, bearing my message for time and for eternity.--Letter 109, 1898, p. 4. (To Brother Moon, November 29, 1898.)

 

[JoyfulChristian]

For me, Colossians 2:16 is THE eye-opener regarding the Feasts of the Lord. The word used for "sabbath" is the Greek word "Sabbaton." All uses of Sabbaton in the New Testament refer to the seventh-day Sabbath. In Colossians 2:16, Paul "strings together" the dietary laws (Leviticus), the Feasts of the Lord (as determined by the New Moons), and the seventh-day Sabbath. Whatever we do to one, we do the the rest of this list.

It is clear from Acts 18:21 and I Corinthians 5:12 that Paul continued to observe and advocated for the observance of the Feasts of the Lord. This is borne out in history -- even into the 3rd and 4th century Christians were still observing the Feasts -- why else would the Council of Nicea feel the need to ban Christians from observing "the Jewish superstitions?" And remember, this ban included observance of the seventh-day Sabbath.

The law shows us we are sinners; the Feasts of the Lord show us God's plan of salvation. Christ is the Substance of the Feasts. We know who the Passover Lamb is. The Feasts of the Lord are God's religious calendar, to help us keep focused throughout the year on Jesus Christ and what He has done for us and is planning to do for us.

When Ellen White speaks of the "rites and ceremonies" which ended at the cross, keep reading and she invariably talks about the sacrificial system. Paul also says that the animal sacrifices were the "type" which met the "anti-type" at the cross. Christ's sacrifice is the final, effectual sacrifice and the cross did away with the animal sacrificial system which pointed to Christ and His sacrifice. This, however, does not do away with the Feasts and their intended function -- to point us to Christ. In the Feasts, we see Messiah as Creator, Redeemer, Prophet, Priest and King. Remember, the seventh-day Sabbath is the first Feast of the Lord listed in Leviticus 23.

Unfortunately, too many people would rather observe the pagan festivals of Easter and Christmas, and call them Christian. Read Exodus 32 if you want to see how God feels about worshipping Him in a pagan fashion. Aaron not only made the golden calf, but "Aaron made a proclamation and said 'Tommorow is a feast to the Lord.' Then they rose early on the next day, offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play." Exodus 32:5-6.

Jesus promised His disciples that He would observe Passover with them in the Kingdom. Zechariah 14:16 says that the Feast of Tabernacles will be observed in the New Earth. Isaiah 66:22 says " 'From one New Moon to another and from one Sabbath to another all flesh shall come to worship before Me,' says the Lord." Why the New Moons? They are the markers for the Feasts of the Lord -- the moon is God's timepiece for the annual Feasts.

We have a choice: do we follow a religious calendar based on pagan festivals, or do we follow God's religious calendar -- the Feasts of the Lord. This is not salvation by works -- it is participating in the blessings which God designed should be obtained by focusing on the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[visionary]

For me, Colossians 2:16 is THE eye-opener regarding the Feasts of the Lord. The word used for "sabbath" is the Greek word "Sabbaton." All uses of Sabbaton in the New Testament refer to the seventh-day Sabbath. In Colossians 2:16, Paul "strings together" the dietary laws (Leviticus), the Feasts of the Lord (as determined by the New Moons), and the seventh-day Sabbath. Whatever we do to one, we do the the rest of this list.

It is clear from Acts 18:21 and I Corinthians 5:12 that Paul continued to observe and advocated for the observance of the Feasts of the Lord. This is borne out in history -- even into the 3rd and 4th century Christians were still observing the Feasts -- why else would the Council of Nicea feel the need to ban Christians from observing "the Jewish superstitions?" And remember, this ban included observance of the seventh-day Sabbath.

The law shows us we are sinners; the Feasts of the Lord show us God's plan of salvation. Christ is the Substance of the Feasts. We know who the Passover Lamb is. The Feasts of the Lord are God's religious calendar, to help us keep focused throughout the year on Jesus Christ and what He has done for us and is planning to do for us.

When Ellen White speaks of the "rites and ceremonies" which ended at the cross, keep reading and she invariably talks about the sacrificial system. Paul also says that the animal sacrifices were the "type" which met the "anti-type" at the cross. Christ's sacrifice is the final, effectual sacrifice and the cross did away with the animal sacrificial system which pointed to Christ and His sacrifice. This, however, does not do away with the Feasts and their intended function -- to point us to Christ. In the Feasts, we see Messiah as Creator, Redeemer, Prophet, Priest and King. Remember, the seventh-day Sabbath is the first Feast of the Lord listed in Leviticus 23.

Unfortunately, too many people would rather observe the pagan festivals of Easter and Christmas, and call them Christian. Read Exodus 32 if you want to see how God feels about worshipping Him in a pagan fashion. Aaron not only made the golden calf, but "Aaron made a proclamation and said 'Tommorow is a feast to the Lord.' Then they rose early on the next day, offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play." Exodus 32:5-6.

Jesus promised His disciples that He would observe Passover with them in the Kingdom. Zechariah 14:16 says that the Feast of Tabernacles will be observed in the New Earth. Isaiah 66:22 says " 'From one New Moon to another and from one Sabbath to another all flesh shall come to worship before Me,' says the Lord." Why the New Moons? They are the markers for the Feasts of the Lord -- the moon is God's timepiece for the annual Feasts.

We have a choice: do we follow a religious calendar based on pagan festivals, or do we follow God's religious calendar -- the Feasts of the Lord. This is not salvation by works -- it is participating in the blessings which God designed should be obtained by focusing on the Lord Jesus Christ.

Very good.... well said

 

[DanPev]

Well this is your opinion and my answering will only bring futile debate and arguing. Futile because you guys will never change your minds; I can only hope that the Spirit of truth will guide you into all truth.

What matters is not whether we keep the feasts or not, whether we eat meat or not, or what kind of music we listen to. There is only ONE THING that matters, and that is JESUS. All these other things only bring debate and confusion and get our minds off of HIM. In the end what matters is that I have a relationship with Him, I can keep all these feasts and still be lost if I don't mantain the relationship.

Keep these rites and ceremonies if you like, I just want to see you in heaven, if we are both there then we can settle this disagreement once and for all!

Peace out!

 

[visionary]

Well this is your opinion and my answering will only bring futile debate and arguing. Futile because you guys will never change your minds; I can only hope that the Spirit of truth will guide you into all truth.

What matters is not whether we keep the feasts or not, whether we eat meat or not, or what kind of music we listen to. There is only ONE THING that matters, and that is JESUS. All these other things only bring debate and confusion and get our minds off of HIM. In the end what matters is that I have a relationship with Him, I can keep all these feasts and still be lost if I don't mantain the relationship.

Keep these rites and ceremonies if you like, I just want to see you in heaven, if we are both there then we can settle this disagreement once and for all!

Peace out!

It is true that keeping rites and ceremonies will gain you nothing if you are not keeping it in the spirit in which it was intended.

Hebrews 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

so what is this shadow of things to come? ......

Colossians 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: 17Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

which to see how Christ will fulfill them... For some people studying them helps then learn how Christ is in it. For others it is experiencing it, that opens up their eyes as to how Christ is in these feasts. Then the rest of us need both.

 

[teamn00bs]

Interesting facts ...

 

[YeshuamySalvation]

It is true that keeping rites and ceremonies will gain you nothing if you are not keeping it in the spirit in which it was intended.

Hebrews 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

so what is this shadow of things to come?
Colossians 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: 17Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. ......which to see how Christ will fulfill them... For some people studying them helps then learn how Christ is in it. For others it is experiencing it, that opens up their eyes as to how Christ is in these feasts. Then the rest of us need both.

Wonderful visionary. I would go with what the passages clearly say and not the wrenched out of context Adventist interpretation, the Apostal says they are shadows not that they were shadows past tense. The judging that goes on pertains more as to how and when they kept the days rather then if they kept them at all, Paul mentions human dogmas in verse fourteen according to the Greek which were against us, in which Yeshua took out of the middle and nailed to his cross.... Notice the context verse 22 says Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men?

You cannot apply the false understanding that the ceremonial law was done away at the cross with the evidance of one passage wrenched out of it's immediate context... Notice that with the context, the Adventist interpretation falls in the weight of it's asurdaties.. Read the whole chapter and you will not see Paul mention the word law once...

 

[Sophia7]

Wonderful visionary. I would go with what the passages clearly say and not the wrenched out of context Adventist interpretation, the Apostal says they are shadows not that they were shadows past tense. The judging that goes on pertains more as to how and when they kept the days rather then if they kept them at all, Paul mentions human dogmas in verse fourteen according to the Greek which were against us, in which Yeshua took out of the middle and nailed to his cross.... Notice the context verse 22 says Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men?

You cannot apply the false understanding that the ceremonial law was done away at the cross with the evidance of one passage wrenched out of it's immediate context... Notice that with the context, the Adventist interpretation falls in the weight of it's asurdaties.. Read the whole chapter and you will not see Paul mention the word law once...

We recently had another discussion on this in another thread: http://www.christianforums.com/t2979226-which-day.html. You might want to check it out because it covers some of the same issues raised here.

I don't know if you've noticed, but Adventist scholars are beginning to rethink the traditional Adventist interpretation of Colossians 2 as referring to ceremonial Sabbaths. Here is a quote from Angel Manuel Rodriguez, the head of the Adventist Biblical Research Institute, regarding Colossians 2 and the Sabbath (emphasis mine). I don't agree with him on everything, but I do agree with much of what he says here. You can read his entire article on the Sabbath at http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch...tholic2002.htm. He takes the view that the term Sabbath in Colossians 2 refers to the weekly Sabbath and that Paul was admonishing people not to judge others by how they observe these things, not telling them that these were ceremonial laws that were nailed to the cross.
_________________________________________________________________________

B. Col 2:16-17; Gal 3:10: Special Days

Colossians 2:16-23 is exegetically one of the most difficult passages to interpret in the New Testament. Part of the problem is the difficulties one faces in understanding the terminology used there and the extent to which Paul is quoting from his opponents. The other problem is defining the type of false teaching that was being promoted among church members. There is no scholarly consensus on those issues. Those who believe that the polemic is aimed mainly at Judaism find in the passage evidence to argue for the irrelevance of the Sabbath commandment for Christians.[87] But recent studies have supported the more traditional conviction that in Colossians we are not dealing with traditional Judaism but with a syncretistic movement in which Jewish elements are present.[88] The Jewish elements are usually found particularly in the phrase "in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day."

For our purpose one of the key terms in that sentence is "Sabbath day." Is it referring to the seventh day Sabbath of the Old Testament or is it designating something else? Some Adventists have argued that the reference is not to the commandment because the Sabbath could not be described as "shadow of what is to come" (2:17); it was instituted before sin came into the world. It has been common to argue that the Greek term for Sabbath used here is plural in form (sabbaton) and that it is better to apply it to the ceremonial Sabbaths associated with the Israelite festivals.[89] They could properly be described as shadows pointing to the work of the Messiah. More recently Adventist scholars have concluded that the phrase "festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day" seems to describe a yearly, monthly and weekly sequence making it difficult to retain the more common view. This has led to some other interpretational possibilities based on the context and on the use of the phrase "festival, new moon, Sabbath." For some the term "Sabbath" here is referring to the Jewish halakah, the "teachings of men" mentioned in the context (2:22).[90] Others argue that the list is designating the sacrifices offered during those religious occasions and not to the occasions themselves.[91] The sacrifices were a shadow of the sacrificial death of the Messiah.

The reference to the Sabbath is problematic for all interpreters because of the context in which it is found. Although the common tendency is to find in it a reference to the commandment there are still those who, based on the fact that the sequence is yearly, monthly and weekly, consider it possible and probable that the reference is not to the commandment itself but to the week. In other words, the term sabbaton should be translated "week,"[92] a usage found elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g. Luke 18:11; Mark 16:9).[93] That possibility "cannot be ruled out completely (in which case the phrase would refer to weekly, monthly, and probably annual festivals)."[94]

But even if the term sabbatton designates the seventh day, the Sabbath, as it probably does, we should be extremely careful concerning the significance we attach to that usage. The term is employed in the context of a syncretistic "heresy" and therefore its original biblical significance has been altered. Paul is reacting to syncretistic practices promoted by the false teachers with respect to eating, drinking and festivals. The use of the verb "to judge" in 2:16 is very important for a correct grasping of the meaning of the passage. When Paul says, "no one is to act as your judge in regard to," he is in fact saying, "Let no one determine or regulate your eating, drinking . . ."[95] In other words the false teachers are not requiring submission to those practices but determining the way they should be performed on the basis of their own teachings. Paul correctly designates those regulations as "commandments and teachings of men" (2:22; cf. 2:8).

Paul is in fact warning "the Colossians not against the observances of these practices as such, but against 'anyone' (tis) who passes judgment on how to eat, to drink, and to observe sacred times. The judge who passed judgment is not Paul but the Colossian false teachers who imposed 'regulations' (Col 2:20) on how to observe these practices in order to achieve 'rigor of devotion and self-abasement and severity to the body' (Col 2:23)."[96] What Paul is rejecting is not "the teachings of Moses but their perverted use by the Colossian false teachers."[97] He does not have in view "the Jewish observance of these days as an expression of Israel's obedience to God's law and a token of her election. . . . What moves him here is the wrong motive involved when the observance of holy festivals is made part of the worship advocated at Colossae in recognition of the 'elements of the universe', the astral powers which direct the course of the stars and regulate the calendar."[98]

We can conclude that Paul is simply condemning "not the principle of Sabbath keeping but its perversion" or "superstitious observance."[99] We have already indicated that such type of Sabbath observance may have been quite common outside Jewish circles. Therefore, based on Col 2:16 one cannot theorize that Paul was promoting or teaching the abolition of the Sabbath commandment.[100] He was rejecting the attempt of the false teachers to impose their views on believers concerning how to observe it.[101] They were misusing the commandment but its misuse does not invalidate the commandment itself.[102]

 

[YeshuamySalvation]

We recently had another discussion on this in another thread: http://www.christianforums.com/t2979226-which-day.html. You might want to check it out because it covers some of the same issues raised here.

I don't know if you've noticed, but Adventist scholars are beginning to rethink the traditional Adventist interpretation of Colossians 2 as referring to ceremonial Sabbaths. Here is a quote from Angel Manuel Rodriguez, the head of the Adventist Biblical Research Institute, regarding Colossians 2 and the Sabbath (emphasis mine). I don't agree with him on everything, but I do agree with much of what he says here. You can read his entire article on the Sabbath at http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch...tholic2002.htm. He takes the view that the term Sabbath in Colossians 2 refers to the weekly Sabbath and that Paul was admonishing people not to judge others by how they observe these things, not telling them that these were ceremonial laws that were nailed to the cross.
_________________________________________________________________________

B. Col 2:16-17; Gal 3:10: Special Days

Colossians 2:16-23 is exegetically one of the most difficult passages to interpret in the New Testament. Part of the problem is the difficulties one faces in understanding the terminology used there and the extent to which Paul is quoting from his opponents. The other problem is defining the type of false teaching that was being promoted among church members. There is no scholarly consensus on those issues. Those who believe that the polemic is aimed mainly at Judaism find in the passage evidence to argue for the irrelevance of the Sabbath commandment for Christians.[87] But recent studies have supported the more traditional conviction that in Colossians we are not dealing with traditional Judaism but with a syncretistic movement in which Jewish elements are present.[88] The Jewish elements are usually found particularly in the phrase "in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day."

For our purpose one of the key terms in that sentence is "Sabbath day." Is it referring to the seventh day Sabbath of the Old Testament or is it designating something else? Some Adventists have argued that the reference is not to the commandment because the Sabbath could not be described as "shadow of what is to come" (2:17); it was instituted before sin came into the world. It has been common to argue that the Greek term for Sabbath used here is plural in form (sabbaton) and that it is better to apply it to the ceremonial Sabbaths associated with the Israelite festivals.[89] They could properly be described as shadows pointing to the work of the Messiah. More recently Adventist scholars have concluded that the phrase "festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day" seems to describe a yearly, monthly and weekly sequence making it difficult to retain the more common view. This has led to some other interpretational possibilities based on the context and on the use of the phrase "festival, new moon, Sabbath." For some the term "Sabbath" here is referring to the Jewish halakah, the "teachings of men" mentioned in the context (2:22).[90] Others argue that the list is designating the sacrifices offered during those religious occasions and not to the occasions themselves.[91] The sacrifices were a shadow of the sacrificial death of the Messiah.

The reference to the Sabbath is problematic for all interpreters because of the context in which it is found. Although the common tendency is to find in it a reference to the commandment there are still those who, based on the fact that the sequence is yearly, monthly and weekly, consider it possible and probable that the reference is not to the commandment itself but to the week. In other words, the term sabbaton should be translated "week,"[92] a usage found elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g. Luke 18:11; Mark 16:9).[93] That possibility "cannot be ruled out completely (in which case the phrase would refer to weekly, monthly, and probably annual festivals)."[94]

But even if the term sabbatton designates the seventh day, the Sabbath, as it probably does, we should be extremely careful concerning the significance we attach to that usage. The term is employed in the context of a syncretistic "heresy" and therefore its original biblical significance has been altered. Paul is reacting to syncretistic practices promoted by the false teachers with respect to eating, drinking and festivals. The use of the verb "to judge" in 2:16 is very important for a correct grasping of the meaning of the passage. When Paul says, "no one is to act as your judge in regard to," he is in fact saying, "Let no one determine or regulate your eating, drinking . . ."[95] In other words the false teachers are not requiring submission to those practices but determining the way they should be performed on the basis of their own teachings. Paul correctly designates those regulations as "commandments and teachings of men" (2:22; cf. 2:8).

Paul is in fact warning "the Colossians not against the observances of these practices as such, but against 'anyone' (tis) who passes judgment on how to eat, to drink, and to observe sacred times. The judge who passed judgment is not Paul but the Colossian false teachers who imposed 'regulations' (Col 2:20) on how to observe these practices in order to achieve 'rigor of devotion and self-abasement and severity to the body' (Col 2:23)."[96] What Paul is rejecting is not "the teachings of Moses but their perverted use by the Colossian false teachers."[97] He does not have in view "the Jewish observance of these days as an expression of Israel's obedience to God's law and a token of her election. . . . What moves him here is the wrong motive involved when the observance of holy festivals is made part of the worship advocated at Colossae in recognition of the 'elements of the universe', the astral powers which direct the course of the stars and regulate the calendar."[98]

We can conclude that Paul is simply condemning "not the principle of Sabbath keeping but its perversion" or "superstitious observance."[99] We have already indicated that such type of Sabbath observance may have been quite common outside Jewish circles. Therefore, based on Col 2:16 one cannot theorize that Paul was promoting or teaching the abolition of the Sabbath commandment.[100] He was rejecting the attempt of the false teachers to impose their views on believers concerning how to observe it.[101] They were misusing the commandment but its misuse does not invalidate the commandment itself.[102]

Thanks Sophia for the info on Angel Rodriguez.... It really saddens me that many Seventh Day Adventist want to ignor the biblical evidance to hold on to there unsupported Ecclesiastical Traditional interpretation of scripture, even if it is Ellen Whites interpretations in which they cling on to if they are not biblical they must by all means be rejected.

 

[Sophia7]

Thanks Sophia for the info on Angel Rodriguez.... It really saddens me that many Seventh Day Adventist want to ignor the biblical evidance to hold on to there unsupported Ecclesiastical Traditional interpretation of scripture, even if it is Ellen Whites interpretations in which they cling on to if they are not biblical they must by all means be rejected.

Yes, I agree. Ellen White should not be the Adventist arbiter of truth or the filter through which we read the Bible.

 

[visionary]

Yes, I agree. Ellen White should not be the Adventist arbiter of truth or the filter through which we read the Bible.

They make out that Ellen White would be against this new light... but truly if she was alive ... would she? I have seen too many of her statements and thoughts mis used for conference headquarter self interests.

 

[OntheDL]

Yes, I agree. Ellen White should not be the Adventist arbiter of truth or the filter through which we read the Bible.

Ellen White's writting is not the standard of truth. The word of God is the truth. However if Ellen White did not write on her own, the writings should not contradict the Bible.

But if you don't believe so, maybe you are just in the wrong business.

 

[DanPev]

Ellen White's writting is not the standard of truth. The word of God is the truth. However if Ellen White did not write on her own, the writings should not contradict the Bible.

But if you don't believe so, maybe you are just in the wrong business.

Exactly!!!

Ellen White was either inspired or not inspired. If she was inspired the she should not contradict the Bible (I believe she doesn't). If she was NOT inspired, then why should we follow her at all? There is no such thing as partial inspiration.

This is not to say that she doesn't make mistakes, of course she did, she was HUMAN. All humans make mistakes, even the bible writers did. See, if every word in the Bible was dictated by God then there obviously wouldn't be any mistakes. Some christians find themselves hard pressed when atheists come to them with "proof" that the Bible is baloney. This is because they beleive that the bible was dictated by God. However most adventists beleive that God INSPIRED the Bible writers but did not tell them exactly what to write. Thus there is no error in the Bible but there are a few minor mistakes in it.

Same thing goes for EGW.

 

[Sophia7]

Ellen White's writting is not the standard of truth. The word of God is the truth. However if Ellen White did not write on her own, the writings should not contradict the Bible.

But if you don't believe so, maybe you are just in the wrong business.

The problem that I have with this is that many Adventists read Ellen White instead of the Bible. For example, once when I was teaching Sabbath School and made an appeal to people to spend some time each day reading the Bible, a guy came up to me afterward and asked, "Is it ok to read The Desire of Ages instead?" We have many church members with this kind of attitude.

Now, reading her books is great, but not in place of the Bible. I just do not accept the idea that many Adventists have that Ellen White's writings are equal to the Bible or that every doctrinal dispute should be settled by consulting her writings. The Bible should be our authority for testing truth, as she herself taught. I believe that Ellen White would be appalled to see her writings being used as an Adventist Deuterocanon.

 

[OntheDL]

Exactly!!!

Ellen White was either inspired or not inspired. If she was inspired the she should not contradict the Bible (I believe she doesn't). If she was NOT inspired, then why should we follow her at all? There is no such thing as partial inspiration.

This is not to say that she doesn't make mistakes, of course she did, she was HUMAN. All humans make mistakes, even the bible writers did. See, if every word in the Bible was dictated by God then there obviously wouldn't be any mistakes. Some christians find themselves hard pressed when atheists come to them with "proof" that the Bible is baloney. This is because they beleive that the bible was dictated by God. However most adventists beleive that God INSPIRED the Bible writers but did not tell them exactly what to write. Thus there is no error in the Bible but there are a few minor mistakes in it.

Same thing goes for EGW.

Hi,

Yes, God does not dictate the writers. The writers were inspired and wrote in their own words. I'd be cautious calling those mistakes in the Bible. Because all the so called 'mistakes' are inconsequential to the central doctrines. And probably have more to do with the scribes and the translators.

 

[OntheDL]

The problem that I have with this is that many Adventists read Ellen White instead of the Bible. For example, once when I was teaching Sabbath School and made an appeal to people to spend some time each day reading the Bible, a guy came up to me afterward and asked, "Is it ok to read The Desire of Ages instead?" We have many church members with this kind of attitude.

Now, reading her books is great, but not in place of the Bible. I just do not accept the idea that many Adventists have that Ellen White's writings are equal to the Bible or that every doctrinal dispute should be settled by consulting her writings. The Bible should be our authority for testing truth, as she herself taught. I believe that Ellen White would be appalled to see her writings being used as an Adventist Deuterocanon.

Ellen White's writings are not equal or additional to the Bible. Anyone who thinks so is wrong.

There were prophets whose sayings or writings never made it into the Bible. Their writings were inspired and were in agreements with the Bible. Or they were false prophets.

God gave us the Spirit of Prophecy as a lesser light to magnify the Bible for these last days. And those who reject the teachings of SOP are just as mistaken because the SOP is the testamony of Jesus also.

 

[visionary]

Can we get off defending the writtings of EGW and back to the OP which has to do with the OT feasts?

I personally believe that EGW would be a big proponent of the OT feast light that has been shed on christiandome these last few years. This is light for our time, for it will soon be time for their fullfilment just like the spring time feasts were fulfilled with His first coming.

 

[OntheDL]

Can we get off defending the writtings of EGW and back to the OP which has to do with the OT feasts?

I personally believe that EGW would be a big proponent of the OT feast light that has been shed on christiandome these last few years. This is light for our time, for it will soon be time for their fullfilment just like the spring time feasts were fulfilled with His first coming.

We have gone over this many times before...In the SOP, the studying of sanctuary and its services is highly encouraged. But the OT ceremonial feasts are rarely mentioned without saying its observances were abolished at the cross.

Now I'm not against participate in some of these feasts. But there is no requirement in the scripture to observe them for the NT believers and we are not under these laws.

It all depends on what we want to believe. But the scripture is very clear. The OT ceremonies were shadows pointed to the savior. The rituals and the levitical priesthood were done away.

 

[YeshuamySalvation]

We have gone over this many times before...In the SOP, the studying of sanctuary and its services is highly encouraged. But the OT ceremonial feasts are rarely mentioned without saying its observances were abolished at the cross.

I know we have gone over it hundreds of times and still you have refused to give us any answeres other then repeating the same nonsequiters over and over without any scriptural support...

It all depends on what we want to believe.

It does not depend on what we believe, it's all about what scripture teaches, if scripture and Traditional Adventist teachings, including Ellen Whites teachings, don't agree, then we must cling on tightly to what scripture says and reject all doctrines that are diametrically opposed to it. In other words scripture comes first and Ellen White is not scripture.

But the scpture is very clear.The OT s ceremonies were shadows poiting to the savior. The rituals and the levitical priesthood were done away.

It's funny how you mention this without providing one bible passage to prove your point.. Could this be a sevear case of heavy indoctrination through the googles of Ellen White?

The OT s ceremonies were shadows poiting to the savior.

Both you and Ellen White say they were [Past - Tense] shadows, now scripture says something quite different take a look... Col 2:17 17 Which are [ Present - Tense] a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

and among those shadows [present - Tense] is the weekly Shabbat take a look...

Col 2:16 16 ¶ Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

sabbaton
sabbaton
sab'-bat-on


of Hebrew origin (shabbath 7676); the Sabbath (i.e. Shabbath), or day of weekly repose from secular avocations (also the observance or institution itself); by extension, a se'nnight, i.e. the interval between two Sabbaths; likewise the plural in all the above applications:--sabbath (day), week.

 

[OntheDL]

I know we have gone over it hundreds of times and still you have refused to give us any answeres other then repeating the same nonsequiters over and over without any scriptural support...


It does not depend on what we believe, it's all about what scripture teaches, if scripture and Traditional Adventist teachings, including Ellen Whites teachings, don't agree, then we must cling on tightly to what scripture says and reject all doctrines that are diametrically opposed to it. In other words scripture comes first and Ellen White is not scripture.

It's funny how you mention this without providing one bible passage to prove your point.. Could this be a sevear case of heavy indoctrination through the googles of Ellen White?

Both you and Ellen White say they were [Past - Tense] shadows, now scripture says something quite different take a look...Col 2:17 17 Which are [ Present - Tense] a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

and among those shadows [present - Tense] is the weekly Shabbat take a look...

Col 2:16 16 ¶ Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

sabbaton
sabbaton
sab'-bat-on


of Hebrew origin (shabbath 7676); the Sabbath (i.e. Shabbath), or day of weekly repose from secular avocations (also the observance or institution itself); by extension, a se'nnight, i.e. the interval between two Sabbaths; likewise the plural in all the above applications:--sabbath (day), week.

I thought you have some decency after the embarassing epistle of you impersonating someone else. But apparently you would not excuse yourself.

You have the right to have your own opinion. But I'm not going to waste any more of my time.