Sabbath should not be discussed in SDA specific forums

EastCoastRemnant · Nov 28, 2016

Paul Yohannan said:
Fact check: 318 holy saints in opposition to Arius and a handful of supporters.

A whole 318?... holy saints you say? Do you know something about the mind of God that you know His saints? Good men I assume but that is all we as *not God* can surmise. Still just a bunch of men sitting around a table... unless there's something special about the table... a relic perhaps.

Something about "the majority never being on God's team all throughout scripture" comes to mind also... just like today.

Paul Yohannan · Nov 28, 2016

EastCoastRemnant said:
Do you know something about the mind of God that you know His saints?

Apparently...

EastCoastRemnant said:
Good men I assume but that is all we as *not God* can surmise.

This is of course inaccurate. The Orthodox Church has a specific methodology to ascertain whether or not someone is a saint which is in many respects more vigorous and less prone to political influence than the Roman Catholic process.

But on this point I would also note in all fairness to everyone that your own church managed to determine the writings of a single woman to be inspired prophecy...

This in spite of the historical inaccuracies and unfulfilled predictions contained therein.

Which is rather more than we have ever done.

EastCoastRemnant said:
Still just a bunch of men sitting around a table... unless there's something special about the table... a relic perhaps.

A relic might well help.

EastCoastRemnant said:
Something about "the majority never being on God's team all throughout scripture" comes to mind also... just like today.

Alas, unfortunately for this argument, Nicenes have been continually persecuted from the very beginning. Many of the most savage attrocities in the history of humanity have been committed by non-Trinitarians against Trinitarians, for example, the genocide against Armenians.

The Orthodox Church via St. John of Damascus regards Islam as a non-Trinitarian heresy, and indeed all remaining Arians, for example the Visigoths, wound up embracing Islam.

EastCoastRemnant · Nov 28, 2016

Paul Yohannan said:
This is of course inaccurate. The Orthodox Church has a specific methodology to ascertain whether or not someone is a saint which is in many respects more vigorous and less prone to political influence than the Roman Catholic process.

I'm pretty confidant that God is the only one that knows you are His... superior methodology not with standing.

But on this point I would also note in all fairness to everyone that your own church managed to determine the writings of a single woman to be inspired prophecy...

This in spite of the historical inaccuracies and unfulfilled predictions contained therein.

If you would cite some so we can discuss them, that would be real helpful.

Alas, unfortunately for this argument, Nicenes have been continually persecuted from the very beginning. Many of the most savage attrocities in the history of humanity have been committed by non-Trinitarians against Trinitarians, for example, the genocide against Armenians.

The Orthodox Church via St. John of Damascus regards Islam as a non-Trinitarian heresy, and indeed all remaining Arians, for example the Visigoths, wound up embracing Islam.

Of course it was easy for the Arians to adopt Islam, neither supposedly teaches that Jesus was God.

You still missed the reference to majority vs remnant... wide road and many vs narrow and few...

Paul Yohannan · Nov 28, 2016

EastCoastRemnant said:
I'm pretty confidant that God is the only one that knows you are His... superior methodology not with standing.

The Church is the body of Christ, and as a result determinations made about sanctity can be viewed with confidence. Not the least owing to the continued presence of the saints in the active life of the Church.

EastCoastRemnant · Nov 28, 2016

Paul Yohannan said:
The Church is the body of Christ, and as a result determinations made about sanctity can be viewed with confidence. Not the least owing to the continued presence of the saints in the active life of the Church.

Didn't the Jewish religious leadership feel the same way? That their standing as depositors of Gods truth and being His people, gave them the ability, even the right to enact rules and edicts that Jesus denounced in strong, no uncertain terms?

"Woe unto you scribes and pharisees... hypocrites"... "synagogue of satan"

Interesting you can't see the obvious parallels...

Paul Yohannan · Nov 28, 2016

EastCoastRemnant said:
Didn't the Jewish religious leadership feel the same way? That their standing as depositors of Gods truth and being His people, gave them the ability, even the right to enact rules and edicts that Jesus denounced in strong, no uncertain terms?

"Woe unto you scribes and pharisees... hypocrites"... "synagogue of satan"

Interesting you can't see the obvious parallels...

The Orthodox Church is assuredly not Second Temple Judaism, and I am not the one advocating a legalistic adherence to certain OT precepts.

I would note however that our Lord generally directed his criticism at the Jewish sects rather than at the hierarchical temple priesthood, and St. Symeon is an important figure in the nativity as described in the Gospel according to St. Luke.

Major1 · Nov 29, 2016

Paul Yohannan said:
Nicea was not specifically Roman Catholic. The Bishop of Rome was not even personally present.

It was my understanding that Constantine invited bishops from all across the Empire, however it was instigated by the RCC and Constantine actually gave the opening address.

It really does not matter, but interesting point.

Gerhard Ebersoehn · Nov 29, 2016

Hank77 said:
Using scripture, not just your opinion, would you please tell me why you believe that the resurrection of our Lord occurred on the 7th day Sabbath rather than on the day following the 7th day Sabbath, the day of First Fruits?

Two basic and proving reasons.

One)

The Old Testament never speaks about the Sabbath for the sake of the Sabbath per se (like it never speaks about anything for its own sake). The Old Testament whenever it speaks about the Sabbath, does so with The Word, Jesus Christ, in view and as the end-goal and reach, of its proclamation -- no different than with anything else the Old Testament may speak about.

Old and New Testaments declare the perfectly identical Divine Truth about the Sabbath.

From the Old, "the day The Seventh Day Sabbath Rest Day : OF THE LORD GOD";

From the New, "God thus concerning the Seventh Day spake, And God the day, The Seventh Day, from all his works rested."

This is telling us why to believe that the Resurrection of our Lord occurred on <the 7th Day Sabbath> -- because Jesus' resurrection "made the Sabbath", "The Lord's Day" about which "God, thus concerning the Seventh Day ... through the prophets in times past ... spake."

Two)

The NEW Testament never speaks about the Sabbath for the sake of the Sabbath per se (like it never speaks about anything for its own sake). The New Testament whenever it speaks about the Sabbath, does so with The Word, Jesus Christ, in view and as the end-goal and reach of its proclamation -- no different than with anything else the New or the Old Testament may speak about.

Several declarations from the New Testament proclaim this perfectly fulfilled Divine Truth about the Sabbath of God’s Rest which He rested in Christ in his Resurrection. Ephesians 1:19-24, “the all-exceeding reach and goal of the working of God’s Mighty Power which He WROUGHT WHEN HE RAISED CHRIST FROM THE DEAD” – the most powerful and august definition of God’s ultimate Rest in Christ in resurrection from the dead in all of the Holy Scriptures.

This is telling us why to believe that the Resurrection of our Lord occurred on <<the 7th Day Sabbath>>, because Jesus' resurrection "made the Sabbath", "The Lord's Day"— day of which "God, thus concerning the Seventh Day ... in these last day … BY THE SON, spake."

“If JESUS gave them rest— [“the Rest of God” - Katapausis tou Theou], there THEREFORE for the People of God remains a keeping of the Sabbath Day [sabbatismos] : HE, having ENTERED into his own Rest as God in his Own”. “GOD RAISED UP CHRIST from the dead BY THE GLORY OF THE FATHER” which glory of the Father is the Rest of God IN CHRIST JESUS.

God’s Glorious Rest from all his works WROUGHT and finished, came together and culminated in Christ “when God RAISED Him from the dead”. Ephesians 1:19.

So in Exodus 15 “The Lord TRIUMPHED GREATLY” when the LORD “brought” Israel “up, out” of the sea-grave ON THE SABBATH— wherefore the LORD commanded them to “remember the Sabbath Day”, and “they sang a New Song … the Song of Moses and of the Lamb” the Lord’s Sabbaths’ Song of Victory in his Rest through Jesus Christ.

“The Lamb stood on the mountain as slain”, Resurrected from the dead. “The Lamb stood on the mountain as slain” IN HIS GLORY—the glory of His Sabbath Day’s Victory— victory “on the Lord’s Day”! “And with Him stood hundred and forty four thousand redeemed from the earth”, that is, resurrected from the dead. The Sabbath was the day “the LORD planted them in the Mountain of his Inheritance”; his—Christ’s, “Inheritance in the saints” the Church triumphant. Ephesians 1:18.

Gerhard Ebersoehn · Nov 29, 2016

Hank77 said:
Using scripture, not just your opinion, would you please tell me why you believe that the resurrection of our Lord occurred on the 7th day Sabbath rather than on the day following the 7th day Sabbath, the day of First Fruits?

Why? Because the Bible tells me so (said Karl Barth why he believed Jesus loved him).

Why? Because Matthew 28:1-5a ANY English Bible from Tyndale or Wycliffe until the beginning of the 20th century, reads the same as the KJV which reads the same as the Greek in any surviving manuscript,
"IN THE END OF THE SABBATH / LATE ON THE SABBATH TOWARDS the First Day of the week"
and not, as the NKJV for example and most 'translations' since the mid 20th century, parrot Justin Martyr, 2nd century, "...after Saturn the day after they crucified Him, He resurrected ON the Day-of-the-Sun".

Why the Resurrection of our Lord occurred on the 7th day Sabbath rather than on the day following the 7th day Sabbath?
Because of many, many more Scriptures and truths, most, expressly written; others, clearly and incontrovertibly implied.

Why? Because of (partly quoted) 'the God-given and therefore imperative eschatological whole and wholeness' of PROPHESY and PROMISE and COVENANT of God's grace.
Here we approach the more direct answer to your ---wrong--- question. For another post DV.

Paul Yohannan · Nov 29, 2016

Major1 said:
It was my understanding that Constantine invited bishops from all across the Empire, however it was instigated by the RCC and Constantine actually gave the opening address.

It really does not matter, but interesting point.

No, it was instigated by the Emperor. The Orthodox Church of Alexandria deposed Arius, who then began travelling around and promoting his ideas elsewhere, making powerful allies in the form of Eusebius of Nicomedia and other bishops. St. Constantine wished to resolve the question to avoid any insurrection in the East.

Rome always supported Alexandria. In general Rome also tended to oppose ecumenical councils because they regarded them as superfluous. The Roman bishop was absent from most or all of the early councils, certainly from the first four. The early Roman church was exceedingly conservative; it was also separated by language and distance from the other four Patriarchates.

Hank77 · Nov 29, 2016

Gerhard Ebersoehn said:
So in Exodus 15 “The Lord TRIUMPHED GREATLY” when the LORD “brought” Israel “up, out” of the sea-grave ON THE SABBATH— wherefore the LORD commanded them to “remember the Sabbath Day”, and “they sang a New Song … the Song of Moses and of the Lamb” the Lord’s Sabbaths’ Song of Victory in his Rest through Jesus Christ.

Are you saying that the Lord brought the Israelites and mixed multitude out of Egypt on the 7th day Sabbath? Where do you see that?
I see that they left the day after the Passover. Three days they were without water. On the third day the Lord lead them to a place with 12 water wells and 40 palm trees. Here they were refreshed and had shade to rest in.

Gerhard Ebersoehn said:
Why? Because Matthew 28:1-5a ANY English Bible from Tyndale or Wycliffe until the beginning of the 20th century, reads the same as the KJV which reads the same as the Greek in any surviving manuscript,
"IN THE END OF THE SABBATH / LATE ON THE SABBATH TOWARDS the First Day of the week"

Mat 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
Mar 16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
Mar 16:2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.

The Sabbath had ended and the 8th day night was almost over as the sun was rising on the 8th day.
These Jewish women were not traveling to the tomb ON the Sabbath, that would have been breaking the Law. In fact I think it would have been breaking the Law for them to touch a dead body on the Sabbath.

Gerhard Ebersoehn said:
Why the Resurrection of our Lord occurred on the 7th day Sabbath rather than on the day following the 7th day Sabbath?
Because of many, many more Scriptures and truths, most, expressly written; others, clearly and incontrovertibly implied.

You will have to give me more then, because I believe that there are at least a few that point towards the resurrection happening on the day of First Fruits. Which would have been the first day of the Weeks before Pentecost.
1Co 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

Major1 · Nov 29, 2016

Paul Yohannan said:
No, it was instigated by the Emperor. The Orthodox Church of Alexandria deposed Arius, who then began travelling around and promoting his ideas elsewhere, making powerful allies in the form of Eusebius of Nicomedia and other bishops. St. Constantine wished to resolve the question to avoid any insurrection in the East.

Rome always supported Alexandria. In general Rome also tended to oppose ecumenical councils because they regarded them as superfluous. The Roman bishop was absent from most or all of the early councils, certainly from the first four. The early Roman church was exceedingly conservative; it was also separated by language and distance from the other four Patriarchates.

Then I stand educated. Thanks my friend.

Gerhard Ebersoehn · Nov 29, 2016

Hank77 said:
Are you saying that the Lord brought the Israelites and mixed multitude out of Egypt on the 7th day Sabbath? Where do you see that?
I see that they left the day after the Passover. Three days they were without water. On the third day the Lord lead them to a place with 12 water wells and 40 palm trees. Here they were refreshed and had shade to rest in.

You are telling the story after the exodus was completed.
In short Exodus 12 to verse 27 gives the history of "the day they always had to KILL the passover" Mark 14:12 Matthew 26:17 Luke 22:7 John 18:28; 19:14.
Exodus 12:28 to 14:12 gives the story of how Israel "went out", in later Scriptures dated "on the fifteenth day".
Exodus 14 from verse 13 to 31 tells of God's "great work", "that day", finished.
Exodus 15:1 says, "Then, sang Moses and the children of Israel THIS SONG...."

Notice a NIGHT separates each main event from the next, or rather, a night BEGINS each of the "three days thick darkness" of the last two plagues during which the LORD "carried you out on eagle's wings", and "planted them in the mountain of his inheritance".
"So Moses brought Israel from the (grave of) the Red Sea and they went out INTO THE WILDERNESS of Shur", Exodus 15:22.

I am not trying to give a cerebral explanation of the Exodus; just to divide the Word of God faithfully. The exodus explains how the Sabbath Commandment had the creation motive replaced with the Passover Redemption of Yahweh motive.

Gerhard Ebersoehn · Nov 29, 2016

Hank77 said:
Mat 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

Mar 16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

Mar 16:2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.

The Sabbath had ended and the 8th day night was almost over as the sun was rising on the 8th day.

These Jewish women were not traveling to the tomb ON the Sabbath, that would have been breaking the Law. In fact I think it would have been breaking the Law for them to touch a dead body on the Sabbath.

Matthew 28:1, “In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the First Day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

It speaks of the great earthquake and the descending of the angel and the opening of the grave AT THE TIME OF the Resurrection. It states, “In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the First Day of the week”. It does not state, “After the Sabbath, dawn / before sunrise ON the First Day of the week.” Recent translations though, do read like that. They are FAKES.

Mark 16:1 “And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint Him.”

It was at least three hours later and after sunset and on the First Day “after the Sabbath Day”. It tells nothing of or about Jesus’ Resurrection like Matthew by implication does, “on the Sabbath” the day before.

Mark 16:2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.

Yes? It was say 12 hours after the Resurrection, say three hours before sunup? So?

The Sabbath had ended, and, quote, “the First Day” was about 9 hours of its night spent with about 3 hours over <<as the sun was rising>>— again, not <<on the 8th day>>, but, quote, “on the First Day”!

<<These Jewish women were not traveling to the tomb ON the Sabbath.>>

Yes. But why not? Not because <<that would have been breaking the Law>>. Says who?! Nonsense! Matthew literally wrote, “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary set out to go see the sepulchre when there suddenly was a great earthquake” which most definitively must have frustrated their intention “to go have a look at the grave”.

<<In fact I think it would have been breaking the Law for them to touch a dead body on the Sabbath.>>

You don’t have to worry about that; the two women only wanted “to see the GRAVE” (Infinitive of intention); not to touch the body. They did not have any spices with them as in Luke 24:1,2 when they long after the Sabbath was over, “on the First Day of the week”, actually went to salve the body as they, again, according to Mark 16:1, had INTENDED to do. So according to Matthew 28:1 they knew they would not be able to enter the sepulchre “on the Sabbath”.

Gerhard Ebersoehn · Nov 30, 2016

Hank77 said:
You will have to give me more then, because I believe that there are at least a few that point towards the resurrection happening on the day of First Fruits. Which would have been the first day of the Weeks before Pentecost.
1Co 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

<<I believe that there are at least a few (Scriptures) that point towards the resurrection happening on the day of First Fruits.>>

Absolutely --- and a LOT! But first let us get it precise, it’s not <<First Fruits>>; it’s “First Sheaf (specific) of (winter harvest) first fruits Waved before the LORD”.

As above, “on the fourteenth day of the First Month” the lamb was killed;

“on the fifteenth day of the First Month is FEAST” and they “ATE the flesh with unleavened bread THAT NIGHT … and on the fifteenth day … after midnight … they WENT OUT”. Several Scriptures. Note that Exodus uses the one date of the 14th for all “three days darkness” for obvious reason of the “thick darkness three days” indistinguishable.

But not only was the lamb killed on the 14th, “late” (about 3 p.m.). Other things which also were eschatological pointers to the SLAIN Passover Lamb of God, had— from its very nature—, to be done on the day-to-kill, the fourteenth.

First was “leaven removed from your houses on the head / first, first day” … “in That Night” of the fourteenth Leviticus 23:15a;

Then they “reaped / cut the edges / corners of the harvest”, and “lifted up” the sheaf from the earth, and carried it on the shoulder, and “brought it to the priest”, who “entombed” it as it were in the “sanctuary / tomb” for the fifteenth day of the First Month. Leviticus 23:10,21,22. (Another study)

Here the First Sheaf ‘rested’ over “the sabbath” hours of “the Feast Day” Leviticus 23:10, “great day of sabbath / rest day of (passover)” John 19:31.

“On the day [not ‘morning - morrow’] after the (passover-)sabbath the priest shall wave the sheaf before the LORD to be accepted for you.”

On this “the sixteenth day of the First Month the Sanctuary was finished to be cleansed on” in 2Chronicles 29:15, the sheaves were taken out of the sanctuary / tomb as to denote the resurrection from the grave (of the cleansing Priest and Sinless, Christ and the saved, as well as of the temple-defiling dead, the sinful lost).

This “sabbath-of-(the passover)-rest-day”, “on the fifteenth day of the First Month”, was “Feast Day ye (man) shall proclaim in its season”; not “the Seventh Day the Sabbath of the LORD ye (man) shall do no work in”— not even to determine or proclaim its validity. Hands off the Sabbath of the LORD your GOD, o Israel, o mankind, o ye no-gods!

The day the priest waved the first sheaf of winter harvest therefore, did not have to be, the First Day of the Week although it could fall on it if its season in any year caused the phenomenon.

The day the priest waved the first sheaf of winter harvest “on the day after the …passover…sabbath”, <<would have been the first day of the Weeks before Pentecost>> because it is written, “Ye shall count from (and including) the day after the…pasover…sabbath”. It might occasionally have been on the First Day of the week, but not necessarily or always.

1Co 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

Amen

Monk Brendan · Nov 30, 2016

Gerhard Ebersoehn said:
I believe Christians are free to observe “Sabbaths’ Feast of Christ the Substance, eating and drinking of Him, the Nourishment (of Sabbaths) ministered”, “For if JESUS gave them Rest”—gave them Himself, Himself being “the Rest-of-God”, “God thus concerning the Seventh Day having spoken … by the Son … And God on the day The Seventh Day from ALL, HIS, WORKS, rested.” … “There THEREFORE, for the People of God remains (obligatory) Sabbath-Day-of-Rest.”

If you believe that it is necessary--or even helpful for your spiritual life to worship and rest on the Sabbath, fine! However, please extend the same courtesy to the rest of us, who are not convinced that it is either necessary or helpful--especially by posting a thread that could be considered toxic by some, in a forum that does not allow discussions on this topic.

Monk Brendan · Nov 30, 2016

tatteredsoul said:
I have been through this many times on these forums, but not one person has ever been able to show me where Christ, or God has specifically said that we can break any of God's laws previously set up. Only MEN have said this.

Matt 12:11-12 says,
And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out?

12 How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days.

Hank77 · Nov 30, 2016

Gerhard Ebersoehn said:
The day the priest waved the first sheaf of winter harvest therefore, did not have to be, the First Day of the Week although it could fall on it if its season in any year caused the phenomenon.

The day the priest waved the first sheaf of winter harvest “on the day after the …passover…sabbath”, <<would have been the first day of the Weeks before Pentecost>> because it is written, “Ye shall count from (and including) the day after the…pasover…sabbath”. It might occasionally have been on the First Day of the week, but not necessarily or always.

I don't agree that the omer should be lifted up on the 16th day every year, but on the day after the first 7th day Sabbath following the Passover sacrifice, which is always the 8th day.

Lev 23:15 And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven sabbaths shall be complete:
Lev 23:16 Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the LORD.

If one interprets that scripture to mean the day after the first day of Unleavened Bread rather than the 7th day Sabbath Lev. 23:16 would rarely be fulfilled, only about once every seven years.

In Joshua 5:11 we see that the omer was lifted up on the 15th day, not the 16th, as it was the day immediately following the passover on the 14th.

We could discuss this in more depth in a separate thread if you would like.
However this is a couple of the reasons that I believe that resurrection happened early on the 8th day because the offering of the omer, the first fruits.

Monk Brendan · Nov 30, 2016

Gerhard Ebersoehn said:
The day the priest waved the first sheaf of winter harvest “on the day after the …passover…sabbath”, <<would have been the first day of the Weeks before Pentecost>> because it is written, “Ye shall count from (and including) the day after the…pasover…sabbath”. It might occasionally have been on the First Day of the week, but not necessarily or always.

To ask a silly question, since when is Pentecost in winter? Pentecost is almost always in late spring/early summer. Why would a WINTER harvest's first fruits be offered in late spring?

I am not trying to put you down. I am just pointing out that the logic of your interpretation is flawed.

Monk Brendan · Nov 30, 2016

Gerhard Ebersoehn said:
Irrelevant, bad history. Therefore useless as far as what I said, is concerned, which is the status quo 2016, “Sunday is Roman idolatry rampant throughout Christianity.”

Excuse me? Why would St. Thomas Christians be irrelevant? India has an apostolic tradition longer than the traditions of your church (whatever it may be). There are Christians in India that have recorded family history that goes back to the first Christians that St. Thomas converted when he arrived.

Sabbath should not be discussed in SDA specific forums

I Must Decrease That He May Increase

Well-Known Member

I Must Decrease That He May Increase

Well-Known Member

I Must Decrease That He May Increase

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency