What of these passages, do they make you think?

[LarryP2]

I think there are a few that support the 10 commandments (Sabbath) that aren't SDA but in the end they have to use a LOT of the SDA arguments to get around the variety of problems trying to integrate the Law into a Grace based theology creates. It is far easier to plagiarize stuff than it is to do your own headwork and seems like some groups rely on such to keep their members from figuring out that the logical reality of it all theologically doesn't work without smoke and mirrors distracting people from the "magic tricks" going on that are supposed to be "reality".

The whole Sabbath argument is just trash. It ignores history, ignores the Laws of Judaism, ignores what the Apostle Paul clearly stated in his Epistles, ignores the Church Fathers, ignores what the Ebionite/Judaizing heresies stood for.

The absurd source of support for the Sabbath hoax is "The Great Controversy," a trashy and utterly deceitful, lowbrow conspiracy theory rant. It is a 90 percent plagiarized bilge of lies and paranoid Catholic and Jew hatred, that has been investigated as a Hate Crime in parts of Canada. It ignores the entire history of the Eastern Orthodox church and its claims, and is a stitched together a colossus of fraud of irrelevant historical incidents. It was written to deceive Adventist Church Members into reviving some of the most vile, anti-Christian heresies.

That the writer is a proven false prophet becomes evident when the Seventh Day Adventists quote from the Baptist Confession of Faith for alleged support for the 7th Day Sabbath, and rename the Book for general public distribution, or leave the Prophet's name off of it altogether.

 

[Sophrosyne]

The whole Sabbath argument is just trash. It ignores history, ignores the Laws of Judaism, ignores what the Apostle Paul clearly stated in his Epistles, ignores the Church Fathers, ignores what the Ebionite/Judaizing heresies stood for.

The absurd source of support for the Sabbath hoax is "The Great Controversy," a trash, lowbrow conspiracy theory rant. It is a 90 percent plagiarized bilge of lies and paranoid Catholic and Jew hatred, that has been investigated as a Hate Crime in parts of Canada. It ignores the entire history of the Eastern Orthodox church and its claims, and stitched together a colossus of fraud of irrelevant historical incidents.

That the writer is a proven false prophet becomes evident when the Seventh Day Adventists quote from the Baptist Confession of Faith for alleged support for the 7th Day Sabbath, and rename the Book for general public distribution, or leave the Prophet's name off of it altogether.

Yup the thing is..... once you prove the Sabbath isn't for Christians then the 10 commandments falls apart and there is no connection with the OT or Mosaic Law and dietary Laws and such are unconnected too.

 

[LarryP2]

Yup the thing is..... once you prove the Sabbath isn't for Christians then the 10 commandments falls apart and there is no connection with the OT or Mosaic Law and dietary Laws and such are unconnected too.

It isn't just Christians that should not keep the Sabbath. ALL Gentiles have been prohibited from Sabbath Keeping since the beginning of Judaism. God gave the Gentiles the Noahide Laws and gave Judaism the Mosaic Laws. They do not mix.

Gentiles attempting to keep the Sabbath faced the Death Penalty. Christianity from its beginnings vigorously and forcibly fought the evil heresy of Sabbath Keeping.

"The premise that Colossians 2:14-17 does not mean what it says has been worth billions and billions of dollars to the Seventh-day Adventist Church. It has created a membership of over 12 million people who give, in most cases, 10% of their hard-earned money to the Church, supporting a huge network of schools, churches, publishing houses, and a huge top-heavy church bureaucracy of state conference, union conference, division, and General Conference officials whose salaries must be paid every month."

......

"Unless someone can explain it away, Adventists are in direct disobedience to the command of God, given through Paul, that Sabbath-keeping not be required of Christians any more than they are required to observe the Jewish dietary laws and annual sabbaths. Billions of dollars depend on the truth that Colossians 2:14-17 does not mean this, yet no one has ever been able to prove that this passage does not mean what it says. Adventist leaders have known the facts about this text and a host of other anti-Sabbatarian facts since 1888. Tragically, Adventist leaders have continued to "sell" their faulty and dangerous "other gospel" belief package to its members in exchange for 10% and more of their hard-earned money."

http://www.bible.ca/7-sabbathgate-1888ad-Kerry-Wynne.htm

 

[from scratch]

The whole Sabbath argument is just trash. It ignores history, ignores the Laws of Judaism, ignores what the Apostle Paul clearly stated in his Epistles, ignores the Church Fathers, ignores what the Ebionite/Judaizing heresies stood for.

The absurd source of support for the Sabbath hoax is "The Great Controversy," a trashy and utterly deceitful, lowbrow conspiracy theory rant. It is a 90 percent plagiarized bilge of lies and paranoid Catholic and Jew hatred, that has been investigated as a Hate Crime in parts of Canada. It ignores the entire history of the Eastern Orthodox church and its claims, and is a stitched together a colossus of fraud of irrelevant historical incidents.

That the writer is a proven false prophet becomes evident when the Seventh Day Adventists quote from the Baptist Confession of Faith for alleged support for the 7th Day Sabbath, and rename the Book for general public distribution, or leave the Prophet's name off of it altogether.

I think that's exactly what Paul says -

3 As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine,

4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.

5 Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:

6 From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;

7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.

8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;

9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
1 Tim

4 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

6 If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained.

7 But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness.

8 For bodily exercise profiteth little: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come.

9 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation.

10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

11 These things command and teach. 1 Tim


9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.

10 For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision:

11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.

12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, the Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.

13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;

14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.

15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.

16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate. Titus 1

 

[VictorC]

Yup the thing is..... once you prove the Sabbath isn't for Christians then the 10 commandments falls apart and there is no connection with the OT or Mosaic Law and dietary Laws and such are unconnected too.

Agreed.
We can see that the Ten Commandments was the covenant from Mount Sinai(1), which had a limited jurisdiction up until God's redemption at His appointed time(2). We can also see that the Law retained the recipients until this appointed time(3), and it wasn't the recipients who 'kept' the covenant God declared was broken by their fathers(4). Those insisting that we need to keep the old covenant have redefined the Law and reversed this relationship. Reinterpretation of a legal covenant shows that they aren't compliant with it(5).

1) Deuteronomy 4:13, Galatians 4:24
2) Galatians 4:4-5, Romans 7:6-7
3) Galatians 3:23-25, also seen in Romans 7:6
4) Romans 11:32, Hebrews 8:7-13
5) James 4:11, Romans 2:23, Galatians 6:13

 

[LarryP2]

Agreed.
We can see that the Ten Commandments was the covenant from Mount Sinai(1), which had a limited jurisdiction up until God's redemption at His appointed time(2). We can also see that the Law retained the recipients until this appointed time(3), and it wasn't the recipients who 'kept' the covenant God declared was broken by their fathers(4). Those insisting that we need to keep the old covenant have redefined the Law and reversed this relationship. Reinterpretation of a legal covenant shows that they aren't compliant with it(5).

And Seventh Day Adventists, currently posting 500,000 Sabbath Posts for every one on the Resurrection, use incredibly-blatant dishonesty when they call this the "War on the Ten Commandments." The Ten Commandments NEVER applied to Gentiles. NEVER. Gentiles were covered by the 7 Noahide Commandments which prohibit murder, sexual sin, theft, idolatry and so on.

"The War on the Ten Commandments" is an incredibly dishonest and deceitful misrepresentation of the facts: Gentiles were NEVER part of the Mosaic Law.

 

[VictorC]

And Seventh Day Adventists, currently posting 500,000 Sabbath Posts for every one on the Resurrection, use incredibly-blatant dishonest when they call this the "War on the Ten Commandments." The Ten Commandments NEVER applied to Gentiles. NEVER. Gentiles were covered by the 7 Noahide Commandments which prohibit murder, sexual sin, theft, idolatry and so on.

"The War on the Ten Commandments" is an incredibly dishonest and deceitful misrepresentation of the facts: Gentiles were NEVER part of the Mosaic Law.

That's why we brought up Acts 15, and the council's determination of what the Gentile converts were responsible for (they noticed God's election by giving them His Spirit, with no regard for the Law). There is no Sabbath conveyed by the early church depicted in this pivotal decision.

 

[FredVB]

With all this argument here against any who want to openly discuss the Sabbath of the Bible, it is amazing to think there is shared belief in the same God, who it is evidently thought would change his mind regarding on what he places importance. The One who said what I showed in Isaiah 56, which was not really dealt with, changes from that? And I have not judged anyone, in anything I said. But it seems to be said it does not matter from any taking this other side. What about where he says One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord;and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother?

they have to use a LOT of the SDA arguments to get around the variety of problems trying to integrate the Law into a Grace based theology creates. It is far easier to plagiarize stuff than it is to do your own headwork and seems like some groups rely on such

I might be flattered, that what I find out for myself seems to need an organization to come up with it. I have only looked in a Bible.

The whole Sabbath argument is just trash. It ignores history...The absurd source of support for the Sabbath hoax is a trashy and utterly deceitful, lowbrow conspiracy theory rant. It is a 90 percent plagiarized bilge of lies and paranoid Catholic and Jew hatred, that has been investigated as a Hate Crime in parts of Canada.

And I see all this hatred being spoken here, for an alternative practice, without a biblical basis.

 

[LarryP2]

And I see all this hatred being spoken here, for an alternative practice, without a biblical basis.

You have read Acts 15, right? And Colossians 2:13-18, right?

Do you know of anyone who might someday acknowledge the adamant Eastern Orthodox claim that Sunday worship and Easter Commemoration occurred in the First Year after the Resurrection? And did so at the command of the Apostles? How about address it? And THEN, maybe in the future, dispute it. And then after all of that, refute it. Instead of just ignoring it, and pretending like the elephant in the room does not exist?

And then there are the First and Second Century Christian Fathers: They unanimously denounced Sabbath Keeping as an Anti-Christian heresy. They were all discipled at the knees of the Apostles, where most likely, those anti-Sabbath opinions came from. Which indeed are consistent with the above-cited texts.

Does anybody actually THINK that they can figure it out better than the Church Fathers, who were taught directly by the Apostles?

Eastern Orthodoxy is a church with 300 million members and nobody disputes that it is 2,000 years old. You would think someone might set up and notice the obvious, along with the unanimous writings of the First and Second Century Fathers.

 

[from scratch]

With all this argument here against any who want to openly discuss the Sabbath of the Bible, it is amazing to think there is shared belief in the same God, who it is evidently thought would change his mind regarding on what he places importance. The One who said what I showed in Isaiah 56, which was not really dealt with, changes from that? And I have not judged anyone, in anything I said. But it seems to be said it does not matter from any taking this other side. What about where he says One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord;and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother?


I might be flattered, that what I find out for myself seems to need an organization to come up with it. I have only looked in a Bible.

And I see all this hatred being spoken here, for an alternative practice, without a biblical basis.

Discussing the Sabbath is one thing, but what is taking place here is quote another. Its evangelism of Christians pure and simple.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Discussing the Sabbath is one thing, but what is taking place here is quote another. Its evangelism of Christians pure and simple.

Exactly this.... we rarely see people who are fine with Christians deciding NOT to keep the Sabbath here debating what we see is people pulling a flock of sheep over the eyes of people here trying to deceive them into thinking that they will be sent to Hell if they don't keep the Sabbath, or that God will be so extremely displeased that perhaps he will only allow them in heaven as a janitor. It is plain outright condemnation to preach Sabbath keeping based upon it is a Christian principle to begin with. If it is optional then it isn't Christian to begin with.

 

[LarryP2]

Exactly this.... we rarely see people who are fine with Christians deciding NOT to keep the Sabbath here debating what we see is people pulling a flock of sheep over the eyes of people here trying to deceive them into thinking that they will be sent to Hell if they don't keep the Sabbath, or that God will be so extremely displeased that perhaps he will only allow them in heaven as a janitor. It is plain outright condemnation to preach Sabbath keeping based upon it is a Christian principle to begin with. If it is optional then it isn't Christian to begin with.

It's a lot worse than that. Given the ratio of their Sabbath spam posts (around 70 trillion), versus their posts on the Resurrection (maybe 5, and even then, under extreme duress: Their bluff has been called); you just are compelled to agree with the unanimous opinion of the First Century Church Fathers: Sabbath Keeping is a vile, satanic heresy that is completely incompatible with Christianity. Why the open proselytising of Christians with obviously anti-Christian heretical cult doctrine is allowed on a Christian website just baffles me to no end.

 

[Sophrosyne]

It's a lot worse than that. Given the ratio of their Sabbath spam posts (around 70 trillion), versus their posts on the Resurrection (maybe 5, and even then, under extreme duress: Their bluff has been called); you just are compelled to agree with the unanimous opinion of the First Century Church Fathers: Sabbath Keeping is a vile, satanic heresy that is completely incompatible with Christianity. Why the open proselytising of Christians with obviously anti-Christian heretical cult doctrine is allowed on a Christian website just baffles me to no end.

What I find is that they accuse people of breaking the Law while they use the resurrection as an excuse to not keep it properly while telling people they must keep it and make them think that they have to keep it properly while they don't.

 

[LarryP2]

What I find is that they accuse people of breaking the Law while they use the resurrection as an excuse to not keep it properly while telling people they must keep it and make them think that they have to keep it properly while they don't.

It is a colossal fraud that is oil and water with Christianity. It is based solely on a 90 percent plagiarized, Jew- and Catholic-hating unhistorical, conspiracy-theory rant that has been vigorously investigated as a hate crime in Canada. So intent were Canadian officials on vigorously prosecuting the distribution of this hate literature, that Adventists called off the campaign.

An inveterate thief/pathological liar claimed she had a "vision" in heaven where the 4th Commandment had a halo around it. So she stole enough books to make her own book and made a mint.

She never saw a halo around the 4th Commandment. She saw dollar signs. The following was written by one of the 300,000 Adventists jumping ship per year:

"The premise that Colossians 2:14-17 does not mean what it says has been worth billions and billions of dollars to the Seventh-day Adventist Church. It has created a membership of over 12 million people who give, in most cases, 10% of their hard-earned money to the Church, supporting a huge network of schools, churches, publishing houses, and a huge top-heavy church bureaucracy of state conference, union conference, division, and General Conference officials whose salaries must be paid every month."
.....
"Unless someone can explain it away, Adventists are in direct disobedience to the command of God, given through Paul, that Sabbath-keeping not be required of Christians any more than they are required to observe the Jewish dietary laws and annual sabbaths. Billions of dollars depend on the truth that Colossians 2:14-17 does not mean this, yet no one has ever been able to prove that this passage does not mean what it says. Adventist leaders have known the facts about this text and a host of other anti-Sabbatarian facts since 1888. Tragically, Adventist leaders have continued to "sell" their faulty and dangerous "other gospel" belief package to its members in exchange for 10% and more of their hard-earned money."
http://www.bible.ca/7-sabbathgate-1888ad-Kerry-Wynne.htm

This Sabbath trash has no more to do with Christianity than a fly-by-night multi-level marketing hoax. Which come to think of it.......

 

[FredVB]

With all this argument here against any who want to openly discuss the Sabbath of the Bible, it is amazing to think there is shared belief in the same God, who it is evidently thought would change his mind regarding on what he places importance. The One who said what I showed in Isaiah 56, which was not really dealt with, changes from that? And I have not judged anyone, in anything I said. But it seems to be said it does not matter from any taking this other side. What about where he says One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord;and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother?

I might be flattered, that what I find out for myself seems to need an organization to come up with it. I have only looked in a Bible.

And I see all this hatred being spoken here, for an alternative practice, without a biblical basis.

You have read Acts 15, right? And Colossians 2:13-18, right?

Do you know of anyone who might someday acknowledge the adamant Eastern Orthodox claim that Sunday worship and Easter Commemoration occurred in the First Year after the Resurrection? And did so at the command of the Apostles? How about address it? And THEN, maybe in the future, dispute it. And then after all of that, refute it. Instead of just ignoring it, and pretending like the elephant in the room does not exist?

And then there are the First and Second Century Christian Fathers: They unanimously denounced Sabbath Keeping as an Anti-Christian heresy. They were all discipled at the knees of the Apostles, where most likely, those anti-Sabbath opinions came from. Which indeed are consistent with the above-cited texts.

Does anybody actually THINK that they can figure it out better than the Church Fathers, who were taught directly by the Apostles?

Eastern Orthodoxy is a church with 300 million members and nobody disputes that it is 2,000 years old. You would think someone might set up and notice the obvious, along with the unanimous writings of the First and Second Century Fathers.

Indeed I have read Acts 15, as I have been saying, even many times, as with the rest of the Bible, and I dealt with discussing Colossians 2:13-18, and actually explained what can be understood from it a little earlier in this thread, #31.

There is all this response in this thread with posters responding about Seventh Day Adventists. Who has brought up Seventh Day Adventism? It sure was not me. I had said that does not include me, and with the original post I was clearly just asking a question about something said in the Bible. I even said,

Maybe you are right. I myself am not sold on a position. So when I read something in Bible passages bringing it up, why should I not bring it here? If you are sure of your position, why don't you explain it? What do you think of this?

So any responding showing what I found does not mean what I see could explain that, and maybe convince me if they are right, with what actually shows that in the Bible. But the responses are showing that there isn't anything with which to do that. So I am left with Isaiah 56:1-2, 6-8 showing the same thing as what I understood from it. It is not relevant to this what unbelieving Jews say about gentiles, they frankly are not in agreement with Christ. Nor does it matter what Eastern Orthodox or others in history said, which is not from the Bible. I anyway am not Eastern Orthodox either, and it is what is said in the Bible that I see matters. In the old testament of the Bible, their Hebrew scriptures, there is nothing said that gentiles should not do anything differently in regarding the sabbath. And God does not have it said in the new testament of the Bible for gentile believers that have come to Christ that they cannot or should not observe the sabbath in any way. I have shown some scripture that shows that it is subject to their conscience and no one is to judge them for it, which is a concept that seems difficult to grasp, even in discussions here. I am not judging any. I make my decision what I should do, and it is my own, and do not say it for any others. But I have basis about knowing that Yahweh God said to those he spoke, about the sabbath, It is holy. And God never said anything about it ever coming to an end. Those he told were to observe, to not violate its holiness. But it already is holy, from what God himself said for it. Observing that is never said to be wrong.

Whoever is evangelizing, it is not I doing so.

 

[LarryP2]

Indeed I have read Acts 15, as I have been saying, even many times, as with the rest of the Bible, and I dealt with discussing Colossians 2:13-18, and actually explained what can be understood from it a little earlier in this thread, #31.

The respectable Bible Commentary writers unanimously disagree with your interpretation, insofar as it suggests a mandatory or even additional requirement for Salvation. THAT is the problem here.

There is all this response in this thread with posters responding about Seventh Day Adventists. Who has brought up Seventh Day Adventism?

Probably 90 percent or more of the Sabbath spam trash posters belong to that denomination. They teach Salvation by perfect Sabbath Keeping. They reject the Divinity of Christ and the Trinity as the method of Salvation.

"Seventh Day Adventists deny the resurrection by observing the Sabbath. We come to church on Sunday, the Lord's Day, to worship Him who "died for our sins, and rose again for our justification." We worship a living Savior, and with thanksgiving, can sing:
"He lives, He lives, Christ Jesus lives today!"
If I worship Christ on Saturday I deny that His work is finished, that He is a resurrected, living Savior."
http://www.abaptistvoice.com/English/Articles/Miscelanous/WhyIAmABaptist.htm

So any responding showing what I found does not mean what I see could explain that, and maybe convince me if they are right, with what actually shows that in the Bible. But the responses are showing that there isn't anything with which to do that. So I am left with Isaiah 56:1-2, 6-8 showing the same thing as what I understood from it. It is not relevant to this what unbelieving Jews say about gentiles, they frankly are not in agreement with Christ.

Good for you! But imagining that it is "not relevant" what the Jews think about their Sabbath was simply NOT an option for Jesus, Paul or the Early Christian Church. They did not have the luxury of ignoring the severe Jewish ban on Gentile Sabbath Keeping. It was enforced with the Death Penalty.

In the old testament of the Bible, their Hebrew scriptures, there is nothing said that gentiles should not do anything differently in regarding the sabbath.

Another fantasy world statement. The Gentiles did NOT emphatically NOT have the option of Sabbath keeping under Jewish Law. You can put on your blinders and ignore that law, and you have the luxury of doing so. But when the Bible was written, the law was NOT confined to the Old and New Testaments. ALL of the Jewish Law was in effect during the Bible periods of time. It was enforced by the Sanhedrin. Gentiles who thought like you could be stoned on orders from the Sanhedrin. That is why the Sabbatarian arguments are impossible. They ignore history, they ignore Jewish Law, they ignore the clear anti-Sabbatarian statements in the Epistles.

And God does not have it said in the new testament of the Bible for gentile believers that have come to Christ that they cannot or should not observe the sabbath in any way. I have shown some scripture that shows that it is subject to their conscience and no one is to judge them for it, which is a concept that seems difficult to grasp, even in discussions here.

Other than they could be stoned to death on orders of the Sanhedrin for observing the Sabbath, yes I suppose there is nobody else that would judge them.

I am not judging any. I make my decision what I should do, and it is my own, and do not say it for any others. But I have basis about knowing that Yahweh God said to those he spoke, about the sabbath, It is holy. And God never said anything about it ever coming to an end. Those he told were to observe, to not violate its holiness. But it already is holy, from what God himself said for it. Observing that is never said to be wrong.

Other than if you were an unfortunate Gentile, in which case the Sanhedrin was not nearly as tolerant as you are, nor did they have on blinders to pretend that only the Old Testament that you have contained ALL of the Jewish Law. It doesn't. Neither the First Century Jews or the Gentiles had the luxury of pretending what laws were in effect.

 

[FredVB]

The respectable Bible Commentary writers unanimously disagree with your interpretation, insofar as it suggests a mandatory or even additional requirement for Salvation.

Probably 90 percent or more of the Sabbath spam trash posters belong to that denomination. They teach Salvation by perfect Sabbath Keeping. They reject the Divinity of Christ and the Trinity as the method of Salvation.

"Seventh Day Adventists deny the resurrection by observing the Sabbath. We come to church on Sunday, the Lord's Day, to worship Him who "died for our sins, and rose again for our justification." We worship a living Savior, and with thanksgiving, can sing:
"He lives, He lives, Christ Jesus lives today!" If I worship Christ on Saturday I deny that His work is finished, that He is a resurrected, living Savior."

The Gentiles did NOT emphatically NOT have the option of Sabbath keeping under Jewish Law, when the Bible was written, the law was NOT confined to the Old and New Testaments. ALL of the Jewish Law was in effect during the Bible periods of time. It was enforced by the Sanhedrin. Gentiles who thought like you could be stoned on orders from the Sanhedrin. That is why the Sabbatarian arguments are impossible. They ignore history, they ignore Jewish Law, they ignore the clear anti-Sabbatarian statements in the Epistles.

Other than they could be stoned to death on orders of the Sanhedrin for observing the Sabbath, if you were an unfortunate Gentile, in which case the Sanhedrin was not nearly as tolerant as you are, nor did they have on blinders to pretend that only the Old Testament that you have contained ALL of the Jewish Law. It doesn't.

The Bible Commentators, even if respectable, are not inerrant. If you show scripture they use that is proof of something you can show that to convince me. Anyway I have said nothing suggesting anything about how there is salvation. I basically do not assume that we don't have agreement on it, although in humble honesty I should say I don't actually know, if you are Eastern Orthodox, what your position would be with that.

I don't know about Seventh Day Adventists generally, other than what I read from Walter Martin. I make no assumptions on what they would all say about salvation. I for one do not say the doctrine of the Trinity saves someone. Sure it is important, but that is not the gospel message. When saved in Christ, it will be too difficult to still not see the divinity of Christ. But rather than doctrines, salvation is according to true faith in Christ.

It seems to me to be just as bad as saying one is saved with observing Sabbath to say that one is saved with worshiping on Sunday. I do not suggest anything denying the resurrection, though the argument is countering this. What argument then is to be said with there being Seventh Day Baptists?

I really don't understand the basis for it being said the covenant law is or was not confined to what is in the Bible. I don't see the Sanhedrin being so powerful as it is argued, I do see traditions of men held as equal with the word of God (kind of like what I see argued around here), but if the Sanhedrin had people killed by stoning with ordering it for infractions, they would have just had that done with Christ, rather than go to Roman authority. Stonings may have happened on occasion but it does not seem to be from orders from the Sanhedrin, but rather from mobs that might have gotten away with it, but not with it sanctioned by the Romans. If it is from the Bible, I don't know what in the law is anti-Sabbatarian. And rather than verse references, if you have anti-Sabbatarian statements, not just something about law, in the epistles, do show them, written out.

What could the Sanhedrin do anyway beyond Jerusalem? What reach would they have to the gentiles throughout the empire?

And what more covenant law is there, outside of the Bible, that you say to which I or anyone has blinders on?

 

[LarryP2]

The Bible Commentators, even if respectable, are not inerrant. If you show scripture they use that is proof of something you can show that to convince me. Anyway I have said nothing suggesting anything about how there is salvation. I basically do not assume that we don't have agreement on it, although in humble honesty I should say I don't actually know, if you are Eastern Orthodox, what your position would be with that.

It is clear from the historical record that the decision in Acts 15 forevermore precluded Gentile Christians from EVER following the Mosaic Law. The First and Second Century Christian Fathers could not be clearer: Christians attempting to keep the Mosaic Law were involving themselves in a non-Christian heresy. They denounced Sabbath Keeping as a non-Christian heresy over and over again. They were disciples of the original Apostles. There is no way of rehabilitating the dead and obsolete Mosaic Law for Christians.

I don't know about Seventh Day Adventists generally, other than what I read from Walter Martin. I make no assumptions on what they would all say about salvation. I for one do not say the doctrine of the Trinity saves someone. Sure it is important, but that is not the gospel message. When saved in Christ, it will be too difficult to still not see the divinity of Christ. But rather than doctrines, salvation is according to true faith in Christ.

Heres a great article about the way Seventh Day Adventists deliberately lied to Walter Martin in order to conceal their anti-Trinitarian, Salvation by Works theology:
Did Adventist leaders lie to Walter Martin

It seems to me to be just as bad as saying one is saved with observing Sabbath to say that one is saved with worshiping on Sunday. I do not suggest anything denying the resurrection, though the argument is countering this. What argument then is to be said with there being Seventh Day Baptists?

I have never heard or read ANYONE, ANYWHERE claim that one is saved by Sunday Worship. There are MILLIONS of statements indicating that Sabbath Keeping is necessary for Salvation. Seventh Day Baptists are a bit different: The quote I gave you applied only to SDA. Seventh day Baptists do not believe anything different, other than the Sabbath, than their Sunday Keeping brethren. If they were the only Sabbath Keepers in the world, there would be NO controversy. Seventh Day Baptists are full Trinitarian in their beliefs. Here are some differences:
http://www.seattlesdb.org/sda.htm
http://www.7thdaybaptistchurch.org/articles/a000001.htm
http://www.asdba.org/files/library/ComparisonOfSDBsAndSDAs.pdf

Seventh Day Baptists are full Christian in their beliefs. Seventh Day Adventists either degrade or deny virtually every single Christian Doctrine.

I really don't understand the basis for it being said the covenant law is or was not confined to what is in the Bible. I don't see the Sanhedrin being so powerful as it is argued, I do see traditions of men held as equal with the word of God (kind of like what I see argued around here), but if the Sanhedrin had people killed by stoning with ordering it for infractions, they would have just had that done with Christ, rather than go to Roman authority. Stonings may have happened on occasion but it does not seem to be from orders from the Sanhedrin, but rather from mobs that might have gotten away with it, but not with it sanctioned by the Romans. If it is from the Bible, I don't know what in the law is anti-Sabbatarian. And rather than verse references, if you have anti-Sabbatarian statements, not just something about law, in the epistles, do show them, written out.

There is NOTHING in the New Testament that separates the Law from its "man-made traditions." Neither Paul nor Jesus denounced the "man made traditions." They denounced the WHOLE Law, which includes the traditions. They knew they could NOT be separated from the Mosaic Law. No Sanhedrin-ordered stonings, eh? You have heard of St. Stephen, haven't you? That was on orders from the Sanhedrin.

What could the Sanhedrin do anyway beyond Jerusalem? What reach would they have to the gentiles throughout the empire?

Nothing. Which is why the Acts 15 ruling is so mind-boggling. It is a clear and unmistakable statement that the Mosaic Law does not apply to Gentile Christian converts.

And what more covenant law is there, outside of the Bible, that you say to which I or anyone has blinders on?

Our Old Testament contains maybe 5 percent at best of the Old Covenant Law. The Old Testament was NOT included as a summary of the Mosaic Law. It is a thumbnail sketch, at BEST, of the way the law and prophets foretold Christ. And which gave the Early Christians enough to understand what Christ meant. THAT is all the Old Covenant law is good for. The idea that one can understand or follow the Mosaic Law by using the Old Testament is just delusional. That idea is extremely offensive to Judaism.

 

[FredVB]

Larry, it is truly hard to see who it is that you really address in posts here. I have stated I am not involved with Seventh Day Adventists, but you have always been talking about them. You mention that Seventh Day Baptists are orthodox when I ask about it, saying there wouldn't be the objections used for them, but still go on with objections about Adventists. The information shown did not condemn the beliefs of all Adventists, which you do, though. But thanks for the information that was linked. If I will find that there is a Seventh Day Baptist church in my area, I would go and see it when they meet.

How is there 70 trillion "Sabbath spam posts"? This must be using hyperbole very loosely.

I ask again that you use evidence from passages in the Bible that is needed for anything that was later taught by any, that you would use, that is still to be done.

Acts 15 does address the law concerning what gentiles who come to Christ are to do in light of it. Aside from what Christ has commanded and the teachings through his apostles, the things in the covenant that Jews were to observe that still applies to gentile believers are to avoid anything involving idolatry, anything of blood or meat from animals that were strangled, and from being sexually immoral. How much of this are Christian believers now careful to avoid? But nothing is said of the Sabbath there, one way or another, and Sunday was not addressed. Rather, in verse 21 it is said in addressing the issue, for Moses has those who preach him in every city, it would have been beyond useless for this to be said if gentiles were not to go hear it. And in all those cities this would be beyond the reach of control by the Sanhedrin. They only tried to do something with Paul once he had been caught while at the Temple in Jerusalem. They no longer tried anything with him once he was taken with his voyage leaving the shores of Palestine. But they could never just have him ordered to be stoned, though it was desired to have him put to death. It was up to the Roman system, of those who were really in control. This is why there could not just be a stoning of Christ from it ordered from the Sanhedrin, which they would have done if they could. So with Stephen there was no Roman authority present right then, and it was mob action that took him from their presence and found a place where they could stone him, with the presence of Saul to guard, and then likely disperse. It was not at all legal under Roman authority, and Paul later wisely deferred to it.

Whatever you say about what more there is of law, which might be such as the Talmud that was to come, Christ said things such as "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets, I did not come to destroy, but fulfill", clearly meaning what is in the Bible, and "Why do you transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?" he never said anything showing their traditions were desirable as was God's word. But this is I think is not emphasized either by Roman Catholics or Eastern Orthodox.

 

[LarryP2]

What is the point of Sabbath Keeping?

If it has ANYTHING to do with Salvation.....ANYTHING........it is utterly contrary to the Gospel and the Epistles.

Other than Seventh Day Baptists, Sabbath Keeping is ALWAYS insisted as being necessary to Salvation. It is ALWAYS framed as being part of being "obedient," and the implication is ALWAYS that your Salvation is in doubt if you do not keep it. That's why the FIrst and Second Century Christian Fathers UNANIMOUSLY condemned as a satanic, anti-Gospel, anti-Christian heresy that they vigorously and actively excommunicated from the Church.

Therefore, other than in very few narrow circumstances like the Seventh Day Baptists, it is incompatible with the Gospel, the New Testament and the Resurrection. Lastly, the clause in the 4th Commandment prohibiting your "manservants and maidservants" from doing ANY work on the Sabbath automatically makes Sabbath Keeping a delusional, empty and futile gesture in a modern economy:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7820818/

If you buy virtually ANYTHING in our globalized economy, you have paid the wages of "servants" who have willfully violated the Sabbath on your behalf. The fact that modern monetary instruments create a false "barrier" to your Sabbath Breaking is purely an artificial construct. If you announce that you are keeping yourself and only yourself, then you are engaging in hypocrisy.