Where do you draw the Sabbath keeping line?

[EJ M]

This from, Sabbatatrians Refuted and Sabbath keepers Exposed: 2011 AD

There is no greater lunacy about the Sabbath than what happened to the Seventh-day Adventists of the South Pacific Islands of Western Samoa and Tokelau in 2011. On midnight on December 29, 2011, a world agreement moved the International Date Line from the American side to the Australian side for the purpose of benefiting tourism. These islands never experienced December 30th because an instant jump was made from December 29th to December 31st at 10:00 GMT. The seventh day of the week got turned into the day that was formerly Sunday. The General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists considered the matter and decided that the Adventist churches on Samoa and Tokelau were to keep the same day they had always kept, ignoring the change of the International Date Line. As a result, Adventist Sabbath-keepers on these islands began keeping Sunday with the other Christians. These other island Christians, by keeping their new “Sunday,” are expected, according to the statements of Ellen White, to receive the Mark of the Beast if they don’t start worshiping on the right day. These other Christians moved their “Sunday” to the new “Sunday,” which was the former 7th day “Sabbath,” but because they are still thinking of it as “Sunday,” they are probably doomed, according to the typical viewpoint espoused by Adventism, to end up in Hell. Now, they are worshiping on what used to be the 7th day Sabbath, which would have rescued them from Hell. But, alas, the INTENT of these other Island Christians is observe the first day of the week. Their motives are, therefore, wrong, but the motives of the Adventists are pure because they are trying to keep the actual 7th day of the week. It seems that by special dispensation of the General Conference, the Adventists, who now are keeping Sunday will be protected against receiving the dreaded Mark of the Beast. Now, if the non-Adventist Christians on these islands would become Seventh-day Adventists, they could get a special dispensation from the General Conference president to keep the “wrong” day, and both Adventists and non-Adventist Christians could be saved.

The ability of the General Conference to change Sunday into Saturday by dispensation appears to give it powers that rival the ecclesiastical authority falsely credited to the pope by the Catholic Church. For the whole story, see the article in Adventist Today, “Samoa, the International Dateline Shift, and the Seventh-day Sabbath,” which appeared in the publication in 2013 at the following link. Note that the author of the Adventist Today article does not discuss the Mark of the Beast problem.

http://www.atoday.org/article/1937/...nal-dateline-shift-and-theseventh-day-sabbath

 

[visionary]

I am sure the theological debate on how this was to be handled was lively. The choice between having them change the cycle of seven one time to be nsync and keep the seventh day as the rest in the same time zone, or to keep the cycle of seven and be out of sync with the seventh day cycle of those in the same time zone must have been interesting to say the least. I don't think I agree with the final determination.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

The irony, of course, is that the original seventh day, according to the ancient Hebrew calendar (which was lunar) is not the same day that the Seventh Day Adventists claim, date line or no date line. It's an easy mistake to make, though inexcusable, considering the importance they place on it. Had they considered the original schedule, then the movement of the date line would have been irrelevant.

If a man wants to claim damnation for getting a date wrong, then he'd better make sure he at least has the right date, himself.

 

[liberty of conscience]

The irony, of course, is that the original seventh day, according to the ancient Hebrew calendar (which was lunar) is not the same day that the Seventh Day Adventists claim, date line or no date line....

False, already addressed, I will simply refer to that which has already been posted on these forums by this, here - The 7th Day Sabbath, is not Lunar-cy, being mow`edness, I tell you, mow`edness!!!

 

[liberty of conscience]

This from [misinformed link removed]

There is no greater lunacy about the Sabbath than what happened to the Seventh-day Adventists of the South Pacific Islands of Western Samoa and Tokelau in 2011....

Already addressed, in quite some detail, by this, here - The 7th Day the Sabbath of the LORD was made for a round world - spheroid - & IDL, or the Day Line

You probably don't even know that sister White herself travelled to Samoa on the "Moana". Her example is clear if one cannot see from scripture.

 

[Dale]

Already addressed, in quite some detail, by this, here - The 7th Day the Sabbath of the LORD was made for a round world - spheroid - & IDL, or the Day Line

You probably don't even know that sister White herself travelled to Samoa on the "Moana". Her example is clear if one cannot see from scripture.

According to the Life Sketches of Ellen White, which contains her autobiography, she sailed to Samoa on the Alameda. There is no mention of the Moana.

There is no mention of anything in particular happening during her visit to Samoa.

 

[Dale]

This from, Sabbatatrians Refuted and Sabbath keepers Exposed: 2011 AD

There is no greater lunacy about the Sabbath than what happened to the Seventh-day Adventists of the South Pacific Islands of Western Samoa and Tokelau in 2011. On midnight on December 29, 2011, a world agreement moved the International Date Line from the American side to the Australian side for the purpose of benefiting tourism. These islands never experienced December 30th because an instant jump was made from December 29th to December 31st at 10:00 GMT. The seventh day of the week got turned into the day that was formerly Sunday. The General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists considered the matter and decided that the Adventist churches on Samoa and Tokelau were to keep the same day they had always kept, ignoring the change of the International Date Line. As a result, Adventist Sabbath-keepers on these islands began keeping Sunday with the other Christians. These other island Christians, by keeping their new “Sunday,” are expected, according to the statements of Ellen White, to receive the Mark of the Beast if they don’t start worshiping on the right day. These other Christians moved their “Sunday” to the new “Sunday,” which was the former 7th day “Sabbath,” but because they are still thinking of it as “Sunday,” they are probably doomed, according to the typical viewpoint espoused by Adventism, to end up in Hell. Now, they are worshiping on what used to be the 7th day Sabbath, which would have rescued them from Hell. But, alas, the INTENT of these other Island Christians is observe the first day of the week. Their motives are, therefore, wrong, but the motives of the Adventists are pure because they are trying to keep the actual 7th day of the week. It seems that by special dispensation of the General Conference, the Adventists, who now are keeping Sunday will be protected against receiving the dreaded Mark of the Beast. Now, if the non-Adventist Christians on these islands would become Seventh-day Adventists, they could get a special dispensation from the General Conference president to keep the “wrong” day, and both Adventists and non-Adventist Christians could be saved.

The ability of the General Conference to change Sunday into Saturday by dispensation appears to give it powers that rival the ecclesiastical authority falsely credited to the pope by the Catholic Church. For the whole story, see the article in Adventist Today, “Samoa, the International Dateline Shift, and the Seventh-day Sabbath,” which appeared in the publication in 2013 at the following link. Note that the author of the Adventist Today article does not discuss the Mark of the Beast problem.

http://www.atoday.org/article/1937/...nal-dateline-shift-and-theseventh-day-sabbath

EJM,

This is a good post on the stresses and strains within SDA doctrine.

I notice that you refer to Adventists as believing that those who worship on the wrong day would go to hell. That actually isn't quite accurate because their founder, Ellen White, did not believe in hell. It isn't always easy to pick this up from her writing because she says that the unsaved will be destroyed by fire. Among other theological peculiarities, she did not believe in a soul apart from the body. The doctrine of Soul Sleep, that people are just plain dead after bodily death until the Resurrection, which is supposed to be followed by Investigative Judgment, follows from the non-existence of the soul. For those under condemnation, then, the resurrection of the body is followed by the body being destroyed by fire. Then they cease to exist.

When and why did Ellen White decide that there is no hell? That all the churches and ministers who believe that there is are simply wrong? That all the Bible verses that refer to it are misleading or are simply misunderstood? Did she have a grand vision on this subject? According to her autobiography, Life Sketches, she was raised as a Methodist, a very conservative church in those days. When she was 17, still a teenager, she had a talk with her mother. They decided that they had no use for hell, so they didn't believe in it. God would destroy the unsaved, but they rejected any notion of a permanent hell.

That's it--no vision on this subject, just a talk with her mother. They agreed that hell is completely inconvenient, so they rejected the idea. As far as I can tell, all of her writing simply assumes this point. She assumes that God will resurrect the unsaved only to destroy them with fire, but that suffering by fire will come to an end. No permanent hell.

It is one of many points where the theology of Ellen White is not Biblical.

 

[bbbbbbb]

EJM,

This is a good post on the stresses and strains within SDA doctrine.

I notice that you refer to Adventists as believing that those who worship on the wrong day would go to hell. That actually isn't quite accurate because their founder, Ellen White, did not believe in hell. It isn't always easy to pick this up from her writing because she says that the unsaved will be destroyed by fire. Among other theological peculiarities, she did not believe in a soul apart from the body. The doctrine of Soul Sleep, that people are just plain dead after bodily death until the Resurrection, which is supposed to be followed by Investigative Judgment, follows from the non-existence of the soul. For those under condemnation, then, the resurrection of the body is followed by the body being destroyed by fire. Then they cease to exist.

When and why did Ellen White decide that there is no hell? That all the churches and ministers who believe that there is are simply wrong? That all the Bible verses that refer to it are misleading or are simply misunderstood? Did she have a grand vision on this subject? According to her autobiography, Life Sketches, she was raised as a Methodist, a very conservative church in those days. When she was 17, still a teenager, she had a talk with her mother. They decided that they had no use for hell, so they didn't believe in it. God would destroy the unsaved, but they rejected any notion of a permanent hell.

That's it--no vision on this subject, just a talk with her mother. They agreed that hell is completely inconvenient, so they rejected the idea. As far as I can tell, all of her writing simply assumes this point. She assumes that God will resurrect the unsaved only to destroy them with fire, but that suffering by fire will come to an end. No permanent hell.

It is one of many points where the theology of Ellen White is not Biblical.

I find it amazingly ironic that the very denomination which accuses other denominations of abandoning biblical teaching and practice in favor of "convenience" is following the teachings of a lady who abandoned the clear teaching of scripture because she, and her mother, thought hell was just too inconvenient for them. Sleep on SDA!

 

[CaspianSails]

This from, Sabbatatrians Refuted and Sabbath keepers Exposed: 2011 AD

There is no greater lunacy about the Sabbath than what happened to the Seventh-day Adventists of the South Pacific Islands of Western Samoa and Tokelau in 2011. On midnight on December 29, 2011, a world agreement moved the International Date Line from the American side to the Australian side for the purpose of benefiting tourism. These islands never experienced December 30th because an instant jump was made from December 29th to December 31st at 10:00 GMT. The seventh day of the week got turned into the day that was formerly Sunday. The General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists considered the matter and decided that the Adventist churches on Samoa and Tokelau were to keep the same day they had always kept, ignoring the change of the International Date Line. As a result, Adventist Sabbath-keepers on these islands began keeping Sunday with the other Christians. These other island Christians, by keeping their new “Sunday,” are expected, according to the statements of Ellen White, to receive the Mark of the Beast if they don’t start worshiping on the right day. These other Christians moved their “Sunday” to the new “Sunday,” which was the former 7th day “Sabbath,” but because they are still thinking of it as “Sunday,” they are probably doomed, according to the typical viewpoint espoused by Adventism, to end up in Hell. Now, they are worshiping on what used to be the 7th day Sabbath, which would have rescued them from Hell. But, alas, the INTENT of these other Island Christians is observe the first day of the week. Their motives are, therefore, wrong, but the motives of the Adventists are pure because they are trying to keep the actual 7th day of the week. It seems that by special dispensation of the General Conference, the Adventists, who now are keeping Sunday will be protected against receiving the dreaded Mark of the Beast. Now, if the non-Adventist Christians on these islands would become Seventh-day Adventists, they could get a special dispensation from the General Conference president to keep the “wrong” day, and both Adventists and non-Adventist Christians could be saved.

The ability of the General Conference to change Sunday into Saturday by dispensation appears to give it powers that rival the ecclesiastical authority falsely credited to the pope by the Catholic Church. For the whole story, see the article in Adventist Today, “Samoa, the International Dateline Shift, and the Seventh-day Sabbath,” which appeared in the publication in 2013 at the following link. Note that the author of the Adventist Today article does not discuss the Mark of the Beast problem.

http://www.atoday.org/article/1937/...nal-dateline-shift-and-theseventh-day-sabbath

I would be much more concerned about the Sabbath and the traditions associated with it if I were bound by the Law of Moses.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I would be much more concerned about the Sabbath and the traditions associated with it if I were bound by the Law of Moses.

Praise God that we are under the New Covenant and not the Old! II Corinthians 9:15

 

[visionary]

Praise God that we are under the New Covenant and not the Old! II Corinthians 9:15

Yes we are, isn't it great that the TEN are highlighted by the Holy Spirit.?

 

[bbbbbbb]

Yes we are, isn't it great that the TEN are highlighted by the Holy Spirit.?

So, are the TEN are the only commandments that God actually cares about?

 

[visionary]

So, are the TEN are the only commandments that God actually cares about?

The TEN are engraved in stone, that which is stated to be the ones to be implanted in your heart.

 

[ewq1938]

The TEN are engraved in stone, that which is stated to be the ones to be implanted in your heart.

Nothing states that. The scripture states the epistle is written in the heart not the ten commandments. The same passage says the ten commandments (that which was written in stone) was done away.

 

[visionary]

Nothing states that. The scripture states the epistle is written in the heart not the ten commandments. The same passage says the ten commandments (that which was written in stone) was done away.

that which is written on stone is now written on heart...
2 Corinthians 3:3
Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.

 

[ewq1938]

that which is written on stone is now written on heart...

It doesn't say what was on the stone is on the heart. It says that which is written (which is the epistle) is written not on stone but the heart.

2Co 3:2 Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men:
2Co 3:3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.
2Co 3:4 And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:
2Co 3:5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;
2Co 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
2Co 3:7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:
2Co 3:8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?
2Co 3:9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.
2Co 3:10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.
2Co 3:11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.

 

[ewq1938]

Modern English makes it clearer:

2Co 3:1 Do we seem to be again attempting to put ourselves in the right? or have we need, as some have, of letters of approval to you or from you?
2Co 3:2 You yourselves are our letter, whose writing is in our heart, open for every man's reading and knowledge;
2Co 3:3 For you are clearly a letter of Christ, the fruit of our work, recorded not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in stone, but in hearts of flesh.

2Co 3:1 Are we once again bragging about ourselves? Do we need letters to you or from you to tell others about us? Some people do need letters that tell about them.
2Co 3:2 But you are our letter, and you are in our hearts for everyone to read and understand.
2Co 3:3 You are like a letter written by Christ and delivered by us. But you are not written with pen and ink or on tablets made of stone. You are written in our hearts by the Spirit of the living God.

As you can see, nothing about the ten commandment written in anyone's hearts...it's speaking of a letter or message written in the hearts and that is the gospel of Christ.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Modern English makes it clearer:

2Co 3:1 Do we seem to be again attempting to put ourselves in the right? or have we need, as some have, of letters of approval to you or from you?
2Co 3:2 You yourselves are our letter, whose writing is in our heart, open for every man's reading and knowledge;
2Co 3:3 For you are clearly a letter of Christ, the fruit of our work, recorded not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in stone, but in hearts of flesh.

2Co 3:1 Are we once again bragging about ourselves? Do we need letters to you or from you to tell others about us? Some people do need letters that tell about them.
2Co 3:2 But you are our letter, and you are in our hearts for everyone to read and understand.
2Co 3:3 You are like a letter written by Christ and delivered by us. But you are not written with pen and ink or on tablets made of stone. You are written in our hearts by the Spirit of the living God.

As you can see, nothing about the ten commandment written in anyone's hearts...it's speaking of a letter or message written in the hearts and that is the gospel of Christ.

Thank you for your excellent response. I could not have said it better myself.