The Reformed Sabbath

don · 01-19-09 9:18 pm

The Spirit works on us individually and as we share in fellowship, He works in community. The guilt you experience regarding the Sabbath comes from a regulation view of the Sabbath rather than a Gift from God view. Not once did Jesus seek to clarify regulations and firm them up. In all the Sabbath encounters, He took opportunity to teach mercy and compassion.

Remember, for the Christian, Jesus is the only Rabbi or Master. So, we depend on His explanations for our walk with God.

God knows your heart, and He knows mine. Regarding the Sabbath and the Mark, this interpretation of Revelation 13 will be proven when events occur. If they transpire as Adventists teach, then it will be beyond doubt a correct interpretation. The Mark, even according to Adventists, is not considered placed until the National Sunday Law and subsequent Death Decree.

I believe that we are duty bound as Christians to recognize faith in Jesus whereever we find it. It is up to the Spirit to bring conviction. All we can, or should, do is to share our understandings.

bob · 01-20-09 12:03 am

Thanks Don, I sure wish your approach would become the norm in Adventism. I suppose it won't as long as the brethren cling so tightly to Ellen White. Her thoughts on Sabbath observance was such that we could never attain the standard. Little did I know that most members only used what was convenient.

I don't remember very much about the sermons I have heard over the years, but I do remember one in the early 60s. The pastor was going on and on about how we should conduct ourselves on Sabbath and then he said something that has never left me. I do a little paraphrasing about it, thou shalt not cook peas on the Sabbath. He went on to explain that it was OK to heat them, but to start cooking them from scratch was sinning and God couldn't bless us. We were new SDAs and over the course of time that was just the tip of the iceberg. The list of thou shalt nots was a mile long.

We were invited for Sabbath dinner at some 2nd gwneration SDAs and being new converts we thought everyone held to the standards we were being taught. Well darned if she didn't prepare mashed potatoes from scratch. This was the beginnings of the double sided education we were about to receive.

We used double sided tape at work and the guys called it two faced tape. They likened it to some of the guys in the shop, so the tape got renamed the names of the two faced guys. There are a lot of church members who are like the two faced tape, one face on Sabbath morning and one during the afternoon and all the next week until the cycle startes again the following Sabbath. I believe works oriented churches breed these kinds of people. And that's all I have to say about that.

Thanks for your ear. Bob

elaine · 01-20-09 9:36 pm

Because work is never spelled out in the Bible commandment, people ever since have made their own.

If a farmer moonlights and does accounting on the Sabbath, is it work? If a woman who usually works preparing meals every day, is she working when the family eat out to avoid her working?

Please, where in the Bible can one see the work that the Israelites were not to do on Sabbath.

In the Exodus version of the Ten, it says to remember the Sabbath day; in Deuteronomy it says to "keep [or guard] the sabbath day.

The Exodus version says that God rested on the seventh day; in Deuteronomy, it says nothing at all about God resting; instead, it is strictly a day of resting.

don · 01-21-09 7:35 am

Managing the Sabbath Gift

Christianity stresses the spiritual nature of the law and the law written on the heart of the believer. I learn that the Sabbath has been made by God for me and you, and our servants and animals.

http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/clipart/happy.gif

In the spirit of freedom in Christ, I manage this Sabbath gift as my conscience guides me. Sometimes, in my work, I consider preparing my religion classes on the Sabbath but it does not take long for me to realize that such an activity would feel like work to me. So, I avoid it. Yet, on Sabbath, I post to this forum and do my religious blog work and its very relaxing and enjoyable.

bob · 01-21-09 11:09 am

Christianity stresses the spiritual nature of the law and the law written on the heart of the believer. I learn that the Sabbath has been made by God for me and you and our servants and animals.

Don, are you saying that there are two different laws,the spiritual law and one written on our hearts? And you indicate that you learned about the Sabbath which indicates it wasn't part of the package written on your heart. Correct me if I didn't absorb that correctly.

You learned from some Adventist that God made the Sabbath for you. That is not biblically correct. He made it for the Israelites. Anything else is just read into the facts. There is no evidence that any other culture ever observed any certain day of the seven day cycle.

In the spirit of freedom in Christ, "I manage this Sabbath gift as my conscience guides me. Sometimes, in my work, I consider preparing my religion classes on the Sabbath but it does not take long for me to realize that such an activity would feel like work to me. So, I avoid it. Yet, on Sabbath, I post to this forum and do my religious blog (work) and its very relaxing and enjoyable."

Should we depend on our conscience to guide us? You are convinced that it is fine to use Sabbath time on forums while others are convinced it is fine to play tennis, fly a kite, do a little gardening, eat out, mow de lawn, or maybe leisurely window shop at the mall while getting some exercise.

Of course if the person lives in an Adventist ghetto, like Collegedale, some modification might be required and the thou shalt not allow thy neighbor to know what activities thee are partaking of on the Holy day, has to be observed. That could be called changing Sabbath habit, especially if ones pastor or the university president moves in nest door.

Lest anyone thinks I am being hypocritical, I assure everyone that I have been there and done that. Have a great day, Bob

don · 01-21-09 3:23 pm

And you indicate that you learned about the Sabbath which indicates it wasn't part of the package written on your heart. Correct me if I didn't absorb that correctly.

I believe that Jesus must teach me and as He does the Law gets written on my heart. Some heart-felt laws are natural, but not all. Love your enemies is very unnatural. It too must be written on my heart.

I assist the heart-writing by allowing. Of course, even that is a spirit activity.

Jesus is my Teacher, Guru, Rabbi. He teaches me. I am submissive to Him so His teachings get written on my heart.

Once I am properly instructed by Christ, then I live totally free. How can this be? The teachings of Jesus are written on my heart.

bob · 01-21-09 5:56 pm

Your post sounds reasonable. There is some action that we have to take and some decision on our part. Jesus didn't begin to cover all aspects of life. We can gleen much from scripture, but there are some things we reason away.

Paul admonishes Women to remain silent in the church. Most churches ignore his council and so it doesn't get written on the hearts of most people. Jesus kept the feast days.

Most Christians believe they were strictly Jewish. Jesus said that it isn't what goes into the mouth that defiles, it is what comes out. Yet some follow Jewish law concerning certain meat and that gets written on hearts.

We have to be very wise as to what gets written on the heart. Not all that is there is God's will. Just because a person reasons that it is His will doesn't automatically mean it is. Bob

george · 01-21-09 10:23 pm

About the Sabbath - I'm still hung up on the realization that was brought out some time ago on this forum - that the weekly Sabbath is inexorably tied to the festival of the New Moon mentioned in Isaiah. When I first "learned" about the Sabbath it was said that the weekly cycle has never changed - proof being the Jews as they keep the seventh-day Sabbath.

However, that does not make sense, especially since the Israelites did not have a Norman Rockwell calendar posted in their tents. How else where those early Sabbath keepers going to know when the new month began and thereby, the weekly cycle? If, indeed, the new moon sets the beginning of each month, the Sabbaths that SDAs have been keeping have been on the wrong day since the Sabbath would keep moving month to month.

elaine · 01-21-09 10:54 pm

The commandment says: The seventh day.

The first begins when?

How do we know how the calendar of weeks began thousands of years before Sinai? Because there is not one single record of the Sabbath being observed by all the patriarchs, beginning with Adam, no record that he was even given the Sabbath, that one even knew about, or kept the Sabbath.

It was first given as a law at Sinai. The law there was given to the Israelites and it explicitly says that it was given to no other people. It is clear that Paul--and consequently Christianity after his time--ultimately saw no significant role for the laws of the Torah in Christian practice. The old laws had served for a while, guarding the Jews in the same way that a paidagogos, a Greek slave in charge of the household's children might look after his charges, sometimes disciplining them with a stern hand--but that time was now past. Indeed, Paul said, trying to live by the written code the letter of the Torah utimately condemned people to death, whereas the new covenant of Christianity the spirit gave life 2 Cor. 3:6

The authority for such an enormous chage in outlook derived from the very events on which Christianity was founded; the crucifixion and reurrection, Paul said, had made the old laws obsolete.

With not a single instruction given in the entire NT for the new Christians to observe the Jewish laws, SDAs are unique in trying to keep the Jewish laws while embracing Christianity: An impossible feat. How many places in the NT is the law called obsolete, that we have been released from the law?

The Torah was the most sacred and revered of all Judaism; Jesus has replaced the Torah for Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

maggie · 01-22-09 12:46 am

I'm still hung up...the weekly Sabbath is inexorably tied to the festival of the New Moon mentioned in Isaiah.

Looks like I really messed with your mind, didn't I, Sirje.

Sorry.

http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/clipart/happy.gif

I don't keep the moon sabbaths but it's kind of a nice idea, I think, earth mother that I am....

george · 01-22-09 6:41 am

Hi Maggie,

http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/clipart/lol.gif

I don't keep moon sabbaths but it's kind of a nice idea, I think, earth mother that I am....

Nor do I, but you have a point. It seems we'd better start if we're going to keep it later as Isaiah predicts.

maggie · 01-22-09 10:40 am

We could dance frenetically and worshipfully, of course, around a bonfire in the woods in the Dark of the Moon, Sirje.

That's what I call a "Reformed" Sabbath and lots of fun.

Sorry, Tom, I'm leaving now....

john8verse32 · 01-22-09 10:49 am

but would that make us lunatics?

http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/messages/11/200.gif

bob · 01-22-09 11:30 am

Sirje, Adventists claim that the Godhead is also keeping the Sabbath with them. If that were the case then They would be observing it 48 hours each week. If they observe it that long then shouldn't SDAs do the same? Of course if the rule applies then The Godhead would keep it 96 hours...........

Should the latitude running through Sinai be called the International Sabbath line since that is where it began? Since the Sabbath started at Sinai would Adventists East of there,like over yon mountain, catch it on the tail end?

If two Sabbath keepers left Sinai, one to the East and the other to the West and they traveled by land and sea, keeping track of each day, when they meet half way around the World would they be in agreement as to what day it would be? If, after they arrive half way around the world, a friend at Sinai decided to call them on a cell phone to wish each a happy Sabbath, what would be the day/days he/she would be calling on, Sinai time?

The only real Sabbath keeping place would be on a latitude running through Sinai.

Another question. If the Godhead keeps the Sabbath along with SDAs what about the Holy Spirit who is dwelling in each of us, does He take Sabbath off. Are we void of the Spirit if we aren't resting? And since the Godhead rests for 48 hours along with all the SDAs around the world, are we void of the Spirit working 2 days a week?

Answer these bobservations and I will be more than glad to serve up another platter.

http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/clipart/happy.gif

Bob

bob · 01-22-09 11:32 am

Yes, I know I have too much time on my hands, but it is interesting. Bob

john8verse32 · 01-22-09 12:44 pm

http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/messages/11/205.gif

..but what do those SDA's in Barrow Alaska have to do, when the sun sets on friday night in late november not to rise again for another 2 months?

do they keep sabbath in the dark for those two months? if so, they better have medical jobs where they can serve and still retain their employment and income so they can pay their tithe to support the hired-arky.

and those tall, majestic people,living without sin on some nearby planet: do they keep sabbath based on earth time

http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/messages/11/206.gif

and do they know about the zig-zagging international date line fixed by fallible humans which determines the precise time when day starts or dark takes over half the world?

http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/messages/11/207.gif

and what about todays jews...who recently attacked the palestinians in Gaza.. on sabbath!!!, totally surprising them? is it permissible to attack your neighbors on the Lord's day? or should one wait for Sunday to fulfill such biblically divine commands in numb 31 to kill even the little boys but save the virgins?

Joshua set the example, way back when by attacking Jericho with trumpets for 7 days straight, of which one day HAD to be a sabbath, no? tho that story emphasizes more the saving of the helpful hooker instead of any virgins.

why do I keep getting the impression that there may be more for us to understand about this figuratively than literally?

bob_2 · 01-23-09 10:49 am

John, I think you are wrong with your figurative/literal statement. The NT is pretty clear about the Sabbath, and who fulfilled it and that Christ is the TRUE SABBATH.

Do we have to stop worshipping on Sabbath/Saturday under the new Covenant, this is no where demanded in the NT nor is a new day set up except in Hebrews 4. TODAY, which is the Gospel in our hearts TODAY can give us the ultimate goal of the Sabbath rest and peace. The moon is an old tired argument and I don't believe will help in resolving the Reformed Sabbath.

But there was a literal Sabbath given to Israel, not figurative. They did not wonder in the wilderness in Alaska but where the sun had cycles, and again, the Sabbath was for a unique people, ONLY.

However, if you wanted to hear Paul or Peter or other early Christians preach you better have showed up at the beginning of the sermon, whatever day it started.

tom_norris · 01-25-09 4:30 pm

Sirje Walkowiak said: You have repeatedly advocated for the NT Gospel Sabbath but nowhere have you described it.

If you search for Reformed Sabbath or Gospel Sabbath, on the AT site, there is plenty about this topic. I hope JR lets that site stay up forever. It is an excellent source of information, even as it represents a part of Adventist history and progress;

Sirje asked: How is it different from the OT legalistic Sabbath in your opinion?

Tom said: How different is the Old Covenant from the New?

That is how different the OT Sabbath is from the NT Sabbath. In other words, -- very different; But not so different as to be on Sunday;

Sirje said: Actually, I don’t believe Sunday has ever been dubbed as the Christian’s Sabbath;

Few are so blunt, but it is true nonetheless. In fact, all will be surprised at how the RCC supports Sunday. They admit that Sunday is the Gentile version of the Jewish Sabbath, even as they connect it with the 10 Commandments given to Moses.

History is clear on this point. And so too is the RCC. Just read their admission in a recent position paper about the Sunday Sabbath. They just come right out and claim that the 7th day Sabbath was the Old Covenant version of the New Covenant Sunday Sabbath, which they called the Lord’s Day. This is what they say and teach.

I don’t think many understand how RC theology views how the Lord’s Day. Few know that the RCC claims that their Sunday Sabbath has its roots in the Decalogue, through its association with the 7th day Sabbath of the Jews

Of course this is absurd, but this is what they teach. They claim that the Sabbath Commandment morphed from the 7th day to the 1st as the Covenants changed. But where is the apostolic evidence for such a change? There is none. Because it didn’t happen.

I repeat; the RCC teaches that the Sabbath paved the way for Sunday, and thus this progression from the 7th to the 1st Day was all part of God’s divine plan that was unfolding for all to see.

Read it for yourself and understand that the RCC is full of great double-talk and deception, along with impossible theology and fabricated church history. Read the entire document and see how they intermingle the 7th Day Sabbath with their definition and support for their Sunday doctrine called the Lord’s Day.

-----------------------------------------------

God blessed the seventh day and made it holy; Gn 2:3;

The Sabbath precept, which in the first Covenant prepares for the Sunday of the new and eternal Covenant, is therefore rooted in the depths of God’s plan.

This is why, unlike many other precepts, it is set not within the context of strictly cultic stipulations but within the Decalogue, the ten words; which represent the very pillars of the moral life inscribed on the human heart.

In setting this commandment within the context of the basic structure of ethics, Israel and then the Church declare that they consider it not just a matter of community religious discipline but a defining and indelible expression of our relationship with God, announced and expounded by biblical revelation.

This is the perspective within which Christians need to rediscover this precept today. Although the precept may merge naturally with the human need for rest, it is faith alone, which gives access to its deeper meaning and ensures that it will not become banal and trivialized.

APOSTOLIC LETTER, DIES DOMINI OF THE HOLY FATHER, JOHN PAUL II TO THE BISHOPS, CLERGY AND FAITHFUL OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ON KEEPING THE LORD’S DAY HOLY

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_ … ni_en.html

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apo st_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_05071998_dies-do mini_en.html

This is one the most outrageous and false views of the Sabbath that I have ever seen. There is no basis in theology, or apostolic history, for anyone to claim that the Sabbath Commandment of the Decalogue was going to be dramatically changed. As if this was the will of God for mankind. Who said the Sabbath was changed? If not an apostle or Jesus, then it did not happen. Nor could it ever happen.

The Gentile church made a great error about the Sabbath. They overlooked the Reformed 7th Day Sabbath of Jesus, and opted for an anti-Semitic counterfeit. One that has zero credibility to any Protestant.

Moreover, the RCC, incorrectly traces the weekly meetings of the early church to Sunday. But this is impossible because they were all Jews and according to the record, they only knew the Sabbath. There is no apostolic record that shows Sunday Sacredness, and thus their claim is disproved.

So they have been caught in historical fraud on this point, but it nonetheless proves that there has not been a time when the church did not have a weekly Sabbath or Lord’s Day.

---------------------------------------

1. The Lord’s Day — as Sunday was called from Apostolic times — has always been accorded special attention in the history of the Church because of its close connection with the very core of the Christian mystery.

This is absurd and impossible. The entire Church was Jewish. They all embraced the Reformed Sabbath of Jesus.

In fact, in the weekly reckoning of time Sunday recalls the day of Christ’s Resurrection. It is Easter, which returns week by week, celebrating Christ’s victory over sin and death, the fulfillment in him of the first creation and the dawn of the new creation.

2 Cor 5:17. It is the day which recalls in grateful adoration the world’s first day and looks forward in active hope to the last days when Christ will come in glory. Acts 1:11; 1 Th 4:13-17; and all things will be made new. Rev 21:5; Ibid.

-------------------------------------------------- ---

So the RCC views Sunday as the doctrinal outgrowth and maturation of the Sabbath Commandment, even claiming that it has replaced it. Thus Sunday is the new Sabbath for the Gentiles. This is what they say, because this is what it is for them.

Moreover, I remind you that in 19th century America, there was a Protestant movement to protect the Sunday as the Christian Sabbath. This is what the SDA’s battled:

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … y-Law.html

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ay-Law.htm

So Sunday is called the Christian Sabbath, and it has been called that for centuries. Both the RC and the Protestants embrace this false doctrine with both hands--every Sunday.

Only the reformed Sabbath of Jesus is the true Sabbath for the Church. Sunday is a fraud, one that is associated with a false Gospel.

Pauli K. Heikkinen said: Actually in Finnish vernacular “sapatti” is synonymous with Sunday and my grandpa was fined for breaking the Sabbath when he ploughed his fields on a Sunday.

The same thing happened in America. People were arrested for working on Sunday, in the South, in the 1880’s. This is what the Sunday blue laws were all about. I have a book with pictures of some SDA’s being arrested in the south for Sabbath Breaking.

Bob Shields said: Most all 20th century Christians realize that Sunday didn’t become the Sabbath. Before our time Christians did believe in Sunday sacredness.

While many understand that Sunday is not the same teaching as the Jewish Sabbath. They still think Sunday is the new Sabbath for Christians. They call it the Lord’s Day. Or the Christian Sabbath.

They observe it every week, just like the Jewish Sabbath. So what else is it supposed to be? The Gentile Sabbath is Sunday, the Lord’s Day. This is what the RCC teaches.

But the SDA’s are correct. There is no such doctrine as Sunday Sacredness in either the Old or New Covenants. Nor did the Sabbath Commandment morph into Sunday as the RCC teaches. Sunday is a fraud. And so too most everything else that goes along with it.

Bob said: Tom, your post sounds convincing. Now you need to plug in the scripture that cements your beliefs.

Glad to hear it made some sense to you. It may be your association with SDA’s has prepared you to understand some new insights about the Sabbath.

How ironic, that after all these years, the SDA’s have to re-learn the Sabbath. Who knew there was a Gospel Sabbath? Too bad that the church exiled Dr. Ford. This is what he was about to teach to the SDA’s. He understood, not only the Gospel, but also the Gospel Sabbath. That is why he never repudiated the Sabbath-as so many predicted. He has embraced the REFORMED Sabbath of the NT. Which is very different from what the SDA’s teach.

Thus the real Lord’s Day will stun not only the SDA’s, but all others as well. It is a break- through doctrine that will change everything for the disoriented Laodicean church.

Besides, are there any other Sabbaths then the ones I mentioned? If not, it is a process of elimination to see which of these is genuine for the Gospel believer. This RC idea that the 7th day Sabbath Commandment was changed to the 1st day after the Resurrection, is without any apostolic evidence or suggestion.

All fair-minded Christians must repudiate it. It is an outrageous and delusional claim that has no support from the Gospel Story.

Bob said: The New Testament theme certainly isn’t about Sabbath observance.

The NT features the life, death, and teachings of Jesus, all in the context of Judaism, the law and the Sabbath. The Sabbath is part of the Story, which is why Jesus had so much to say about it. The Sabbath is part of the 10 Commandments; it cannot be removed or changed any more than can then the other nine. Except if Jesus should make any changes. He is the only human being that has any authority to change or amend the law. And that is exactly what he had done with the Sabbath. He did it for the church to follow.

Bob said: It isn’t about what we do nearly as much as what has been done for us. How we treat others is the great commission after our acceptance of Him.

We must be far more precise when discussing specific points of theology or doctrine. The law has never been removed as the standard for the church. Which means that the Sabbath is part of the duty of the church. But not the Sunday fraud. That is not the correct Sabbath for the church. And neither is the Old Covenant version that the SDA’s have been promoting all these years.

Bob said: Sabbath observance must have been very low on the priority list of the early church fathers.

Why would you think that? The apostolic church was 100% Jewish. And I can assure you that every one of these men and women only embraced the 7th day Sabbath of their Lord Jesus--every week. For all of them, their Sabbath was the Lord’s Day, and they had the teachings and example of Jesus in their minds to reinforce this point.

The apostolic church was 100% Jewish for some time. But even after the Gentiles were allowed in, it was on the terms of the Jews, who controlled the Gospel paradigm.

Thus, before 70 AD, they were all following the Gospel Sabbath. The doctrine of Sunday was nowhere around as the RCC tries to pretend.

After the destruction of Judaism, the Gentile church emerged and took control, and so too did Sunday as the Christian Sabbath. If there were a Sunday Sabbath/ Lord’s Day in the Apostolic church, where is the reference to it in the NT?

But there is no reference to any such doctrine because there was no such doctrine. Jews do not easily change their laws, much less one so fundamental to their culture, law, and long Tradition. Had Sunday been introduced as the new Christian Sabbath, there would have been a great uproar- as there was with circumcision.

However, there was no uproar because there was no Sunday Sabbath in the church at this time. The RCC are great deceivers on this point. They cannot prove their assertion or make their case.

Moreover the church fathers did deal with the Sabbath. In fact, it was so high on their list that they wrote about it in detail. Too bad that they got it wrong.

The law and the Church

One of the most perplexing problems of the church was how to integrate the Old and New Covenants. What was the church supposed to do with Judaism and the Moral law? How did the law and the Gospel relate one to another?

The Gnostic Christians solved this problem by removing the Old Covenant completely. In the blink of an eye, the Old Testament Law, both Ceremonial and Moral, as well as the Jews and their God were gone. --Replaced by a new, different, and non Jewish God that was supported by a greatly truncated version of the NT that had been redacted of most references to Judaism. Paul was their hero, and their primary source of authority.

The Gnostics separated the law and the Gospel in a dramatic way that was very appealing for the anti-Semitic Gentiles. Now that Christ had come, the Jews and their Bible, as well as their laws and their god were no longer necessary. The Old Covenant was to be totally disregarded and a new, different, and friendlier God of the New Testament promoted. This theology became very popular, and was a great competitive threat to the formation of the Catholic Church.

So Irenaeus had to walk a fine line as he refuted the wholesale removal of the entire OT, including the Law, as well as many of the apostolic documents, and even the Jewish God, while at the same time trying to avoid the Judaizers, who wanted to promote the observance of the OT Law within the church and invent special feast days and perform circumcision, etc.

Against this backdrop of the Marcionite view of the Covenants, Irenaeus sets forth an opposing view of the relationship between the OT Jewish Law and the New Covenant. But in doing so, Irenaeus is forced to speak BOTH of the abrogation of the Old Testament Law as well as of the continuing validity of the law.

Unlike Marcion, Irenaeus disagreed with the removal of the moral law from the New Covenant and correctly asserted that the Decalogue is still binding for Christian. But he then proceeds to treat the fourth commandment as a temporary Jewish institution that is only symbolic and ceremonial in nature.

Such obvious anti-Semitism speaks volumes as it betrays his illogical and irrational Sabbatarian error. Had he been theologically consistent and precise about the Covenants, he would not have made this historical blunder that still stands today as Roman Catholic doctrine.

Irenaeus makes the point in his comments about Jesus’s teaching that, far from casting aside the law of the Old Testament as the Gnostics claimed; he was actually extending the force of the Law. He said that the Lord did not abolish the natural law...but even extended and fulfilled it...

Moreover, he taught that the contrast of it has been said and but I say to you does not indicate a rejection of the Law by Jesus, rather, these words do not contain or imply an opposition to and an overturning of the Law of the past, as Marcion’s followers do strenuously maintain; but are a fulfilling and an extension of them.

Unlike Marcion, Irenaeus was not against the Moral Law; he viewed it as a standard for Christian living in both Covenants. And this correct viewpoint is still fundamental Catholic and Protestant theology today.

Why? Because there is no valid Christian theology that has removed the Moral law from the New Covenant. It is a Gnostical and mythical teaching that has been totally and correctly rejected by the church.

Irenaeus was not against the Moral Law in the New Covenant.

Like the Reformers, he sees its use in driving men to Christ. But as many as feared God and were anxious about his law, these ran to Christ and were all saved.... For the law never hindered them from believing in the Son of God; no, but it even exhorted them to do so, saying that men can be saved in no other way from the wound of the serpent than by believing in Him who, in the likeness of sinful flesh, is lifted up from the earth upon the tree of martyrdom [in ligno martyrii] and draws all things to himself and brings to life the dead.

But the Law was not merely pedagogical for Irenaeus; it also provided the perfect standard for godly living and in both covenants.

He says: As in the Law, so also in the Gospel, the first and greatest commandment is to love the Lord God with the whole heart and there follows a commandment like it, to love one’s neighbor as one’s self.... For the precepts which are essential for life...are the same in both covenants....

Here we see an example of the Irenaean stress on the continuity of law between old and new covenant religion. But that continuity did not translate fully or rationally. There were differences for Irenaeus between the Law in the Old and the Law in the New covenant as the standard of living.

Though the same Law is held by both Hebrew and Christian, Christ has expanded the Christian’s obligation. He says: Since then all the natural precepts are common to us and them [the Jews], they had in them the beginning and origin; but in us they have received growth and completion.

While Irenaeus refuted Marcion’s total removal of the Old Testament from the church, he too was forced to admit that the Jewish legislation must have an end when the new covenant is revealed. But unlike the Gnostics, he dealt with this problem by separating the ceremonial; law from the Ten Commandments of God. Thus predating the SDA’s by many, many centuries.

The Laws of bondage were canceled by the new covenant of liberty, he said. He [God] does not wish those who are to be redeemed to be brought again under the Mosaic legislation, for the law has been fulfilled by Christ; but to go free in the newness by the Word, through faith and love towards the Son of God.

But how can Irenaeus speak of not being brought again under the Mosaic legislation if the Law is essentially the same in both covenants as he also taught? And if the Law is the same in both dispensations, how can the old covenant be characterized, as bondage while the new covenant is one of liberty?

How can he speak of the law NOT being abrogated and yet being canceled at the same time? In short, how do we account for these two opposing themes in Irenaeus’s teaching on the Law?

The tension is largely resolved in this matter by recognizing that Irenaeus divides the Law of the Old Testament into two parts, the natural law, naturalia; and the ceremonial law, legalia or sometimes called, servitutis praecepta.

Irenaeus was not the first, second century theologian to suggest divisions in the law. Justin Martyr had previously proposed a three-fold division. In his scheme the first kind of law concerned righteousness, the second was for the purpose of pointing to the Messiah, and the third was included because of the hardness of men’s hearts.

Irenaeus’s first category, naturalia, was roughly equivalent to Justin’s first type as it represented God’s primordial standard of righteousness for all men.

Irenaeus second category, legalia, comprehended both Justin’s second and third types, and it signified the laws which were typological in nature, as well as those, which were given because of men’s stubbornness.

According to Irenaeus, the naturalia or natural precepts of the law had been implanted in mankind form the beginning; but the legalia or ceremonial laws had been added at a later time because of the disobedience of Israel

Irenaeus says: when they [the Jews] turned themselves to make a calf, and had gone back in their minds to Egypt, desiring to be slaves instead of free-men...[God] subjected them to the yoke of bondage. By yoke of bondage Irenaeus means the building of the tabernacle and temple, the Levitical priesthood, the sacrificial system and the other servile things of the Law.

And so the Mosaic law, though it included the naturalia, which had been given to the patriarchs before, also included the ceremonial legislation. Because of this two-fold character of the Mosaic legislation, Irenaeus could speak of Christ canceling the laws of bondage meaning only the ceremonial law while simultaneously asserting that Christ was extending the law of the Old Testament --meaning the natural precepts of the Law.

Irenaeus claimed God did not want the redeemed to be brought again under the Mosaic legislation. He asserted that the ceremonial aspect of the Mosaic code was not meant for the new covenant believer because it was fulfilled in Christ. Yet at the same time he appealed to the natural precepts contained in the Mosaic Law as the STANDARD OF CONDUCT.

Therefore, he could characterize the new covenant as one of liberty because the keeping of the ceremonial laws no longer burdened the believer and because the legal dispensation was aptly so-called because of its many statutes in comparison to the precepts of the new covenant law that can be summed up in two commands.

The abolition of the ceremonial law, therefore, is but one new liberty among many that Irenaeus gives as examples of this new freedom: the adoption as sons, the giving of the Spirit, Proof, the giving of the Abrahamic promise to the Gentiles Proof 91-95) and not insignificantly, the end of the ceremonial law as a school-master.

He says: Therefore also we have no need of the law as pedagogue. Behold, we speak with the Father, and stand face to face with Him, become infants in malice and made strong in all justice and propriety.

With the ceremonial law abolished, and the moral law retained in the Church, Irenaeus is explicit about the binding character of the Decalogue which he says, if one does not observe, he has no salvation. The obligation of the Ten Words does not change in the new covenant. The Decalogue remains.

Here is the historical foundation for both the Catholic and Protestant positions about the moral law. This formula stands to this day. And those who try to claim that the moral law has been removed at the cross are following Marcion and the Gnostics, not the apostles or the early church fathers, much less the RCC or the Protestant Reformers.

Thus the SDA Pioneers were correct on this point, while their anti-Sabbatarian enemies took positions about the law that were completely out of harmony with the fundamentals of the historic Christian Faith.

Irenaeus says: Preparing man for this life, the Lord himself spoke in his own person to all alike the words of the Decalogue; and therefore, in like manner, do they remain permanently with us receiving by his advent in the flesh, extension and increase, but not abrogation.

At this point Irenaeus sounds like an SDA from Battle Creek. But yet, right on the heels of his assertion about the ongoing authority of the Ten Commandments, he declares that the keeping of the Sabbath is part of temporary Mosaic legalia, or the ceremonial law.

Here is a stunning and irrational conclusion that reflects more prejudice than theological fact. It reminds me of how the IJ people make leaps of logic to reach irrational and illogical conclusions because they are seeking a predetermined outcome. This seems no different.

But such an error under the circumstances is not very surprising. Ignatius and Justin had both rejected the seventh day Sabbath and asserted that it was part of the transient Jewish legislation. Indeed, as R.J. Bauckham observes, it...seems axiomatic with second century writers that the Sabbath commandment, despite its place in the Decalogue, belongs with those Jewish ceremonial ordinances whose literal observance has passed with their fulfillment in Christ.

The puzzling thing is trying to discern how Irenaeus reconciled his strong assertion about the continuing validity of the Decalogue with his relegation of the fourth commandment to the dismissive status of Jewish ceremonial law?

No doubt Irenaeus believed that the fourth command was fulfilled in some symbolic sense and therefore it did not need to be taken literally. This can be seen in Adversus Haereses 4.16.1, whereby Irenaeus compares circumcision and the Sabbath, and determines that they are both sign and symbol.

Anti-Semitism prevented the early Catholic Church from embracing the true Semitic Sabbath of Jesus and the Apostles. Even though they admitted the ongoing nature of the Moral law, they had to make up a special rule in order to remove it.

To the early church fathers, circumcision was a sign given to the race of Abraham to set them apart from other races and to signify God’s covenant with Abraham. The Sabbath was also a sign for the Mosaic covenant. Circumcision, according to Irenaeus, is also a symbol, which looks forward to its fulfillment in the circumcision without hands, while the Sabbath, too, is symbol, even if he offered little proof of that assertion.

Irenaeus says: the Sabbaths taught that we should continue day by day in God’s service. This interpretation reflects the application of Irenaeus principle that Christ has extended the law. And now the Christian does not simply keep one day in seven but every day of the week.

In stretching the point and grasping for a reason to reduce the Jewish Sabbath to symbol, Irenaeus invents the Everyday Sabbath in order to gain doctrinal separation from the stigma of Judaism. And thus the REFORMED Sabbath of the Gospels would be marginalized and rationalized away by the Gentiles until Sunday would emerge as the Gentile Sabbath.

Within time, thanks to the errors of the early church fathers, the Jews would be considered estranged from the Gospel rather than originators and owners of this growing Semitic paradigm.

Listen to Irenaeus speak about the Everyday Sabbath in a passage from the Proof of the Apostolic Preaching, page 96: Nor will he [the Christian] be commanded to leave idle one day of rest, who is constantly keeping Sabbath, that is, giving homage to God in the temple of God, which is man’s body, and at all times doing the works of justice.

The conclusion of this matter is that while Irenaeus made a valiant and successful effort to defeat the Gnostics and to reconcile and explain the Two Covenants for the Gentile church, he made a major error in excluding the reformed Seventh-day Sabbath of Jesus as binding on the church.

While he seems to be the originator of the ceremonial law position that the SDA’s later made famous in the 19th century, his easily refutable position about the Sabbath being relegated to Old Covenant symbol dooms his false anti Sabbatarian conclusion.

This is especially so because Hebrews views the Sabbath as an unfulfilled symbol for the New Covenant believer. And why would anyone want to remove symbolism that is not yet fulfilled?

Heb. 4:9 So there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God.

Thanks to Irenaeus, his faulty Covenant error about the Sabbath was placed within the foundations of the RCC. And his pioneering work on the Covenants became the theological basis for the removal of the Jewish Sabbath, which was eventually, and incorrectly replaced by Sunday, and incorrectly referred to as the Lord’s Day.

While Irenaeus was correct to distinguish the ceremonial law from the 10’s, and even more correct to say that the moral law represents the duty of the church and the standard for behavior in the New Covenant; he was wrong to exclude the Jewish Sabbath, as reformed by Jesus; that is so clearly located in the center of the Ten Commandments as well as in the Gospels.

Jesus, as the self-proclaimed Lord of the Sabbath, reformed and preserved the weekly Sabbath so that his followers would know how to observe it under the New Covenant. He made the Sabbath practical, as well as theological, and eschatological. He even made it salvific, because he obeyed this point of the law in order to impute his Sabbath keeping righteousness to sinners for salvation.

All this means that the Sabbath is was much more than a symbol, it is part of the very Gospel itself, a part of Christ’s Holy Righteousness, which is so intimately associated with our salvation.

Therefore, there remains a weekly New Covenant Sabbath day for the Gentiles as well as for the Jews. The Gospel makes sure of this. And so too does sound theology.

It is a theological blunder to exchange what is so concrete, binding, and admittedly authoritative with something so unbiblical as the Everyday Sabbath or even the more impossible Sunday Sabbath. These popular doctrines have no real basis in theological fact. But rather, they were developed because of Anti-Semitism, a powerful force that drove the early Gentile church to make a major mistake about the Jewish Sabbath and its relationship to the New Covenant.

It is a miracle that the post-apostolic church understood as much as they did. Had it not been for Marcion, the Catholic Church, and the Cannon, and even the Reformation, would have looked very different.

So here is the source of the Everyday Sabbath that has been making such a comeback with the anti-Sabbatarian crowd. It was the invention of Irenaeus, who was struggling to deal with the Gnostic interpretation of the Two Covenants within an anti-Semitic worldview.

With the clear vision of hindsight, it is obvious that Irenaeus failed to get it fully correct. But at least he was 90% better than what Marcion had come up with, as he taught the complete removal of the entire law, including the Ten Commandments, from the New Covenant.

It should be noted that at no time does Irenaeus relate the keeping of the Lord’s Day to the fourth commandment. It was not until the mid-fourth century that a Christian theologian applies the Sabbath commandment to the Lord’s Day.

See: IRENAEUS: SABBATARIAN OR ANTI SABBATARIAN? A Look at the Old Law in the New Covenant in the Theology of Irenaeus of Lyons. By J. Ligon Duncan III.

http://www.fpcjackson.org/resources/chu … enaus.html

www.fpcjackson.org/resources/church_history/irenau s.html

http://www.atomorrow.com/cgibin/discus/ … &page=3305

Moreover, there was never a time when the church did not meet on a weekly basis--Saturday at first and then Sunday.

Because the apostolic church was 100% Jewish, they always met every Sabbath. Later on, as the Gentiles took over, Sunday was purposefully made the new Sabbath day. Thus, there was a period when both Sat and Sun were being observed in different parts of the world. As the Jews became suppressed and homeless, the Gentiles took full control of the church and the Sabbath was replaced by the fiction of Sunday as the Lord’s Day.

Thus the church has always had a weekly Sabbath, even today. And it always will. So the question is this? When will someone in Laodicea understand the correct Sabbath? It was supposed to be the SDA’s, but they have stumbled and fallen flat on their faces for all to see. So who will do it now?

Bob said: Not stealing is a pretty blunt law as is most of what became the law of love.

The Sabbath is part of the Moral law. Period. In fact, it is in the center. Just because it is different does not lessen its authority or make it less of a law. God spoke about the Sabbath, and it was only the 7th day version. Jesus, his Son, also spoke out and defended the Sabbath, even as he reformed it in the name of God.

So there is no excuse for the church to disregard such clear and strong evidence. There is no excuse for anyone to be so wrong about the Sabbath. And yet everyone is wrong, Including and especially the SDA’s--who claim to be experts about the Sabbath.

While the RC church was smart enough to understand there must be change in the Sabbath, they made the wrong one. They went from the Old Covenant 7th Day to a New Covenant 1st Day. This is absurd and impossible. The Bible does not teach such a thing.

Here is what must happen: The OC Sabbath must be replaced by a NC version. This is what Jesus is saying. This is what the Gospels are teaching.

Duty of the church

The NT contains all manner of instruction about behavior and faith. The Reformed Sabbath as taught by Jesus is clearly contained in the Gospels. It is the duty of the church, just like many other things.

Bob said: Observing a day requires much thought and cannot be left to the individual to decide what is holy and what is not. For all to be of one accord the law has to be expanded to take in many situations.

There is only one Sabbath for the Church. Period. And it is the reformed 7th Day Sabbath of the Gospels. God, Jesus, and the Spirit have authorized this doctrine. Thus, it has not been left to any individuals.

The RC attempt to change the 7th day to the 1st has no validity or credibility. Only the 7th day Sabbath has any claim to being holy and special. But that does not mean it has to be the OC Sabbath! There is a new Sabbath waiting to be discovered by the last church. Who knew?

Moreover, Jesus gave specific instructions about how the Gospel Sabbath is to be viewed and how it is not to be viewed. This is why there are so many Sabbath debates in the NT. The church must study the Sabbath debates in order to understand the Gospel Sabbath.

Bob said: I don’t find these instructions anywhere in the New Testament.

Read the Sabbath debates between Jesus and the Pharisees. Learn about the Gospel Sabbath from Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath. Also, note what the apostles do on the Sabbath. They are also our examples.

Bob asked: Is Ellen White the great authority on how we must observe the day?

No, In fact, Ellen White has a poor track record when it comes to the Sabbath.

First off, she was a Sunday keeper for years. Then she switched to the 7th day, but still got it wrong because she thought it started and stopped at 6 pm, as did Bates who converted her to the Sabbath.

She continued in error for almost a decade until JN Andrews stepped forward to declare her Sabbath observance WRONG. Which she admitted and changed.

So she is hardly a genius about the Sabbath. Nor did she ever claim to be. She only knew that Sunday was wrong, and that the doctrine of Sabbath was very important at the end of time. She is correct.

Moreover, Ellen White also had a hard time understanding the Gospel. So she is not the best source to understand the Gospel Sabbath.

But I can tell you that she would applaud the Reformed Sabbath that we are discussing here. She would quickly understand that this is what Uriah Smith should have understood during the 1888 debates. It would have saved the Battle Creek church from destruction and given them renewed purpose and a stronger faith in the Gospel and the Third Angels Message.

But the great legalist, U Smith, refused to admit any error, as he dug in his heels to defend the Old Covenant Sabbath of the Pharisees. As a result, the church quickly fell into debate and a great schism resulted. If only U Smith could have understood the Gospel and the Gospel Sabbath, the history of the SDA’s would look much improved.

Bob asked: Maybe God has commissioned you to tell the world the order of things.

The SDA’s were supposed to be the ones that correctly promoted the Gospel Sabbath to the world. THIS is what the 3rd Angels Message was all about. This was their contribution to the unfolding paradigm that they had preserved for the church.

So the SDA’s are the ones that history and prophecy has commissioned to promote the final truth about the Sabbath to the world. But guess what? They acted like the Jews and misunderstood the law and the Sabbath. They ended up promoting the Sabbath of the Pharisees, not the Gospel Sabbath of Jesus.

Now they need to confess their many errors, repent, reform, and do their prophetic duty, which is to prepare the church for the final events and the Day of Judgment, which is the Second Coming.

There is another Advent Message yet to be sounded. This is where the Gospel Sabbath will be featured, and so too the Gospel. So the Sabbath will have a final role in the last message to the church, just as the SDA Pioneers predicted, just that it will be a very different Sabbath from what Uriah Smith envisioned.

Bob said: At any rate please plug in the texts that prove what you have told us. That would be very helpful in deciding how to honor God.

Everyone must read the Sabbath debates in the NT for themselves. Without the propaganda and double talk of the SDA’s to guide their study.

While the SDA’s pride themselves in understanding the Bible better than all others, this has turned out to be a myth. Most every passage used by SDA’s to defend their doctrines is twisted out of context and manipulated to say the opposite of what the author really intended. And the passages about the Sabbath or no different.

So the answers about all doctrine are in the Bible, but caution must be used in order to correctly understand what the text is saying. It is time to put away the many myths, errors, and traditions that Adventists have built up around the Sabbath.

Just read what Jesus says about the Sabbath and understand that he repudiates what SDA’s teach. Understand that the Pharisees are the same as the SDA’s in the Gospel Story. In fact, the SDA’s are the closest of all Protestant denominations to Judaism. Which may explain why they have embraced so many bad traits of the legalistic Jews that hated the Gospel.

Let all understand that there are only so many Sabbath options. If nothing else, by the process of elimination, and a little study, the true Sabbath for the church should emerge.

Let all SDA’s read the Words of Jesus and understand that it is no sin to work on the Sabbath-- so long as one is doing good. This principle overturns everything that we have been taught about the Sabbath. And it is about time that SDA’s paid attention to the Lord of the Sabbath and understand both the Gospel and the Gospel Sabbath correctly.

At this point the SDA’s are so confused about the law and the Gospel, that they don’t know what they are saying or why. What fools they are to exile Dr. Ford, when he had the very theology that they need to protect the Sabbath and save their eschatology.

Without Dr. Ford and his theology, the SDA church is doomed. This is why they must quickly repent and reform while they have the opportunity. He understands the correct version of the Three Angels Messages, including the Gospel and the Gospel Sabbath. His continued exile is registered as the greatest of sins.

Don Sands said: You have repeatedly advocated for the NT Gospel Sabbath but nowhere have you described it. How is it different from the OT legalistic Sabbath in your opinion?

The Gospel Sabbath is the opposite of how the Jews viewed their Sabbath. It is also the opposite of how the SDA’s view the Sabbath.

We have gone it over this several times, but it is so new that it is hard for many to comprehend. Here is an old post about the Gospel Sabbath:

The Gospel Sabbath

While the SDA’s were correct to promote the Seventh-day Sabbath, they made the mistake of connecting it to the law and not the Gospel. They viewed the Sabbath as a test of obedience to the Old Covenant law. Failure to obey would deny salvation. So the Sabbath was like New Covenant circumcision, a false gateway doctrine that had to be observed in order to enter the kingdom of God. But this was a great error.

Even though the SDA’s were correct about the moral law being the standard for Christian behavior, just as the Reformers were before them, and the early church before that, they have utterly failed to connect the Sabbath to the Gospel. This is what they still have to do. This part of Sabbath Reform is still unfinished and incomplete.

In fact, that is what both 1888 and 1980 were all about. It was a clash between those who viewed the Sabbath as law that must be perfectly obeyed in order to please God, and those who realized that the Gospel was a far greater doctrine than anything to do with Old Covenant Sabbath observance.

The leaders in Battle Creek were horrified that Waggoner subordinated our obedience to the law and the Sabbath to the Righteousness of Christ. They could not understand such a New Covenant concept. Why? Because they did not understand the Two Covenants or the Gospel. They were Old Covenant Christians, much like the Circumcision Party in the 1st century. And Uriah Smith, Editor of the Review, was the leader in this apostasy.

The great tragedy about Glacier View, which was a repeat of 1888 was this: Dr. Ford was the one man who knew better than all others how to defend the Sabbath and associate it with the Gospel. He knew the difference between the Old Covenant Sabbath and the New Covenant one. He knew the secret to successfully promote Sabbath Reform to the SDA’s.

In fact, that is why he stayed a Sabbatarian, even though the SDA’s persecuted him and treated his so shamefully. He remained loyal to the Sabbath without flinching because he understood the law and the Gospel, and realized that only the Seventh day Sabbath could properly reflect the truth of the Righteousness of Christ, that alone is salvific.

But the leaders didn’t like his unbalanced Gospel or his lack of emphasis on keeping the Sabbath like an Old Covenant Jew. So they exiled him and the Gospel, and went back to indoctrinating the SDA church with the old Battle Creek error that promoted the Sabbath from a law based and legalistic perspective.

In other words the SDA leaders preferred living in their unbiblical world that mixed up the Old Covenant with the New and promoted a false Gospel that included our works, especially our Sabbath observance.

By 1980, the SDA’s were very comfortable with this hybrid theology that had grown into such a profitable business, and therefore it made little sense to question what was so successful and what seemed so much like Bible truth.

But the SDA’s have acted like the Pharisees in this matter by attacking the Gospel and thinking that at the same time they were protecting the Old Covenant Law. This is madness. The SDA leaders are blind to what they have done and now they are unable to present the Sabbath from the perspective of the Gospel. Why? Because they don’t understand the Gospel, nor do they accept it.

What a blunder it was to exile Dr. Ford. He held the key to promoting the New Covenant Sabbath like no one else in SDA history. But the leaders preferred the familiar Old Covenant Sabbath of the Pharisees to the New Covenant one that reflected the reformed Sabbath teachings of Jesus. What a pity.

When the Sabbath is connected to the Gospel, as opposed to the law, it becomes a critical test, not only of ones theological knowledge, but also of ones submission to the Word of the Apostles, as well as the public admission that the Christian Faith is a completely Jewish paradigm. At this point, to reject the Sabbath would be tantamount to rejecting all the Righteousness of Christ and rendering Gospel salvation impossible.

Perhaps those that have a Jewish background will come to understand this Sabbatarian Gospel better than the Gentiles who have been falsely indoctrinated to think that Sunday is the Christian Sabbath, or perhaps tricked into this earlier fraud about the Everyday Sabbath, and deceived into thinking that the Gospel is not a Jewish doctrine, but the Sabbath is.

Such myths will be exposed. One day, both Sunday and the Everyday Sabbath will become revealed as complete theological frauds, while the reformed Jewish Sabbath of Christ will emerge as normative for the Protestant Movement and the Remnant Church.

No wonder that the Jews will one-day flock to this new and improved Sabbatarian Gospel that properly gives them credit for the Christian Faith?

And no wonder the world will hate those that embrace the true Sabbatarian Gospel of the early Jewish Church. Those who honor the Sabbatarian Gospel will correctly be seen as Jewish, and therefore fair game for hate and persecution.

This is why the Christians will be in trouble at the end of time. They will be considered Jewish. And so they are in a spiritual, theological, and practical sense. The Gospel and the Sabbath that it contains are completely Jewish and therefore all the Gentiles who embrace it are entering into a very dangerous and very Jewish, Sabbatarian, paradigm.

So I say again that the imputed righteousness of Christ contains ONLY Sabbatarian righteousness because there is no such thing as a Sunday Sabbath doctrine (or an ES doctrine) for Christ to have obeyed on our behalf. It is pure myth because Jesus has no Sunday obedience to impute to anyone, much less obedience to a perpetual Sabbath. There is absolutely no historical or theological foundation for these false Sabbatarian doctrines.

Only the Weekly Sabbath keeping of Jesus, when imputed to us, is salvific. And only this weekly Sabbath keeping of Christ is a legitimate part of the Gospel, not Sunday keeping or the keeping the Sabbath Everyday.

I hope this is clear.

LET ME REPEAT: Christ has no righteousness to impute concerning the false doctrine about Sunday or the ES. He can ONLY impute to us his perfect weekly Seventh-day Sabbath keeping for salvation. Those who understand this theological point, and choose to reject the Sabbath contained in the Gospel, must also reject the imputed obedience of Christ on this point, and thus invite their doom.

In fact, those Christians today who follow a Sunday keeping Christ, or embrace a Perpetual Sabbath Gospel, have been tricked into following a false Christ. They have been deceived about the content, definition, and the mechanics of the Gospel as well as the Two Covenants. They have been tricked into thinking that the Jews can be removed from their own paradigm, and that the Gentiles are in control of the New Covenant church forever.

Denise said: Also, if we are to keep Sabbath, how am I to know what to do or not to do. This is an honest question as for 4 years or a little more, I’ve been a Christian now and still have this question on my conscience regarding the Sabbath. In fact just yesterday I had even mentioned this to someone else.

How are you to know “what to do or not to do” about anything concerning the Christian Faith? There is much more to Christian behavior than just the Sabbath, at least six times as much?

So the answer to this question would be the same for any kind of behavior would it not?

The answer is found in the Word. The NT is full of instruction about our behavior, and this would include the topic about our Sabbath keeping. The Word will instruct all about how to know “what to do or not to do” relative to the Sabbath. Not some church committee as President Paulsen thinks.

There are only two real options to consider for those who wish to remain loyal to the original Semitic paradigm of the early church.

The Sabbath can be observed & kept like the first century Jews, which is to say very legalistically, carefully, and methodically. Or the weekly Sabbath may be observed, enjoyed, shared, and experienced in the reformed, relaxed, and common sense manner of Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath.

I think you can see that the correct starting place to understand New Covenant Sabbath behavior would be with the Reformed Sabbath as taught by Jesus in the early 1st century and recorded by the Apostles at the end of that same century.

These dates are important to know because by the 4th century, due to anti-Semitism, the Gentile Sabbath, which was Sunday, eventually replaced the Jewish one that Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath, observed and reformed for our salvation. And before that apostasy took place, the Everyday Sabbath fraud was used in the 2nd century as a theological precursor to the Sunday deceit. But in the 1st century apostolic church, there was only the weekly Jewish Sabbath.

Just as there is only one Gospel, so too is there only one Sabbath, and it is the weekly Seventh-day brand as reformed by Jesus and recorded in the Gospels. Neither Sunday keeping, nor this earlier Everyday Sabbath scam is a valid option for anyone today who wants to seriously embrace the Gospel teaching of the apostolic church.

Sunday keeping, and this ES, are both incompatible with this glorious and salvific Gospel that only includes the weekly Sabbatarian righteousness of Christ, but excludes any and all Sunday obedience as well as this ludicrous idea about an everyday, all the time, perpetual Sabbath.

Denise asked: “Would you mind explaining to me why this is still to be observed and how it is that we are to observe it now. In my upbringing it was a very strict keeping of this day.”

Why should the Sabbath be observed? Because it is part of the moral law that has never been abrogated. Just as no Christian is free to violate the other nine commandments about killing or stealing or having false gods, the 4th commandment likewise demands compliance in the New Covenant, along with many other duties. “Not for salvation or merit.”

Why should the Sabbath be observed? Because it is also what Jesus did and taught. He is the one who called attention to the Sabbath by proclaiming himself it’s Lord. And he is the one who then went on to make major reforms about how it was to be observed. The NT record is clear on this point.

So any Christian who seeks to follow Jesus will naturally want to follow his Word about the New Covenant Sabbath. Why is this so strange?

Those who had a strict Sabbath upbringing most probably had parents who understood law, but not Gospel. They were taught that God demanded specific behavior about the Sabbath and all else or he would be angry.

But such a legalistic view of the Sabbath is what Jesus confronted and corrected. And in fact, his revision about the doctrine of the Sabbath was one of the reasons why the Jewish leaders wanted to kill him.

John 5:16 For this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because He was doing these things on the Sabbath.

John 5:18 For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.

The Reformed Sabbath of the New Covenant is more like a festive and happy occasion with dancing and food while the Old Covenant Sabbath is more like a funeral dirge in the rain.

So great was this gap between what Jesus thought was acceptable behavior and what the Sabbatarian leaders thought proper, that there was no compromise between these two mutually exclusive positions.

John 9:16 Therefore some of the Pharisees were saying, “This man is not from God, because He does not keep the Sabbath.” But others were saying, “How can a man who is a sinner perform such signs?” And there was a division among them.

The SDA’s, knowing not the Gospel, have ruined the Sabbath just like the Jews did in the days of Jesus. The SDA Sabbath is more rain than sunshine and more law than Gospel. This needs to be corrected, along with most everything else within hierarchal Adventism.

While there is a wide range of acceptable Sabbath behavior for the Gospel believer, there is not much that one can do with this Old Covenant Sabbath that is so restrictive and suffocating. No wonder that Sabbatarians have left such a bad taste in so many mouths. The Jews and the SDA’s have been very poor models for the true Gospel Sabbath. Why? Because they have both rejected the Gospel and refused to accept the teaching of Jesus about the New Covenant Sabbath and the subordination of the law.

Reformed Sabbath Behavior

As to how to behave on the Sabbath? Just look at what Jesus taught about the Sabbath. Did he change it to Sunday, or explain how we should deal with the new Everyday, perpetual Sabbath?

You can do what he did and think like he thought about it. How can you go wrong with that advice? If he taught that the Sabbath was to be acknowledged and observed every day, then the church must follow his lead in this matter. But if not, on what basis can such a new doctrine be supported? The same goes for Sunday.

Jesus reformed the legalistic weekly Sabbath of the Old Covenant and emancipated it from a religious day of spiritual drudgery and public submission to a corrupt religious hierarchy.

Jesus transformed the restrictive and punitive Seventh-day Sabbath into a day of varied activity, including service to others, as he took this Day out of the hands of the religious elite and gave it back to the people for their enjoyment and pleasure.

Once reformed, the New Covenant Sabbath was a day of enjoyment, fellowship, feasting and rest; a special day that was meant to teach the followers of Christ about the Gospel and the eternal rest that is still coming their way.

Mark 2:23 And it happened that He was passing through the grainfields on the Sabbath, and His disciples began to make their way along while picking the heads of grain.

Mark 2:24 The Pharisees were saying to Him, Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?"

Mark 2:27 Jesus said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.”

Mark 2:28 “So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”

Those who follow the Lord of the Sabbath will act the way he did on the Sabbath. Period.

Therefore, you are free to follow his Sabbath example by helping a neighbor, studying the scripture, going to church, or helping the sick, or eating at a restaurant, or walking outdoors with friends. Even debating theology with ones enemies has precedent from the Lord of the Sabbath.

Just study all the things that Jesus and the apostles did on the Sabbath and see how they can fit into your own life. Such an exercise will forever resolve your questions about specific Sabbath performance. This study will also demonstrate that there is no such thing as an Everyday Sabbath, much less a Sunday one.

The Sabbath was made to serve mankind and give to men and women a break from the curse of ceaseless toil. The Sabbath was never intended to become a stern taskmaster that demands religious servitude and worship. Both the Jews and the SDA’s made the Sabbath into idolatry. Without the Gospel, the Sabbath is reduced to a curse.

So the Sabbath in the New Covenant is not about sunset calendars and a list of rules about do’s and don’ts. It is not something we “do” to be saved or to please God. Rather, the Sabbath is a weekly gift from heaven to be received and enjoyed by ALL who embrace the Gospel. It is not a doctrine that is to be used to create guilt or to manipulate behavior.

Nor does the reformed Sabbath teaching of Jesus favor the special few who are in the medical or ministerial professions as the SDA’s teach. These two special groups had a very hypocritical system set up for themselves whereby they were allowed to work and get paid on the Sabbath, while all others were forbidden to consider such sinful action.

The Jews played this same game: While it was fine for those in religious positions to break the law about working on the Sabbath to perform religious duties, like circumcision, it was illegal for others, like Jesus, to heal a person and make them well on that day, or for anyone to do much of anything. They thought they understood the Sabbath so well, and that they had everything figured out for God, but they were badly confused about most everything, especially about the mercy of the creator God.

Luke 13:10 And He was teaching in one of the synagogues on the Sabbath.

Luke 13:14 But the synagogue official, indignant because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, began saying to the crowd in response, “There are six days in which work should be done; so come during them and get healed, and not on the Sabbath day.”

Luke 13:15 But the Lord answered him and said, “You hypocrites, does not each of you on the Sabbath untie his ox or his donkey from the stall and lead him away to water him?”

Luke 13:16 And this woman, a daughter of Abraham as she is, whom Satan has bound for eighteen long years, should she not have been released from this bond on the Sabbath day?

John 7:22 For this reason Moses has given you circumcision not because it is from Moses, but from the fathers and on the Sabbath you circumcise a man.

John 7:23 If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath so that the Law of Moses will not be broken, are you angry with Me because I made an entire man well on the Sabbath?

John 5:16 For this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because He was doing these things on the Sabbath.

John 5:17 But He answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working.”

What double-talk and hypocrisy from the religious Sabbatarian leaders. Away with this test about working on the Sabbath and pretending that we are in the Old Covenant and trying to follow the letter of the law about do this and don’t do that.

Jesus does away with such Old Covenant Sabbath thinking and shows that God himself works on the Sabbath, and that he will too, without any permission or approval from the religious leaders.

Eph. 5:1 Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children.

There is freedom in the Gospel Sabbath from most, if not all of the rules that have been associated with SDA Sabbath keeping. If one is moved to do “good” on that day, and that “good” result in “working on the Sabbath, ”so be it. This is a matter between that person and God. It is not any business of the church. Placing food on the table for children and family is far more important to Heaven than playing legalistic games about the Sabbath.

Jesus taught that the Sabbath Day is for the people. It was not designed so that the religious leaders could turn it into a day of rules and regulations to create guilt and empower themselves to sit in the place of God and criticize and become the Sabbath police.

The Sabbath was not made to give the law more authority or to make us into greater sinners. It represents the opposite. And every Christian is free to follow the reformed New Covenant Sabbath teachings of Christ without guilt or fear. In fact, that is the duty of all who embrace the New Covenant.

There is great latitude in the NC Sabbath and no one is to judge on these matters as we have the Words and the example of Christ to guide all.

John 5:16 For this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because He was doing these things on the Sabbath.

John 5:17 But He answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working.”

The SDA’s made such a big deal out of getting people to take Sabbath pledges and stand up for the Sabbath by confronting their employers that one would think that this Day had died on the cross for all mankind?

The confused SDA’s were encouraged to became martyrs and get fired for the Sabbath, thinking that they were pleasing God by following the letter of the law rather than the Gospel Sabbath as Jesus intended.

Such perverted witnessing is nothing more than Old Covenant nonsense that is the reverse what the Sabbath represents. The New Covenant Sabbath keeping of Jesus does not have such restrictions and legalistic rules.

While one should certainly be prepared to lose a job, or even their life for that matter, rather than repudiate the Gospel, the SDA Sabbath comes nowhere close to fitting this category. The Sabbath is not the Gospel. The SDA’s have deceived many a person with their Old Covenant Sabbath teaching. They have made many lives much worse then if they had never become SDA.

Matt. 23:15 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel around on sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves.

In other words, Gospel Christians do not have to observe the Sabbath day as if they were Old Covenant Jews. This is how the SDA’s did it in Battle Creek and Takoma Park. They were like paranoid and legalistic Jews who had all kinds of rules about cooking and cleaning and this and that.

The Sabbath Day was a pain and a burden, not to mention a financial catastrophe, unless of course you were in the special fields that were exempted from the strict rules.

In fact, the SDA’s were so legalistic, that Friday was called the preparation day, just as the Jews called it. A time to get ready for the Sabbath so as not to be caught at sundown unprepared for all the many rules and regulations.

The meals had to be pre-cooked, shoes polished, the car filled with gas, etc. It was an idolatrous obsession to a perverted doctrine that emanated from a false Christ and a false Gospel In fact, to this day the GC still gets out early on Fridays for this same legalistic, Old Covenant purpose.

Mark 15:42 When evening had already come, because it was the preparation day, that is, the day before the Sabbath.

Luke 23:54 It was the preparation day, and the Sabbath was about to begin.

John 19:42 Therefore because of the Jewish day of preparation, since the tomb was nearby, they laid Jesus there.

But such an emphasis on a day is idolatry. There is no salvation in our Sabbath observance. The day did not die on the cross or bleed for anyone. Nor will anyone be saved because of his or her Sabbath observance. Rather, the Gospel is the central doctrine of the church, it alone is salvific, not our Sabbath observance.

It is the Gospel that gives the Sabbath meaning as we try to grasp for the physical and spiritual rest that is so desperately needed after a week of working in a doomed world.

So there needs to be a new understanding about the Sabbath within the SDA Community.

The Old Covenant Sabbath needs to be replaced with a New Covenant Sabbath as reformed by Jesus and recorded by the Apostles. Away with the SDA Sabbath, which is just as much a fraud as it the Sunday Sabbath of the Catholics, or the Everyday Sabbath of the confused evangelicals.

At the end of time the Remnant will have the true Sabbatarian Gospel as well as the Reformed New Covenant Sabbath of Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath and Savior of the Church.

Tom Norris for Adventist Reform

Last edited by tom_norris (02-07-10 2:06 pm)

maggie · 01-25-09 8:29 pm

27,259 words...I think that's a record.

george · 01-25-09 10:29 pm

Tom,

So, if I could get my eyes to focus again, I would pick out a list of proper NT Sabbath behavior from your above post as being:

Do good.,

Heal,

Help others.,

Meet human needs.,

Study the Bible,

Rejoice in the Gospel

Celebrate salvation in Christ.

How is that activity, or even that state of mind, any different for a Christian on any other given day?

cadge · 01-25-09 11:45 pm

Ha ha, I'm going to get a cow to milk on Sabbaths and name it Beula in honor of J.R.'s cow. And it'd be good for the garden too!

Cadge

P.S. Thanks for the explanation Tom. I'm going to think on that for a while.

don · 01-26-09 6:57 pm

How is that activity, or even that state of mind, any different for a Christian on any other given day?

Tom will answer for himself, for sure; thought I would add my thoughts.

It is true that Christians should involve themselves in such activities all the time. There is something else about the Sabbath which encompasses all this but it does so in community. Yes, the Sabbath can be observed in solitude. I enjoy such a Sabbath. But, along with the personal focus on Christ, the power of the Sabbath is in the community focus.

All during the week, believers are busy making ends meet. On the Sabbath, they meet: at church, over lunch, on the hiking trail, at the hospital, in the study circle, etc. Afterall, its a day off. People can meet together in Jesus name as a planned event. Other days, as well; the Sabbath is designed for such.

This feature of the Sabbath is being met by Sunday-meeting Christians, as well. The Sabbath-Sunday issue focuses on issues of loyalty and changing things God did not mandate changing, etc.

bob_2 · 01-26-09 7:29 pm

Don, or mandate renewing, from Old Covenant to New Covenant. Hebrew 4 is clear on the Sabbath question, SDAs know their uniquenes depends on avoiding discussion of this passage in an open, intellectually honest manner . There is no mandate for a day other than Today. Show me. There is a break in the two covenants. There is not a restating of the same tenets in the New as the Old.

don · 01-27-09 9:03 am

There is not a restating of the same tenets in the New as the Old.

Are you suggesting that anything not restated in the New Testament is no longer a moral value of God's?

I believe that all the covenants reflect the moral values and practical wisdom of God; they are eternal.

His character and wisdom remain constant through all the relationships designed for humanity. If a day of rest made sense in the Mosaic covenant, it makes sense today, as well. It made sense to God, Himself, at the end of the Creation week. In spite of all the global complications, the Sabbath serves a wonderful practical purpose; truly a divine invention.

If a Christian does not want to acknowledge such practical wisdom, I will not push the matter onto him, or her.

bob_2 · 01-27-09 1:30 pm

Don, obsolete means obsolete, Heb 8:13.

Old Covenant was the 10 Commandments, Deut 4:13; Deut 5:1-3. If one wants to hang on to what they believe God is commanding, when he is not, does that not smack of idolatry. There is nothing wrong with meeting, worshipping on Saturday under the New Covenant, but no where is it mandated after being given uniquely to the Jews.

Everyone needs rest, that is not the best arguement for mandating what God does not in the New Covenant and overlooking how God deals with the Sabbath in Heb 4 or Col 2:16,17. Every man to be convinced in his own heart, Romans 14:5. Men are not to judge each other on this, as the SDA church does, Col 2:16,17.

When Christ said on the cross it is finished, He fulfilled the Old Covenant, ALL of it. A New Covenant made the Old or First obsolete. When something is obsolete, then you look to see what replaces it.

Adventists for Tomorrow

Announcement

#26 01-19-09 9:18 pm

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#27 01-20-09 12:03 am

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#28 01-20-09 9:36 pm

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#29 01-21-09 7:35 am

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#30 01-21-09 11:09 am

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#31 01-21-09 3:23 pm

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#32 01-21-09 5:56 pm

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#33 01-21-09 10:23 pm

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#34 01-21-09 10:54 pm

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#35 01-22-09 12:46 am

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#36 01-22-09 6:41 am

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#37 01-22-09 10:40 am

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#38 01-22-09 10:49 am

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#39 01-22-09 11:30 am

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#40 01-22-09 11:32 am

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#41 01-22-09 12:44 pm

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#42 01-23-09 10:49 am

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#43 01-25-09 4:30 pm

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#44 01-25-09 8:29 pm

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#45 01-25-09 10:29 pm

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#46 01-25-09 11:45 pm

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#47 01-26-09 6:57 pm

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#48 01-26-09 7:29 pm

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#49 01-27-09 9:03 am

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

#50 01-27-09 1:30 pm

Re: The Reformed Sabbath

Board footer