There are two major distinctive claims of Seventh Day Adventism, which separate it from the rest of Christianity:
- First, that Christians are supposed to keep Saturday, the Sabbath, holy. They oppose worshiping on Sunday, arguing that it’s against the Ten Commandments and generally anti-Scriptural.
- Second, that the founder of Seventh Day Adventism, Ellen G. White, was a prophet.
The official Seventh Day Adventist website declares:
One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White . As the Lord’s messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction.
But as we’ll quickly see, White was no prophet, and her works are riddled with errors. Let’s look at two of her major claims about the Sabbath, both from her supposedly-inspired book, The Great Controversy.
The first of the claims I want to look at is White’s assertion that all of the early Christians kept the true Sabbath for the first centuries of Christianity:
In the first centuries the true Sabbath had been kept by all Christians. They were jealous for the honor of God, and believing that His law is immutable, they zealously guarded the sacredness of its precepts.
(Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 52).
So that means that at a bare minimum, we should see every single Christian worshiping on Saturday for at least two centuries (since “first centuries” must mean at least two). Now read what St. Justin Martyr wrote in 150 A.D., in his First Apology:
And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings [the Greek word here is Eucharist], according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need.
But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn [That is, the day before Saturday]; and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration.
So well within the first centuries of Christianity, Sunday worship was practiced. And notice that Justin doesn’t describe this as some innovation, either. He’s explaining to non-Christians what basic Christian practices look like, and Sunday worship is already the norm for “all” in 150. For someone alleged to be a prophet, White’s unable to present the truth on even this basic fact about the Sabbath.
Surprisingly, Seventh Day Adventist scholars admit that she’s wrong on this. Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi, perhaps the best Adventist scholar, wrote:
The earliest documents mentioning Sunday worship go back to Barnabas in 135 and Justin Martyr in 150. Thus, it is evident that Sunday worship was already established by the middle of the second century. This means that to be historically accurate the term “centuries” should be changed to the singular “century.” This simple correction would enhance the credibility of The Great Controversy, because it is relatively easy to defend general Sabbath observance during the first century, but it is impossible to do it for the second century.
In other words, the alleged prophet’s words are true, if you change the words. This sounds like a polite way of conceding that Ellen White was a false prophetess.
But what about Bacchiocchi’s claim that while Sunday worship existed in the second century, it didn’t exist in the first? He’s making an argument from silence. This is a common tactic I’ve seen used by Protestants in defending their views. If you show that Ignatius believed that the Eucharist is the true Body and Blood of Christ in 107 A.D., they’ll respond that the Church must have taken a symbolic view until 106. Of course, this sort of argumentation is ridiculous. If you’re going to make an argument from silence, the strongest argument is that no change in doctrine or practice happened — because if a change of doctrine had happened, we’d see evidence. If Christians suddenly (globally) started worshiping on Sunday instead of Saturday, wouldn’t someone have mentioned that somewhere?
White’s second claim is that it was the emperor Constantine who changed Christian worship from Saturday to Sunday. This is from p. 53 of the book I just quoted, The Great Controversy:
In the early part of the fourth century the emperor Constantine issued a decree making Sunday a public festival throughout the Roman Empire. (See Appendix). The day of the sun was reverenced by his pagan subjects and was honored by Christians; it was the emperor’s policy to unite the conflicting interests of heathenism and Christianity. He was urged to do this by the bishops of the church, who, inspired by ambition and thirst for power, perceived that if the same day was observed by both Christians and heathens, it would promote the nominal acceptance of Christianity by pagans and thus advance the power and glory of the church.
We already know that this is false: that Christians were already worshiping on Sunday well before Constantine. But what’s interesting is that White had a second and contradictory prophesy. You see, she also claimed that it was the big, bad pope, not Constantine, who changed the date from Saturday to Sunday. So, for example, in Early Writings of Ellen Gould White, we read her description of an vision she claims to have had in 1850:
The pope has changed the day of rest from the seventh to the first day. He has thought to change the very commandment that was given to cause man to remember his Creator. He has thought to change the greatest commandment in the decalogue and thus make himself equal with God, or even exalt himself above God.
From this, she learns that the pope is the Antichrist. In an earlier “vision” from 1847, she recounts:
I saw that the Sabbath was not nailed to the cross. If it was, the other nine commandments were; and we are at liberty to go forth and break them all, as well as to break the fourth. I saw that God had not changed the Sabbath, for He never changes. But the Pope had changed it from the seventh to the first day of the week; for he was to change times and laws.
Surprisingly even some of our leading evangelists believe, on the basis of Ellen White’s statements, that Sundaykeeping began in the early part of the fourth when church leaders urged Constantine to promulgate in 321 the famous Sunday Law.
This popular view has exposed our Church to much undesirable criticism. Non-SDA scholars and church leaders like Dr. James Kennedy, accuse our church of plain ignorance, by teaching that Sundaykeeping began in the fourth century, when there are irrefutable historical evidences that place its origin two centuries earlier.
I have spent countless hours explaining to Dr. James Kennedy and to professors who viewed the recent NET satellite programs, that this popular Adventist view is not reflective of Adventist scholarship. No Adventist scholar has ever taught or written that Sunday observance began in the fourth century with Constantine. A compelling proof is the symposium The Sabbath in Scripture and History, produced by 22 Adventist scholars and published by the Review and Herald in 1982. None of the Adventist scholars who contributed to this symposium ever suggest that Sundaykeeping began in the fourth century.
So, once they examine the evidence, even Adventist scholars realize that White is full of it. Obvious question: if that’s the case, why remain Adventist?
The entire Seventh Day Adventist church is discredited, because it:
- (a) declares Ellen White a prophetess, when she was clearly not;
- (b) declares her writings as an authoritative source of truth, when they clearly are not; and
- (c) continues, as its distinctive mission, is to celebrate the Sabbath on the Seventh Day, Saturday. Even the church’s name is based on this mission… yet the mission is founded on junk history, false prophesies, and bad Scriptural exegesis.
UPDATE: Check out Brent Stubbs’ post on Constantine and the Catholic Church. He quotes St. Ignatius of Antioch, writing between about 107-110, who said:
If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord’s Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death— whom some deny, by which mystery we have obtained faith, and therefore endure, that we may be found the disciples of Jesus Christ, our only Master— how shall we be able to live apart from Him, whose disciples the prophets themselves in the Spirit did wait for Him as their Teacher?
So by the first decade of the second century, Sunday worship was already a way of signalling that the Christians believed in Jesus as the Messiah, and in His Resurrection. So even Bacchiocchi’s claim that Christian Saturday worship existed for the first hundred years of Christianity is false. And it’s incredibly unlikely that this practice was new at the time of Ignatius. Since the Apostle John died around 100 A.D., one would think that he would have spoken out against Sunday worship, if it truly was a violation of the Gospel. Unless, of course, he’s part of the massive Constantine/papal conspiracy. Of course, we also see Sunday worship in places like Acts 20:7, so there’s no reason to see this as anything other than of Apostolic origin.
UPDATE 2: Brock, in the comments, quotes from the Didache, which was probably written in the mid- to late- first century… that is, at the same time as the New Testament. This closes the case on the idea that the early Christians were Saturday worshippers:
“But every Lord’s day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving [Eucharist] after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one that is at variance with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations. “
Good catch, Brock! I might add that the whole bit about the necessity of confession, the Eucharistic Liturgy being a Sacrifice, etc. — all incredibly Catholic.
Many of us former SDAs are coming home to the Catholic church! You’d be surprised how many….
You are aware, I am sure, of the Ellen White prophecy found in the book, Great Controversy, in which she claims an angel told her that in the last days the Catholic church will be behind a worldwide Sunday Law that will require everyone to worship on Sunday. They will spear head a movement to persecute and even murder Seventh-day Adventists.
Lest you think this crazy idea a forgotten doctrine of the church swept away by liberal SDAs today…. The General Conference of SDAs are about to launch a project attempting to get The Great Controversy into millions of homes via a mail blitzkrieg. This anti-catholicism is alive and well and being taught daily in SDA elementary, secondary and university levels.
To teach that it is wrong to worship on Sunday (as their prophesy contains the warning that all Christians worshipping on Sunday will eventually get the mark of the Beast) is easily refuted.
The Hebrews worshipped daily in the Temple sacrificing all day long to Him. Early Christians worshipped daily in the temple and also “broke bread” ( a worship service) daily. Acts 2:46.
To teach that worshipping God on Sunday is a mark of evil is well, as ignorant as you can get. The Bible makes clear that the early church worshipped every day–including Sunday!
Pray for SDAs! My whole family and most of my friends are SDA. They think I have left Christianity and my sanity to become Catholic! God bless.
Really? So you worship stones and carved images? What a pity..
Did Christ or Paul, or any new testament mandate gave us a command to worship on sunday and treat The Sabbath day not holy?
Should I become a roman-catholic, a church loaded with many monstrous doctrines borrowed from pagan philosophies?
The Seventh-day Adventist church is still the true church. Logically, the Roman-catholic institution fits the Biblical description of Revelation and Daniel.
Are you saying that the Seventh-day Adventist church was around in the 2nd Century? 3rd? 4th?
Was the Baptist, Methodist, and Lutheran churches alive back them…?
Wow, lol! She just broke the 9th commandment in her reply by saying we worship statues. Not only that, but what Christ said was most important of ALL the commandments, to love one another as yourself. Uhh-ohh. And don’t forget Luke 6:37- do not judge and you won’t be judged. Looks like someone has some repenting to do. ntntnt.
Seriously folks, with 20,000 children dying daily from the lack of clean water and food on the same planet we share, what do you think the Lord thinks when we argue over such nonsense. So so so sad. Truly.
Give, share, love… show some compassion.
Teresa,
So thankful that you’re Catholic now! And yes, I’m aware that the Adventists are doubling down on the anti-Catholic conspiracy theories. They were a lot more plausible in the nineteenth century, when Americans didn’t know any real life Catholics.
On a related note, I mentioned here that breaking bread is how the Scriptures often identify Eucharistic celebrations, since the Eucharist uses unleaven bread (that is, the only kind of bread that breaks). So yes, that was definitely Sunday worship.
Also, Brent’s most recent post on the subject is good: check it out!
God bless you, and prayers for your family and friends,
Joe
Um… Jews use Unleavened bread
Chapter 14. Christian Assembly on the Lord’s Day
“But every Lord’s day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one that is at variance with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations. “
The Didache, Cerca 100AD
Brock
Of course! The Didache’s probably even earlier than 100, actually. If I may steal a quote from Wikipedia:
The 2005 edition of the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church comments: “Although in the past many English and American scholars tended to assign it to the late second century, most scholars now place at some point during the mid to late first century.”
It was probably written contemporaneously with the New Testament, in other words. And we can trust it as an authentic representation of Apostolic thought, as it was quickly accepted by the very earliest Christians.
will you please read the Ten Commandments. Exodo 20:1-17 and Mateo 5:17 Acts 10:25-26
Also… the breaking of bread is a common way of saying eating together… it was also often used in the 1800’s read your history books…
Also, an interesting observation that Scott Hahn makes is that Adam and Eve’s first full day on Earth was the Sabbath. Although it was the seventh day of God’s week, it was the first full day of Man’s life. Man has not done much work by the point it experiences the first Sabbath. They got rest before they began their work week.
Their first full day was given to God. This is similar to the first the flock, money, etc that we Jews and Christians are to tithe.
He says it follows that Christ re-establishes the first day of Man’s week as the day of the Sabbath.
God was acting as an example teaching us as mankind what we should do.
Agreed, I like the argument that it was before the destruction of the Temple. I can’t remember all of the reasons they believed it was written then, but there are several compelling ones!
Also, I’m not as familiar with the various liturgies as I should be. Is there something in the liturgy of James that would express Sunday as the proper day?
Out of interest, what is the reason such people give for remaining an SDA when their founder’s claims are so clearly refuted?
Yeah, piggybacking on Restless Pilgrim’s question, is the day-of-worship the *primary* thing that separates SDA from, say, Catholics?
Or is it also the typical smograsbord of issues–papal authority, the sacraments, justification, etc?
Basically I’m wondering if I convince a SDA friend that worshiping on Sunday is not wrong (and maybe even that it’s God-ordained), what would then be the biggest doctrinal obstacle to him becoming Catholic?
Restless Pilgrim,
I’m a little befuddled by this one myself — if you’re an Adventist, and openly acknowledge that your founder was wrong on things which were supposed to be inspired and prophetic, why are you an Adventist? But for most people, it’s a matter of ignorance. Even Bacchiocchi acknowledged that most SDAs, including church leaders, seem to have no idea that they’re parroting easily-disproven claims.
Brandon,
If such a person were to realize that Sunday worship is proper, they’d have to cease to be Adventist… but that’s different from automatically becoming Catholic, of course. Ellen White taught that the pope was the Antichrist, and a lot of SDAs still believe it. There’s a lot of baggage to overcome. Of course, getting them reading the Fathers is a good way to hack through that baggage, also.
Institute of Catholic Culture gave a great talk back in July on Seventh Day Adventism — it’s the July 19 talk here (
http://instituteofcatholicculture.org/media.htm#cults). Deacon Sabatino Carnazzo, MA, & Subdeacon Sebastian Carnazzo, PhD each present, followed by a convert giving his conversion story.
(Apologies in advance to anyone upset by the “Cults” title — I didn’t choose it, and they explained in one of the talks what they meant by it).
God bless,
Joe
Your own Pope said he was an Anti-Christ…
What do Adventists mean when they say she was a prophet? Do they see her writings as public revelation, on par with that of Isaiah and Jeremiah?
I have to ask because it seems that at any given time there are several Catholic “prophets” claiming to have inner locutions or visions of the Virgin Mary. When they make a prediction that, for example, either the world will repent or there will be a Great Chastisement by the year 2000, and the year 2000 comes and goes with neither obvious repentance nor chastisement, we are told that sometimes the visionaries misunderstand what they have been shown. This sounds to me like a cop-out, but if we allow it for our own, we should allow it for them, too.
Howard,
Best as I can understand, they view it as something akin to Isaiah and Jeremiah. It’s used to support SDA doctrines, and the church called her writings “a continuing and authoritative source of truth.” That sounds like public revelation to me.
In contrast, the Catholic Church doesn’t endorse would-be visionaries and prophets. Let time tell if they’re right. As far as the cop-out, that sort of mentality is incredibly dangerous. If a “prophet” predicts something, and it’s not true, they’re a false prophet.
Joe
P.S. Brock, I’m not sure on the Liturgies, but I doubt it, since worship wasn’t just on Sunday. Forgot to respond earlier.
Bro… I’m an Adventist mate…
And I must say… that… that the Bible’s prediction of your pope getting taken away by Napoleon man was what hurt Catholicism a lot.
But, the Bible says that the scar that was made to the beast will heal… So have no fear my friend… your large money wanting church is going to be leading America soon so just be patient.
“P.S. Brock, I’m not sure on the Liturgies, but I doubt it, since worship wasn’t just on Sunday”
Not that really much more proof is needed given the Didache, Ignatius and Justin.
…and, of course, it’s not to say that the New Testament is without its clues… Is it any wonder that St. John saw that great vision of heavenly worship on the Lord’s Day?
(Only just realised that today is the feast of the prophetess Anna. How appropriate!)
Knew a health nut, body builder, trainer in a gym. He followed a strict and very healthy diet, and I figured out that he was an SDA because of his language on sabbath and diet. So, I told him of verses from Acts about Pete’s vision to “take and eat,” as well as Gospel, “not what goes into a man that makes him impure but what comes out.” (sauerkraut?) He looked at the verses as if he had never seen them in his life. It was troubling to him. But, in the name of Jeeheeesuhs and the guy with the funny hat in Rome, someone has to eat bottom feeders without scales.
However, your inadequate interpretation of the scriptures is visible… you see, a priest was to maintain his temple ( his body ) with clean meats, and plants only.
In peters vision, he has never eaten an unclean meat before… so he questions back. But God did this to tell Peter that Gentiles were to be amongst the ones to follow Christ not just the Jews.
The first verse you should was not shellfish are clean now thing… it was a message to Peter and the church that Gentiles where good for Christ…
The second is speaking of the words of a man… similar to what Solomon wrote in Proverbs about a man’s tong.
Also do you really think that God would change his mind about what is clean? No! If that was the case, then would be saying that he made a mistake, and so Satan would be right after all… so the other correct meaning would be have to be correct… that would also delete your supposed lie about what comes out, because that would conflict the previous mater… completely.
So watch what you say…
In other words, think before you speak…
Andy, you are dead wrong. St. Peter’s vision proves the dietary laws are no longer binding because it was gentile DIET that causes the Jews to consider them UNCLEAN. If gentiles can no longer be considered unclean [due to their diet], and since the Bible says All foods are clean (Rom. 14:14) then the vision obviously means that the mosaic dietary laws are no longer binding
For anyone wanting to know…. Whether cultural Adventist (grew up in church and very liberal) or traditional “I-believe-all-the-church-teaches” SDA, it ALL comes down to the Sabbath issue.
I know a ton of Adventists who don’t believe Ellen White is a true prophetess, they don’t agree with hardly any of the SDA doctrines but they would be martyrs for the Sabbath.
It is about the Ten Commandments to them. They are going to stick with Adventism to the death because in their eyes if you don’t keep God’s commandments you don’t love Him. You are a fake or deceived Christian. And the 3rd commandment says remember the Sabbath day. They assume false Christians will forget it and they alone of all Christendom will NEVER forget it–even at the point of torture and death…..
Know that about Adventists before you go in trying to convince them of anything. You can convince them their prophetess is a liar, but they will cling to the church because of the Sabbath.
Fourth commandment… read your Bible… remember there is Ten Commandments… which one did you kick out?
Thanks for the extra info on the Sunday/Sabbath controversy, Joe! I believe I’ll be referencing it when I make my next addition to my “Apologetics toolbox” series.
Messianic Jews will typically worship on the Sabbath instead of on Sunday.
Duh… they are Jews… they have been doing that for 1000’s of years!
I would say that up there next to the sabbath on the most distinctive doctrine list is their belief that the human soul ceases to exist upon death. they are pure materialists, and believe that in the end times, next to the sunday law, there will be a massive deception about immortality of the soul (but of course their prophet lived in the 19th century, so much of the hysteria is presented in form of seances and table rapping).
one of the standard ways of introducing this doctrine is to talk about adam and eve in the garden. the claim of the seerpent was “you will not die”, so, see? Immorality of the soul is the original deception of the devil.
There is also evidence for Christians worshiping on Sunday that predates St. Justin Martyr.
Acts 20:7:
“And on the first day of the week (ie: The day named after that bright-yellow-circle-thingy in the sky), when we were assembled to break bread…(AKA: Communion, Eucharist, that thing Catholics have been doing for going on 2000 years now)”
Acts was written circa 80-85, just after the Gospel of Luke, but before Luke was most likely martyred. (Acts is almost certainly unfinished, and something must have interrupted Luke’s writing of The Book of Acts.)
It’s been my experience that many SDA are extremely anti-Catholic. This one chick told me that the Church was the “Evil Empire…”
They probably use it cover up the lack of foundation of their own belief system…
Um… no… Acts would’ve been written earlier… not by John… Luke wrote it earlier…
Um… no… Acts would’ve been written earlier… not by John… Luke wrote it earlier…
Chinese food is good…! Did I say that?
Um… no… Acts would’ve been written earlier… not by John… Luke wrote it earlier…
Chinese food is good…! Did I say that?
Satan has ways of blocking truth…
Living in Brazil, therefore speaking Portuguese, we call Sunday “Domingo”, which we inherited from the Latin expression “dies Dominicus”, translated as “O Dia do Senhor” and, in English, “The Lord’s Day”.
So, it’s easy to understand that this notion of worshiping Sunday is something special and comes from the Apostolic Tradition itself as we see in the Scriptures.
Hmm. Rob, your passage may be some evidence, but only some. You see, it would be perfectly intelligible in Greek, as in English, to use that construction both for something unique and for something habitual. You wouldn’t think that if someone told you when his family had gathered for dinner Thursday, that they necessarily didn’t eat dinner together all other nights, and so with that.
There is other Scriptural evidence pointing to a Sunday gathering.
As a 4th generation (former) Adventist I have to say I think many still cling to the “Shut Door” policies of the church. If you KNOW the truth (the Sabbath) and leave it, you are lost FOREVER. Most of my family are Adventist and I have shown them false teaching in their own publications but they cannot get beyond the “what if” factor. I still struggle with that sometimes too so these blogs are so very helpful.
Tiger Fan,
Do you have any tips (perhaps from your own conversion) regarding helpful and productive ways of reaching out to Adventists?
I’m an SDA seriously considering leaving the church.
As someone mentioned, the teaching that a person ceases to exist upon death (“the state of the dead”)is right up there with the Sabbath as an SDA distinctive. EGW teaches that immortality of the soul will be Satan’s greatest deception just before the end times. The proof text of all proof texts is Ecclesiastes 9:5,6 “the living know that they shall die but the dead know not anything.” Thus, veneration of saints and the Theotokos is right out the window.
I think you need a two-pronged attack to change SDA minds.
First, you need to show them texts they’ve never seen before. For example, on the state of the dead, later in Ecclesiastes it says a man goes to his eternal reward while the mourners are still in the street. Since SDA’s believe in the resurrection of the body, this will make them question the utility of using Ecclesiastes for doctrinal purposes. Or on the issue of food, I believe Mark’s gospel mentions that Christ declared all foods clean. Once open to a different possibility, you can establish a better foundation for doctrine.
Second, you need to have a firm grasp of history. SDA’s adhere to the historicist method of interpreting scripture, meaning that they look at history from Bible times till now to find fulfillments of different passages. So with this reliance on history, you will be able to force them into an intellectual corner: if they’re willing to accept the testimony of history to show that Napoleon imprisoning the pope is the “deadly wound” in Revelation, then they can’t discount history when it shows that Christians worshipped on Sunday way before Constantine and even during apostolic times.
One point of caution on the Sabbath when dealing with scholars or sophisticated SDAs: EGW does admit that Christians worshipped on both days. Her real “beef” with Sunday is that it replaced Saturday as “the Sabbath” (that’s the point of bringing up Constantine’s decree requiring rest on the venerable day of the sun). This requires a more nuanced argument showing that Sabbath worship wasn’t “Sabbath keeping” as SDA’s understand it, and it was never considered a law for Gentile Christians. That said, for the run-of-the-mill SDA, the fact that Christians worshipped on Sunday would be a bombshell by itself.
CJ,
This was… incredibly helpful.
The Institute of Catholic Culture talk I went to pointed to the following passages showing that the SDA notion of soul sleep is false:
(1) 1 Samuel 28, the witch of Endor. Verses 12, 14, and 15 specify that it actually is Samuel who is conjured by the witch. And Samuel is aware of what’s been going on since his death (see v. 16-19), which he wouldn’t have been if he were sleeping.
(2) Luke 16:19-31, the parable of Lazarus and the rich man. Lazarus is seen being comforted in the bosom of Abraham after death. The rich man and Abraham have an extended discussion. None of this is possible if they’re all asleep.
(3) 2 Corinthians 5:8 is the famous “absent from the body, home with the Lord” passage. The passage only makes sense if Paul is going to enjoy Heaven now. Otherwise, he’s telling the Corinthians he’d rather be asleep than ministering to them (which, besides being rude, would defeat his whole point).
(4) Hebrews 12:1, the great cloud of witnesses. In Hebrews 11, Paul talks about our forerunners in the faith, from Abel on down through the rest of the Old Testament (including the Deuterocanon -see Heb. 11:35). In 12:1, he declares these men and women a “great cloud of witnesses” to the journey of faith each of us is running in this life. Obviously, if they’re asleep, they’re not witnesses.
I think that there were more passages, but those are the ones I’m recalling off-hand. If I get a chance, I’ll go back to that talk, and flesh this out into a full length post later this week.
I have to ask, though: why are you still Adventist? You seem to be quite clear-eyed about the problems with the religion’s fundamental tenets. You seem to recognize that everything that is distinctively “Adventist” about it is also distinctively wrong.
And given your help, what can I do for you in return? You didn’t specify what you’re considering leaving Adventism for, so let me just ask: what are your remaining issues with Catholicism? I don’t want to just tear down your old faith without showing you the fullness of the faith Christ entrusted once for all to the Apostles (Jude 1:3).
God bless,
Joe
Joe,
Glad my post was helpful, and I appreciate your offer of help.
Why am I still SDA? There are a few reasons. I am a 4th generation SDA. I attended SDA elementary schools and college. I am as thoroughly steeped in this stuff as can be. I can see all the problems as clear as day now, but then I can hear a sermon at church or listen to some SDA apologist and think “hmm . . maybe they’re not all wrong.” Adventism is still my “first language” so to speak. St. James would say I’m double-minded 🙁
The other (and bigger reason) is fear. All of my family (except my dad) are SDA. So are in-laws and 90% of my close friends. Leaving would place a huge strain on my marriage and every important human relationship I have. My wife is NOT on board and while she knows I’m questioning, she doens’t know the depth of my alienation from Adventism. And finally, to be honest, there’s a small remnant of doubt that I’m wrong and I’ll go wandering after the Beast if I leave the Adventism.
So the best thing you can do for me is to pray for me to receive clarity and *ahem* intestinal fortitude. I would definitely appreciate it.
CJ,
You’ve got it. You might also want to get in touch with Tiger Fan (above), another 4th generational Adventist who left for Catholicism. If there’s anything else you need, don’t hestitate to ask.
God bless,
Joe
Oh, you asked where I would go if I leave.
Well, paraphrasing Cardinal Newman, once I started reading history, Protestantism seemed less and less viable. That leaves Catholicism and Orthodoxy. So far, I believe the Orthodox have the better side of every issue where they disagree with Rome, so Orthodoxy would be my most likely destination. I do enjoy Catholic media, as it is easier to find and usually better produced.
Probably last post from me today, but I wanted you to know that Bacchiochi is not always well-regarded by rank-and-file SDA’s. After he questioned EGW, rumors started flying that he was a Jesuit infiltrator used by Rome to undermine the SDA church. I wish I was making this up.
It would probably be better to present the evidence from primary sources and leave him out of it.
CJ,
Wow. Now that you mention it, I recall watching an Adventist-produced video about how the Jesuits are infiltrating Protestant denominations. Would that the Jesuits were still an overpowering force for Catholicism and the Gospel!
I’d love to address issues relating to Catholicism and Orthodoxy if any come up, whenever you get to that point in your journey. I won’t rush you, though.
Prayers for you and your wife, and God bless,
Joe
Weren’t Jesuits murderers?
Joe,
Thank you for your post! People need to see that EGW was downright wrong in her claims. I didn’t know about those quotes until now!
Two points I’d like to add:
(1) The SDA church officially supports abortion, just as the LDS church officially supports abortion. That alone is sufficient reason to know they are on the wrong track.
Check out this official teaching:
http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/guidelines/main-guide1.html
“The Church does not serve as conscience for individuals; however, it should provide moral guidance. Abortions for reasons of birth control, gender selection, or convenience are not condoned by the Church. Women, at times however, may face exceptional circumstances that present serious moral or medical dilemmas, such as significant threats to the pregnant woman’s life, serious jeopardy to her health, severe congenital defects carefully diagnosed in the fetus, and pregnancy resulting from rape or incest. The final decision whether to terminate the pregnancy or not should be made by the pregnant woman after appropriate consultation. She should be aided in her decision by accurate information, biblical principles, and the guidance of the Holy Spirit.“
This is somethign many SDAs do not know, and when they find out they are as shocked at Mormons. The sad thing is many people (incl SDAs) think SDAs are strongly pro-life, but that’s obviously false. In light of this, the SDAs who will talk with me end up saying abortion is a minor issue, all in the midst of their cognitive dissonance.
(2) From an exegetical standpoint, there are Bible texts that absolutely demolish the SDAs, particularly the famous Colossians 2:16. SDAs are well aware of this verse, but they are totally unaware of the fact it demolishes their claim. Here is a brief article I wrote on that verse.
And on top of that, the Bible is clear the Sabbath wasn’t instituted until Moses, yet the SDAs parrot the claim the Sabbath was kept since the beginning, and that it “must have been kept by Abel” since he was obviously Godly. But all you have to do is stick to the point there is no record of Sabbath keeping until Exodus 20 when the Mosaic Law established it. The SDAs are technically a form of Judaizers.
I don’t know who you talk to… but here in the east… that never happens…
This is a test to see if I have mastered the system to post a comment. The last two statements by Nick can easily be shown to be mistaken according to the Bible.
Cyril,
Your comment successfully posted. I’m curious as to what you’re saying Nick was mistaken about, and why. Please, continue! God bless,
Joe
Okay, looks like I have made it in. I suggest that Nick read Exodus 16 and Exodus 5:5 to see that Sabbath observance preceded Exodus 20. Further, from the New Testament, Mark 2:27, 28 strongly indicate that Sabbath keeping started on the 7th day of Creation week. Other comments I tried to post last night were:
Wow! Seems the above writers are sure of themselves. Somebody who wrote into Bibleinfo.com, brought to my attention this website and suggested I read, and I did. I’m not very favorably impressed with many statements made because many are not true. Many writers are not even able to spell the name of the church they are against correctly: “Seventh-day Adventist.” The Seventh-day Adventist Church’s foundation is not Ellen White, but the Bible. You are going to have to change history and what the Bible says in order to win a faithful, knowledgeable Seventh-day Adventist to Catholicism. Let me give you just one, (that supports what I just said and I have more), quote from Catholic sources: “The Catholic Mirror” Sept. 9, 1893: “Hence the conclusion is inevitable: viz,. that of those who follow the Bible as their guide,
the Israelites and Seventh-day Adventists have the exclusive weight of evidence on their
side, whilst the Biblical Protestant has not a word in self-defense for his substitution of Sunday for Saturday.”
Read the whole articles on this from either “The Christian Sabbath” produced by The Catholic Church or “Rome’s Challenge” which gives the same articles in a pamphlet produced and still available at bookstores. You can easily download these from the internet in PDF format
Further, documented Catholic sources state that the Catholic Church substituted Sunday for the Sabbath.
And for CJ, have you read “Ellen G. White and Her Critics” that has been out for over 50 years? And, have you read a book that I personally typed for the internet and also arranged to have re-published of the autobiography of Carrie Johnson and biography of Ellen White’s worst enemy, Marvin Dudley Canright? (“I Was Canright’s Secretary”) You can read it online at http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/books/canright/index.htm or buy a hard copy through http://www.lnfbooks.com
Taking the view of the writer of the above article, he is going to also have to trash the Bible because there are errors in it too!
Cyril
Cyril,
There’s no contradiction between saying that switch in liturgical practice to worshiping on Sundays was (a) done by the Catholic Church, and (b) done during the time of the Apostles. They’re the first Catholics.
Exodus 5:5 doesn’t help your case, because it’s not about the Sabbath — it’s about a three-day journey into the wilderness to offer sacrifices to God. Exodus 5:3 says as much. Exodus 16 does, though, in that it shows the Israelites practicing the Sabbath before Exodus 20. It’s still Mosaic, which I think was what Nick was trying to say.
As for Mark 2:27-28, it’s Jesus’ rebuke to those Pharisees who tried to use the Sabbath as a tool against the Christians. He says that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. But the SDA church has Adventists afraid that if they don’t celebrate Saturday worship, they’ll go to hell. You tell me whether that sounds more like the approach of Jesus or the Pharisees.
What say you about the content of the original post? Do you have anything more substantive than that people didn’t put a dash between Seventh and Day?
In Christ,
Joe
Hello Cyril,
Joe has pretty much said what I was going to respond with. First of all, I originally intended to say Exodus 16, I just wasn’t thinking when I said Exodus 20. My mistake. The point was that it was instituted by Moses and they had no command to celebrate it prior (as their puzzlement in Ex 16 clearly indicates).
Now unless you mistyped yourself, I would say your appeal to Exodus 5:5 is they typical question-begging I’ve encountered repeatedly before by SDAs who appeal to texts prior to Ex 16 which don’t actually say anything about Sabbath keeping (as Ex 5:5 does not). As for Mark 2:27-28, they are still speaking within the framework of the Mosaic rules and regulations.
Other than that Cyril, you seem to have utterly ignored the case I made via Col 2:16f and conceded the official semi-pro-abortion stance of the SDAs as perfectly acceptable.
One final point to be made that often causes a lot of confusion and seems to give the SDA side some credence is the claim Christians “substituted” or “transferred” the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. That’s totally false. The Saturday Sabbath and Sunday Worship are two different things liturgically speaking. Christians celebrate Christ’s Resurrection on Sunday, while Saturday Sabbath has nothing to do with this and is instead a Mosaic regulated end of the week break.
Unfortunately, your claim about the apostles and the first
Catholics being the same and switching God’s specific
directions in The Ten Commandments, is not born up by
documented claims by Catholic’s published writings which I
hereby document. Evidently you are not aware of these
things which I now quote from a Catholic source: “The
Catholic Church, . . . by virtue of her divine mission, changed
the day from Saturday to Sunday.”–
Catholic Mirror, official organ of Cardinal Gibbons,
September 23, 1893.
“Question. Which is the Sabbath day?
“Answer. Saturday is the Sabbath day.
“Question. -Why do we observe Sunday instead of
Saturday?
“Answer. -We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because
the Catholic Church, in the Council of
Laodicea [A.D. 336–exact date uncertain], transferred the
solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.’!–“The Convert’s
Catechism of
Catholic Doctrine,” by Rev. Peter Geiermann, C. SS. R.,
page 50, third edition, 1913, a work which
received the “apostolic blessing” of Pope Pius X, January 25,
1910.
I agree with you that Exodus 5:5 may not be about the
seventh-day Sabbath, but that is a possibility because it
contains the word “rest” which is the meaning of “Sabbath.”
Further evidence that Moses was having the Israelites
observe this Sabbath rest is that Pharaoh increased their
work and provided no straw any more. Because the
Sabbath commandment in Exodus 20:11 gives the reasons
for observing the day and since the day was made Holy at
Creation AND the reasons for its observance existed at
Creation, I have yet to hear or see a reasonable explanation
as to why God would not have all His intelligent creatures
enjoy the delights of this day beginning with Creation week.
In the first place, the Bible does not describe anyone
going to hell, but that is another topic for another time. I
agree that the origin of Sabbath keeping is not the purpose
of the context of Mark 2:27, 28. However, if we do not agree
with what is said, we are in trouble. Let me give a little of
what I shared with a recent questioner of Bibleinfo.com, but I will have to do that in a separate post because a message came up saying that I had exceeded 4,096 characters, just as though I was counting them!
Cyril
Why Mark 2:27 & 28 is so significant:
It has been claimed that Mark 2:27, 28 has been taken out of context to support Sabbath observance commencing and being instituted at Creation. I admit the charge of being out of direct context, but hasten to say that we must not say that the words are not true, otherwise we have The Lord of the Sabbath speaking an untruth which none of us would agree to that being the case. Let’s look at the story and the verses.
The disciples came to a corn field, (probably wheat or barley field), and rubbed off the outsides and ate the meat. To this activity the Pharisees ascribed Sabbath breaking by extra rules they had set up for Sabbath keeping. Calling Jesus attention to this “bad behavior” they asked why. Jesus referred to David’s unlawful conduct and then in a humorous or ridiculous presentation of whether man had been created so that the Sabbath could be kept by somebody or whether the Sabbath was created for the benefit of man, made the often quoted verses, setting the record straight. And, I quote: Mark 2:27 And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath: 28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. Mark 2:27 Contemporary English Version 27Jesus finished by saying, “People were not made for the good of the Sabbath. The Sabbath was made for the good of people.
If we take the position that Jesus should have said or meant that the Sabbath was made for the Jews, (in 1450 BC), we find ourselves in the camp of those who are trying to correct our Divine Creator. We have to take the statement just as it reads, that the Sabbath was made at Creation and the only man alive was Adam and his wife Eve. Hence, it was made for their benefit and enjoyment and also the pre-incarnate Christ’s benefit.
Yes, out of direct context, but never-the-less, TRUE! For God said it. Jesus carried them back, in His answer, to the foundation of the Sabbath, the origin of man and His authority. And, you notice, that ended the discussion. (One of their wise choices!)
We could also go into why Jesus said He is the Lord of the Sabbath. That also takes us back to Creation Week, when Christ Created, not only the World, but an extra Holy Day, the seventh day of the week. So, on two counts, this text carries our minds back to the time when the Sabbath was Created–the seventh day of Creation week. Our minds are carried back to the creation of mankind and the creation of the Sabbath in Christ’s response to the Sabbath-breaking charge.
Walking as He walked, (1 John 2:6)
Cyril
Cyril,
(1) My point was that the practice of keeping Sunday as the primary day of rest and worship throughout the week predates the Council of Laodicea by at least 300 years. Laodicea created a Church-wide rule to prevent those Judaizers who insisted that the Mosaic Law had to still be followed. And yes, the Sabbath is of Mosaic origin. It’s no coincidence it’s never mentioned prior to Moses.
(2) I believe that your exegesis of Mark 2:27-28 misses the mark. The contrast Jesus was drawing was between God and man, not between Jews and Gentiles. His point was that an unhealthy obsession over Sabbatarian legalism was defeating the whole point of the Sabbath — which was to relax, and rest in the goodness of God. My point is that the Adventists today are doing the same thing.
(3) You claim that Seventh-day Adventism is based on the Bible, not Ellen White. But the Bible includes passages like Romans 14:5-6 and Colossians 2:16-17, which explicitly denounce what your church teaches. Specifically, Romans 14:5-6 establishes that no one day of the week is inherently better than any other, and Colossians 2:16-17 does something very similar (although Nick already pointed this passage out to you).
(4) Whether you like to admit it or not, your church was founded by a woman who was demonstrably a false prophet. Christ warns us against false prophets in Matthew 7:15-17, and warns us that no good fruit will come from their bad seed. Adventism is the fruit of Ellen G. White — that’s just a basic historic fact. So if she’s a false prophet steer clear of her false church. And I think that there’s great reason to conclude she got basic historical facts wrong, contradicted her own prophesies, and bore all the marks of a false prophet.
(5) Finally, the alternative is to believe that the earliest Christians — as far back as the Didache — were engaged in something sinful (Sunday worship), and in response, the Apostles did nothing to stop their sinfulness? They didn’t speak out once against the Sabbath-breakers, but said things like what we heard in Romans 14:5-6 and Colossians 2:16-17? If you’re right, it would seem that the Apostles intentionally mislead their flock. And St. John, in his Revelation, specified that it occurred on a Sunday, which he calls “the Lord’s Day” (Rev. 1:10). If the day of the week dedicated to the Lord is actually Saturday, how can you account for the Apostles’ actions?
God bless you,
Joe
Say! What happened to CJ?
Joe,
I wonder if you agree with these Catholic statements of which I will give a couple of samples? I do agree with the conclusion of the second one by the Catholic priest there in Michigan.
http://www.sabbathtruth.com/sabbath-history/denominational-statements-on-the-sabbath/articletype/articleview/articleid/982/catholic.aspx
“Tradition, not Scripture, is the rock on which the church of Jesus Christ is built.” Adrien Nampon, Catholic Doctrine as Defined by the Council of Trent, p. 157
Would Jesus say to that: Matthew 15:3 Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
“Perhaps the boldest thing, the most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday. “The Day of the Lord” (dies Dominica) was chosen, not from any directions noted in the Scriptures, but from the Church’s sense of its own power. The day of resurrection, the day of Pentecost, fifty days later, came on the first day of the week. So this would be the new Sabbath. People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become 7th Day Adventists, and keep Saturday holy.” Sentinel, Pastor’s page, Saint Catherine Catholic Church, Algonac, Michigan, May 21, 1995
2 Peter 1:12 . . .be established in the present truth.
Cyril
By the way, just because I don’t answer a question does not mean that I agree with what has been said or presented. In contrast to Roman Catholicism, The Seventh-day Adventist Church does not have a human dictator at its head and so, regarding issues such as abortion, there is no “official” position that I am aware of. People such as Dr. Bacchiocchi as some who have contributed here have stated, is not regarded as an authority for the church and certainly lacks scholarship in some areas such as what has been presented above. I have met him personally and had difficulty in having my ideas even listened to. I have to assume he did the best he could with what he had gleaned from his investigation, even though he missed the boat in some areas. His doctoral thesis received the imprimatur of the Pope of which I have a copy here, but now they, (the university), are trying to deny that he even attended the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome! Deception is not going to impress anybody who has a conscience and discovers it! (Rev. 21:8)
For the truth,
Cyril
Cyril,
You quoting random Catholic newspapers and such is not going to get us very far in discussion. For one, it sends the discussion down a rabbit trail of defending someone else’s words, especially if the words are inaccurate or poorly chosen. Please quote only official Church documents.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church is one such official source you should be consulting – here is some of what it says on the issue of the sabbath:
“2174 Jesus rose from the dead on the first day of the week. Because it is the “first day,” the day of Christ’s Resurrection recalls the first creation. Because it is the “eighth day” following the sabbath, it symbolizes the new creation ushered in by Christ’s Resurrection. For Christians it has become the first of all days, the first of all feasts, the Lord’s Day (he kuriake hemera, dies dominica) Sunday:
[St Justin in 150 AD said] ‘We all gather on the day of the sun, for it is the first day when God, separating matter from darkness, made the world; and on this same day Jesus Christ our Savior rose from the dead.’
2175 Sunday is expressly distinguished from the sabbath which it follows chronologically every week; for Christians its ceremonial observance replaces that of the sabbath. In Christ’s Passover, Sunday fulfills the spiritual truth of the Jewish sabbath and announces man’s eternal rest in God. For worship under the Law prepared for the mystery of Christ, and what was done there prefigured some aspects of Christ:
[St Ignatius in 150 AD said:] Those who lived according to the old order of things have come to a new hope, no longer keeping the sabbath, but the Lord’s Day, in which our life is blessed by him and by his death.”
So from an official teaching source, we see the Catholic Church teaches (a) Christians worship on Sunday in commemoration of the Resurrection, NOT to ‘transfer the sabbath to Sunday’, (b) that “Sunday is expressly distinguished from the sabbath,” and (c) early Christians as far back as 150AD testify that Christians worship on Sunday – calling it the Lord’s Day – and that the sabbath is an expired Mosaic regulation.
Given that, any Catholic newspaper or priest that you quote that says otherwise is either (a) confused, (b) wrong, or (c) saying something other than what you’re thinking it’s saying.
You also said something that I’d like to comment upon:
“The Seventh-day Adventist Church does not have a human dictator at its head and so, regarding issues such as abortion, there is no official position that I am aware of.”
Well, Cyril, you need to follow the link I gave earlier which takes you directly to the official SDA webage and gives the official SDA position on abortion, which is that it’s allowed at times.
Hahaha… you… you defenseless… I read those too… did you even look them up? Probably not, because you are wrong… lying is a sin, don’t it, like your parents didn’t teach you.
Hahaha… you… you defenseless… I read those too… did you even look them up? Probably not, because you are wrong… lying is a sin, don’t it, like your parents didn’t teach you.
I said Thailand food is good… website come one… this ain’t a duplicate… Chinese food was last time…
Hey, sorry about this… the website thinks I duplicate so I change it around…
From a famous writer: John the disciple of Christ…
“So he RESTED the seventh day and rose agin the first.”
That’s basically what it says… check it out mate.
Cyril,
I have had not intention of misrepresenting SDAs – I know from years of apologetics that misrepresentation is the worst thing when it comes to getting anywhere. We all make mistakes, though, and *if* I have, I will retract. But you’ve not shown where I misrepresented the SDAs.
The SDAs expressly permit abortion under various circumstances – and it’s largely irrelevant if they forbid abortion for ‘non-serious’ reasons. The point is, either the child is a human or it is not. If it is, then the sanctity of life overrides any ‘inconveniences’, because taking innocent life is murder by definition and thus never acceptable. The idea that there can be “exceptions,” that is times when murder is OK, is plainly absurd.
To the Catholic mind, it’s that kind of consistency that is easy for us to spot and point out; and on the flip-side it often becomes a scandal and often the occasion of cognitive-dissonance.
Okay, we are all trying to do the right thing. To me, your comment in the article does not rightly represent what I read on the Adventist website. If you read there carefully, abortion is NOT being advocated. And, that is what I understood from what was said in the article, (SDA Church supports abortion.”) Would it not be better to say, SDA Church discourages abortion. What I see is that you have mislead your readers because you think the church is wrong it other areas. Has it come to your attention what the penalty of causing an abortion in the days of the Old Testament was?
Let’s take another example in which it is stated that Ellen White is the founder of The Seventh-day Adventist Church. This is 67% inaccurate because she is only considered one of three. Baptist preacher William Miller is really responsible for bringing to the Christian World’s attention that an important event was to take place in 1844. His problem was that he was mistaken in what the event was. At that time, Ellen Harmon was only 17. When she started having visions of the future, she came into association with an Adventist preacher by the name of James White. After almost 2 years, they decided on marriage–she was 19, soon to be 20–he 26. The truth of the Sabbath came to their attention by another Adventist, Joseph Bates in that same year and they accepted this. So, it was really the three that spearheaded the movement. Official organization and naming did not occur for another 17 years. James White was president twice. Ellen White never held an office nor did she want or relish the job of being the Lord’s messenger.
More later.
For the truth,
Cyril
Cyril and Nick,
Perhaps the two of you could agree on some neutral language like: “The SDA Church permits abortions in certain cases”?
That doesn’t overstate the point, but still makes it clear where we Catholics (and all pro-lifers) see a serious problem. If abortion is the killing of an innocent human child, then the SDA church’s stance is contrary to the Decalogue, and to basic morality.
Cyril,
As for the roles of Miller and James White, Miller was never a Seventh-day Adventist (I’ve talked about him previously on the site), and the criticisms of Ellen also apply to James, since he made similar “prophesies” that the pope had changed the Sabbath to Sunday, from what I’ve read (correct me if I’m wrong).
God bless,
Joe
Hey Bud… notice, that in Ellen G. White writings she predicts the first, second, world wars. And even the events after 9/11
Hey Bud… notice, that in Ellen G. White writings she predicts the first, second, world wars. And even the events after 9/11
P.S. This website hates comments so I’m changing this one… so it isn’t going to say, “Duplicate Comment.”
I didn’t say Chinese, Thailand, or Japanese food was good, I hate seafood, it’s against the the words from Leviticus… ahhhh!!! Just read it coded computer program…
Hey Bud… notice, that in Ellen G. White writings she predicts the first, second, world wars. And even the events after 9/11
P.S. This website hates comments so I’m changing this one… so it isn’t going to say, “Duplicate Comment.”
I didn’t say Chinese, Thailand, or Japanese food was good, I hate seafood, it’s against the the words from Leviticus… ahhhh!!! Just read it coded computer program…
Never mind, that didn’t work… I’ll try again…
Joe,
Giving historical events does not constitute “prophecy.” But, let’s get down to the practicality of all this and what really matters now and that is whether the Papacy is currently pushing Sunday sacredness and worship. I don’t think either of us would disagree on this. Check on the late John Paul’s “Deis Domini” on that and Pope Benedict, XVI’s stance and statements.
You see, this is extra-biblical and to me, unbiblical, seeing as how the Sabbath is God’s flag, sign of authority. Some have altered history and created history that never happened such as “The Donation of Constantine.” You just can’t change or eliminate the 7th-day Sabbath any more than you can eliminate or change the 4th of July or your own birthday, for that matter, because all three are memorials of history.
Take down Ellen, James and Joseph Bates, but it will not change the Bible nor take down The Seventh-day Adventist Church because its foundation is Jesus Christ who authored the Bible.
And for a little truthful Bible trivia, Can you tell me the name of the building that Jesus is in right now?
For the truth,
Cyril
Cyril,
Glad to know you missed me. 🙂 As for the books, yes I have read EGW and Her Critics. As for Canright, I started doubting EGW long before I’d ever heard of him, so I’m not sure what good would come of reading a bio about him.
My doubts about Adventism go beyond EGW or this or that doctrine. Adventism presents itself as the culmination of the Protestant Reformation: Luther & co. got off to a great start, but they didn’t go far enough because they didn’t jettison Sunday and immortality of the soul.
But what happens if the Reformation itself was mistaken? The culmination of a mistake is just a bigger mistake. That’s where I am with Adventism.
What Adventism has in common with Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormonism, and even Islam is that it must teach that The Truth was lost along the way and had to be re-discovered by EGW/Watchtower/Joseph Smith/Muhammad.
This “rediscovery of the truth” idea is necessary because when you look at the actual history of Christianity, you don’t find anything that looks like Adventism. To this day, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church keeps the Sabbath and dietary laws, but they believe in the real presence off Christ in the Eucharist, venerate Mary and the saints, and use alcoholic wine for communion. There were groups that denied the immortality of the soul, but they didn’t keep the Sabbath, etc.
So what you’re left with is believing that Jesus was so inept a teacher that He chose disciples who couldn’t reliably pass on the truth two generations after His resurrection, and that he left His church (which He promised never to leave or forsake) to wander in darkness for 1500 years before giving partial light, and then waited another 300 years to finish the job.
Scripture says that the faith was given once and for all (Jude 1:3). Instead, we have it given, lost for 1800 years, and then rediscovered. This has hell prevailing against the gates of the church, not the other way around. It’s a feature that’s common to any false religion that wants to preserve some kind of respect for Christianity while introducing novel doctrines and claiming them to be the authentic teaching of Christ and the apostles.
Cyril,
The Sabbath itself is not enough to preserve the SDA church. If all you have is the Sabbath, you could be Seventh-Day Baptist, Church of God 7th Day, Messianic Jewish, or Ethiopian Orthodox.
As Adventists have become increasingly fond of saying, the only doctrine that is UNIQUE to the SDA church is the Investigative Judgement (aka 2300 day prophecy/Sanctuary Doctrine).
Nope…
Cyril,
(1) Are you suggesting it’s a sin to set aside Sunday to worship and honor God? Or just that it’s a sin not to keep the Jewish Sabbath in addition?
(2) And for a little truthful Bible trivia, Can you tell me the name of the building that Jesus is in right now?
I’m not sure what you’re asking exactly, but I just encountered Jesus in the Eucharist at the Catholic Information Center this afternoon, so that’s at least one answer to your question. What theologians refer to as His “local” presence, of course, is in Heaven, which He calls His Father’s House.
(3) Let’s do some fundamental exegesis. 2 Chronicles 2:4 says that the Jewish Temple sacrificial schedule consisted of sacrifices “on the Sabbaths, at the New Moons and at the appointed festivals of the LORD our God.”
So there are religious observances celebrated weekly (the Sabbath), monthly (New Moon), and annually (appointed festivals). Do we agree so far?
God bless,
Joe