Amazing Facts bible study guide

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jennifer123
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dear Patrick

Good to hear from you.
Thanks for answering about the Sabbath as written by God on stone. I don’t quite understand what you are trying to say – are you implying that I am not `keeping the Sabbath’ because I don’t kill those who break it? If so, please just remember that the Jews were under a theocracy – God led them literally, by a shining cloud/pillar at night and a cool cloud by day. When the cloud moved, they moved. etc. When asked what to do, God even had a system of green/red stones on the ephod of the high priest to answer them. Under God’s guidance they had to do these things (also remember they were a bunch of freed slaves, unruly at times, and in need of clearcut direction and a firm hand!).

Today not one of us has the right to follow God’s instructions like this. But you know there will come a time of reckoning when records of our lives will be scrutinized. Let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water!

God bless,

Friedrich
 
Dear Nan S

Thank you so much for the friendly note – my day was brilliant, both my sons came home from a long trip (8 flights each), and are safe, thanks to God. Hope you have a better day today.

I never thought your church believes in `once saved, always saved’, so no problem there.

I am genuinely puzzled that there has been such a heated discussion about the law of God, as if it is a curse, something to be dreaded, wittled away, removed. Maybe it is because of misunderstanding. I would love to give my 2 penny’s worth on God’s law:

I love my wife so much. So I DO spend lots of time with her, wash the dishes, thank her for the nice food, talk to her, pay for the bills, remember her birthday/our anniversary… You could call these things LAWS OF LOVE. I also DON’T flirt with other women, don’t look at pornography, don’t watch half naked women on the beach in summer, don’t go off for months without her company, don’t insult her in public etc.
The problem comes in when I don’t love my wife enough! Then the laws of love become a burden. We feel obliged to go through the motions `for the kids’ or whatever stupid reason.

NB I DO NOT kiss my wife so that she will love me, but because we both already love each other, AND WANT IT TO STAY THAT WAY!

BUT TAKE AWAY THE LAWS OF LOVE, AND LOVE SOON DIES!

You and I love Jesus/God/The Holy Spirit so much. So we DO go to church, pray all day long (even at work with eyes open), say grace before meals, pay offerings and tithes, remember Him specially on Sabbath (the day He wants to spend with us, to remember that He created us, and is now re-creating us after sin)… You could call these things GOD’S LAWS OF LOVE. We also DON’T have other gods before us (even TV, house, career), treat our parents disrespectfully, murder, steal, lie, covet etc.

The problem comes in when we DON’T love God enough! Then God’s laws of love become BURDENS! We feel obliged to keep them out of fear of hell or whatever, or to try and win God’s favour! That is why we are so desperate to get ride of them.

NB WE DO NOT obey God’s laws to win His love (that is legalism, or the `old covenant’ way of trying to find God’s favour), but because we both love each other already (that is grace, when these laws are written in our hearts) AND WANT IT TO STAY THAT WAY!

BUT TAKE AWAY GOD’S LAWS OF LOVE, AND OUR LOVE FOR GOD SOON DIES!

That is why Jesus said: ``If ye love me, keep My commandments’’

Have a lovely day!

Friedrich
 
Dear SDA2C

Thank you for your extensive writing on laws of the Bible. I appreciate your view, but need to clarify some things.
Laws, whether written on stone or not, are still laws. I was merely trying to show you that THERE ARE DIFFERENT LAWS.

Try this example: You have a bunch of KEYS – some for your CAR, some for your HOUSE. ALL=KEYS! BUT THEY HAVE DIFFERENT USES.

Take the ``ceremonial’’ laws – this is merely a coined phrase to describe their FUNCTION – read them up in the Pentateuch, especially Leviticus. They cover many topics. The serious' ones are about FEAST DAYS, that were designed by God FOR A FUNCTION -- TO POINT TO THE COMING MESSIAH! Take the Passover feast, it fits EXACTLY with the Passover feast when Jesus died! Without going into all the details, these feasts had ceremonial’ Sabbaths attached to them, fixed to a date rather than a weekly day (like Xmas which falls on different days every year). They were HOLY DAYS, pointing to Christ’s death, resurrection etc. A wonderful set of `lessons’ to teach about the coming Messiah – but when the Messiah had come, their use was not needed anymore! These laws were nailed to the cross.

The Moral Law or 10 Commandments obviously are a different set of KEYS with a DIFFERENT FUNCTION – THEY ARE BASED ON 2 PRINCIPLES – LOVE FOR GOD (1-4) AND LOVE FOR OUR NEIGHBOUR (5-10), and are a MIRROR/SCHOOLMASTER to show us where our `spiritual faces’ are dirty. Do we still need this mirror/key today? You bet. Imagine what our world would be in if the values taught in the Ten Commandments were dropped – by saying God’s laws were done away, we are actually promoting a lawless society, which could lead to disastrous results for this planet!

By the way, somebody kept referring to the 10 Commandments as the ``Jewish Law’’ – please do not limit God to such a degree!
Check your Bible – the Jews only entered the stage thousands of years after Eden. Even Caleb, the first born man on this earth, was a murderer, and God told him so – if there were no laws guiding their love for their neighbour, do you think God would have bothered to curse Cain?

God bless,

Friedrich
Friedrich,

I am a little disappointed that your response does not address any of the Bible Texts that I provided showing that there is only one Law. If you are going to claim that there are two laws, one that was done away with and one that still remains then you need to establish that in scripture.

No matter how you divide them now, or what you call them now, scripture has always treated them as one Law with 613 commands. This is why you have had to create the non-biblical designations of “Moral” and “Ceremonial” in order to separate them. Scripture does not do this!

They did not have different purposes… they had one purpose… to serve the Jews. They were ADDED because of transgression UNTIL Christ. They were created to prepare the way for Christ. Now that Christ has come, we are no longer under a school master.

(2 Cor 3:7 NASB) But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was,
(2 Cor 3:8 NASB) how shall the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory?
(2 Cor 3:9 NASB) For if the ministry of condemnation has glory, much more does the ministry of righteousness abound in glory.
(2 Cor 3:10 NASB) For indeed what had glory, in this case has no glory on account of the glory that surpasses
it.

Notice above that the Holy Spirit calls the commandments which were engraved on stones, the “ministry of death” and goes on to speak of something that has replaced it… the “ministry of the Spirit.”

They are Jewish Laws because they were only given to the Jews. Jews did not believe that gentiles were every required to keep the Sabbath, this is because they had a very strong believe that the Sabbath was given ONLY to them, and not to any other people. The 2nd Century BC book of Jubilee’s states:

``The Creator of all blessed it, but he did not sanctify any people or nations to keep the Sabbath thereon with the sole exception of Israel. He granted to them alone that they might eat and drink and keep the Sabbath thereon upon the earth’’ (Jubilees 2:31)

The Ten Commandments covenant was not made with the fathers. (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc.) Deuteronomy 5:2-3 says “The Lord our God made a covenant with us at Horeb. The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, with all those of us alive here today.”

Nehemiah 9:13-14 says: “You came down on Mount Sinai; you spoke to them from heaven. You gave them regulations and laws that are just and right, and decrees and commands that are good.** You made known **to them your holy sabbath and gave them commands, decrees and laws through your servant Moses.” (NIV).

Notice also that this Sabbath “SIGN” (Exodus 31:13) is between God and “the sons of Israel” (Exodus 12:15,17) and not for all of mankind.

Nehemiah 9:13-14 indicates that the Sabbath was not given to be kept by anyone until it was given to Israel in the wilderness.

If your belief is true that it was not given only to the Jews… then I would appreciate scriptural sources to show that Gentiles were commanded to keep the Sabbath. As far as I have read in my Bible… only Jews were commanded concerning it. It was said to be a sign only between God and the Son’s of Israel.
 
I am genuinely puzzled that there has been such a heated discussion about the law of God, as if it is a curse, something to be dreaded, wittled away, removed.
Friedrich,
I treat it as a curse because it is a curse!

Galations 3:13 "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us–for it is written, “CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE”–

It produces slaves!!

(Gal 4:22 NASB) For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the bondwoman and one by the free woman.
(Gal 4:23 NASB) But the son by the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and the son by the free woman through the promise.
(Gal 4:24 NASB) This is allegorically speaking: for these women are two covenants, one proceeding from Mount Sinai bearing children who are to be slaves; she is Hagar.
(Gal 4:25 NASB) Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children.
(Gal 4:26 NASB) But the Jerusalem above is free; she is our mother

The Old Covenant Proceeding from Mount Sinai bears children who are to be slaves, yet this is what you are trying to get us to follow. Why would we follow you into slavery?
 
Dear Patrick

Good to hear from you.
Thanks for answering about the Sabbath as written by God on stone. I don’t quite understand what you are trying to say – are you implying that I am not `keeping the Sabbath’ because I don’t kill those who break it? If so, please just remember that the Jews were under a theocracy – God led them literally, by a shining cloud/pillar at night and a cool cloud by day. When the cloud moved, they moved. etc. When asked what to do, God even had a system of green/red stones on the ephod of the high priest to answer them. Under God’s guidance they had to do these things (also remember they were a bunch of freed slaves, unruly at times, and in need of clearcut direction and a firm hand!).

Today not one of us has the right to follow God’s instructions like this. But you know there will come a time of reckoning when records of our lives will be scrutinized. Let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water!

God bless,

Friedrich
Dear Friedrich,

It is good to hear from you. I do feel “closer” to you than some of the other SDAs I’ve talked with on here…perhaps because you and I have been together from the “beginning” of this thread. You were the first SDA I talked with when I joined this forum.

No, I was not saying that you were not keeping the sabbath because you don’t kill those who break it. I was saying that you are not obeying God’s command regarding those who break it, based on what he wrote on the tables of stone…and hear me out.

While that may be an exaggeration of a point I was trying to make, the point is that if you review the covenant made between God and Moses, and the freed slaves from Egypt in Exodus, you will find that what are commonly called the 10 commandments were a part of the entire covenant made at that time. All of that covnenant was written by the finger of God, not just the part called the 10 commandments.

I remember when I was a SDA, part of the Bible studies I would give regarding the sabbath centered on the fact that God wrote the commandments with His finger…so as to place more weight on persuading people to keep them.

It is interesting, and true, what you point out above regarding how God led His people after making the covenant with them…pillars of fire, smoke, the system of colored stones used by God to answer their questions.

And then many years later, God chose Mary to be the first human temple for Himself, The Word of God made flesh at the moment when the Holy Spirit moved upon Mary. At that moment Jesus, The Word of God, the Son of God, was conceived and made flesh and also became the Son of Man.

At this point God no longer needed to lead His people cloaked by fire or cloud. He came to this earth and walked among men, taught men face to face, led men in person, answered men’s questions face to face. And He made a new covenant with men where now He would write His laws in our hearts…a more powerful covenant than He had ever made with men in the history of mankind. And we today are blessed to enter into that New Covenant with God. Moraliy is not abolished, evil is not permitted, but now God through His Grace leads us as we enter the covenant with the Trinity. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, dwell within each of us and we now become temples where God dwells.

God establishes covenants for various reasons, not the least of which is how He teaches us about salvation. The old covenant used laws that God wrote on stone with His finger…the new covenat uses laws that God writes on our hearts with His Holy Spirit…the laws that His Son Jesus Christ taught us, not from a pillar of fire or smoke, or stones changing color. Not anymore. God came here in person to teach us about Godly life and Godly love. This is documented in the Gospels. And really if you think about it, The Gospels are the “true” Bible…everything else before and after the Gospels are merely commentary regarding God’s plan to save mankind!

The new fulfills the old in a much better and much more powerful way!!!

God bless all!!!
 
BUT TAKE AWAY GOD’S LAWS OF LOVE, AND OUR LOVE FOR GOD SOON DIES!

That is why Jesus said: ``If ye love me, keep My commandments’’

God is Love, Those baptised in the trinity, are “partakers of his divinity” 2Peter 1:4,.** Love fulfilled the Law,** Crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Those born of the Spirit, are no longer under the law, for the Law cannot Judge the Spirit. Because once in the flesh the law convicts, but now dead to the law by Baptism, we are born anew in the Spirit, Those who are of the Spirit, walk in Love. Grace that brings mercy, forgiveness, and Love which fulfilled the Law that brings a curse, and demands a death.

John 1:16
From his fullness we have all received, grace in place of grace, 11
17
because while the law was given through Moses, grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.
 
VWcrazy;3948807:
Jesus Christ is not a graven image, he is the second person of the Triune God.

The host before consecration is a man made object (a graven thing). After consecration you bow down before it and call it god. this is in violation of Gods commandment.

In Christ Richard
After consecration, the Host IS God, therefore there is no violation of God’s commandment.
 
Are you telling me that we can ignore the 10 Commandments as meaningless???
Actually, no, we can’t ignore the 10 commandments because they are founded in natural law. Long before the time of Moses the Code of Hammurabi included the same commandments we now call the Ten. Many cultures that do not spring from the Judeo-CHristian ethic also follow the Ten. Why? Because anyone given adequate time can sit down and figure them out for themselves. God only gave them to the Israelites as a convenience.
 
While all of these posts are interesting, I find the spirit of this thread to be argumentative and egotistical. Picture this: the Lord Jesus Christ is sitting next to all of you, reading your posts and wishing someone would show His love. Trying to prove a matter of faith is rather like explaining your journey to someone by showing them your shoes.
Hi theresa bloom,

Thank you for pointing this out and serving as a very necessary reminder to us!!🙂 I think your advice to picture Jesus sitting next to us is wise advice!!

And you are correct about matters of faith. It is my prayer that we all keep your observations and comments in mind as we post throughout this forum!!

I’ve noticed that no one replied to your post…so I thought I would!

Thank you!!

God bless all!!!
 
Luke10:25And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
26He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?
27And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
28And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.

You will notice when Jesus is asked by the lawyer what he must do to inherit eternal life. Jesus says WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE LAW? How readest thou? and the lawyer answers: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. Here are the scriptures from the old testament that the lawyer quotes.(not Jesus)

Deuteronomy 6:5
And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
Leviticus 19:18
Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.

The fact is that these commandments existed along side the decaloge for many centuries and were never meant to replace it.
 
While all of these posts are interesting, I find the spirit of this thread to be argumentative and egotistical. Picture this: the Lord Jesus Christ is sitting next to all of you, reading your posts and wishing someone would show His love. Trying to prove a matter of faith is rather like explaining your journey to someone by showing them your shoes.
I think you hit on the major theme about the difference between the Law and the Spirit. I am finding the mental blocks between what is Law, and what pertains to the Spirit. The SDA theology doesnt fit into the Spiritual reality theology of the Catholic because SDA takes a belief from the natural letter of the Law, while the Catholic recognizes the Law, and Jesus fulfilled the Law. It makes it difficult from the perspective if one believes the law saves you, When Jesus is the one who can save you. This I believe is the disagreement, the Catholic describes those things of the Spirit, and SDA will describe those things of the flesh (natural Law). Now to be in Love is to share in the divinity, which is spirit. Anything outside of this Love is not of God, but of the flesh.

1 Corinthians 2:12
We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the things freely given us by God.
13
And we speak about them not with words taught by human wisdom, but with words taught by the Spirit, describing spiritual realities in spiritual terms. 7
14
**Now the natural person 8 does not accept what pertains to the Spirit of God, for to him it is foolishness, and he cannot understand it, because it is judged spiritually. **

So the question is, how do you get one who believes he/she is following the law, to be in the spirit in order to understand the Spirit realities revealed to man from God? Because those who claim the law will be judged by the law. Now we dont want that do we, for the law demands a death, which this price was already paid by Jesus Christ himself. To follow the Law, denies what Jesus paid for; Now those of the Spirit are no longer under the law, but should the one in the spirit fall from grace, then the law can convict the sin, unless repentance and reparation for that sin is made. This is done by confession and the blood of the lamb.
15
The spiritual person, however, can judge everything but is not subject to judgment 9 by anyone.
16
For “who has known the mind of the Lord, so as to counsel him?” But we have the mind of Christ.
 
After consecration, the Host IS God, therefore there is no violation of God’s commandment.
You BELEIVE that the host is God after the consecration. Here is the second commandment. Part of the first for Catholics.

4 Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth. 5 Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them: I am the Lord thy God, mighty, jealous, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me:

Now the host before consecration is man made, a graven thing. After consecration you BELEIVE that it turns into God and you bow down before it. This is clearly in violation of the second commandment.
Now you also BELEIVE that Jesus instituted the mass at the last supper. Now we know that we do not worship a God of confusion and we know that the second commandment is of God and still valid. So why would you not question the validity of this rite(the mass). They both cannot be valid.

In Christ Richard
 
You BELEIVE that the host is God after the consecration. Here is the second commandment. Part of the first for Catholics.

4 Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth. 5 Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them: I am the Lord thy God, mighty, jealous, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me:

Now the host before consecration is man made, a graven thing. After consecration you BELEIVE that it turns into God and you bow down before it. This is clearly in violation of the second commandment.
Now you also BELEIVE that Jesus instituted the mass at the last supper. Now we know that we do not worship a God of confusion and we know that the second commandment is of God and still valid. So why would you not question the validity of this rite(the mass). They both cannot be valid.

In Christ Richard
No, I KNOW that the consecrated Host is God and I KNOW that Jesus instituted the Mass at the last supper. Therefore, since the consecrated Host is God, I am obliged to bow down and worship, because Jesus clearly states, “Thou shalt worship the Lord your God.” Matthew 4:10
 
Dear SDA2RC

Please don’t ever say that God only gave the Sabbath to the Jews – THERE WERE NO JEWS IN GENESIS 2:1 – THAT WAS 2500 YEARS BEFORE ANY JEW EXISTED, and Jesus already blessed the sabbath in the Garden of Eden, set it aside as a holy day to remember for all His followers!

God bless
Friedrich
 
Dear SDA2RC

I am surprised that you see God’s law as a curse! You remind me of those men who are married, but not in love with their wives – they are always making rude jokes about their wives, and in general, marriage is a curse to them, because they find it a legalistic pain in the neck.

Same with God’s law – the Jews thought they could be `married’ to God via the old covenant by just grinding it out, all this legal stuff. THAT TYPE OF RELIGION MAKES YOUR LAWKEEPING A CURSE! God never intended it that way!

If you don’t like the marriage analogy, try this one:
There are hundred of traffic laws, which are for our good. However, when I start speeding, skipping stop signs, I get nailed by the cops – the law is a CURSE to me, I am in trouble.
However, when I am a law abiding citizen, this SAME LAW is a blessing to me, it protects me from accidents etc.

Same with God’s law!

Have a good day,

Friedrich
 
Dear Marsha

Thank you for the following:
Actually, no, we can’t ignore the 10 commandments because they are founded in natural law. Long before the time of Moses the Code of Hammurabi included the same commandments we now call the Ten. Many cultures that do not spring from the Judeo-CHristian ethic also follow the Ten. Why? Because anyone given adequate time can sit down and figure them out for themselves. God only gave them to the Israelites as a convenience.
While there may be some similarities between God’s Law and other codes in the ancient world, I am surprised that you think God’s law copied other laws. Have you thought that perhaps it is the other way around? Same with the Flood story – there are many `flood stories’’ and epics in many ancient civilizations, but did God copy them, or did they get their ideas from God’s original story?

I have yet to find any pagan culture that has figured out commandments like: don’t kill, steal, commit adultery, covet your neighbour’s wife etc. and abided by them – can you give us such an example? Usually it is the other way around – stealing, murdering, lying, etc. disappears when God’s law enters the hearts of these people – there are amazing stories of head hunters in the jungles of Papua New Guinea who became wonderful Christians, and saved the lives of many Allied troups in these jungles during WW2.
To come nearer to home – the German nation has had 1500 years to figure these laws out as one of the most advanced nations on earth – did Hitler figure them out?
Same with the French Revolution – did they figure them out at the guillotine?
Are we as civilized nations today any different - do we figure these things out naturally? No way. Only God’s way lifts us from the muck we naturally tend to get ourselves in.

God bless

Friedrich
 
I have yet to find any pagan culture that has figured out commandments like: don’t kill, steal, commit adultery, covet your neighbour’s wife etc. and abided by them – can you give us such an example? Usually it is the other way around – stealing, murdering, lying, etc. disappears when God’s law enters the hearts of these people – there are amazing stories of head hunters in the jungles of Papua New Guinea who became wonderful Christians, and saved the lives of many Allied troups in these jungles during WW2.
Are you sure you aren’t some leftover from the 18th or 19th century? This statement shows an amazing lack of knowledge of history and culture. Or are you quoting some 19th century book?

St. Paul acknowledged the idea of natural law:

Rmans 2:14 and 15:
**
(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them)**

The Church recognizes this natural law…

**957
Application of the natural law varies greatly; it can demand reflection that takes account of various conditions of life according to places, times, and circumstances. Nevertheless, in the diversity of cultures, the natural law remains as a rule that binds men among themselves and imposes on them, beyond the inevitable differences, common principles.

1958
The natural law is immutable and permanent throughout the variations of history;10 it subsists under the flux of ideas and customs and supports their progress. The rules that express it remain substantially valid. Even when it is rejected in its very principles, it cannot be destroyed or removed from the heart of man. It always rises again in the life of individuals and societies:
**

In addition to natural law:

**1952
There are different expressions of the moral law, all of them interrelated: eternal law—the source, in God, of all law; natural law; revealed law, comprising the Old Law and the New Law, or Law of the Gospel; finally, civil and ecclesiastical laws. **

Before making allegations that the Catholic church has “changed” or disregarded God’s law… it is important to understand “Law” in context. They overlap… it has always and will always be wrong to murder. So it was wrong under the Old Covenant, it is wrong under the New Covenant, and almost all Civil law reflects this basic understanding, even if different societies define it differently. The Church also has ecclesiastical laws that govern itself internally. Laws about fasting and holy day obligations come from Church laws. In making their allegations that the Catholic Church is inconsistent in teaching the Ten Commandments as moral law, while believing we are not under the old covenant, Adventists ignore these important distinctions in “law” in Catholic teaching.

The 10 commandments are part of the Old Law:

**1962
The Old Law is the first stage of revealed Law. Its moral prescriptions are summed up in the Ten Commandments. The precepts of the Decalogue lay the foundations for the vocation of man fashioned in the image of God; they prohibit what is contrary to the love of God and neighbor and prescribe what is essential to it. The Decalogue is a light offered to the conscience of every man to make God’s call and ways known to him and to protect him against evil:

1963
According to Christian tradition, the Law is holy, spiritual, and good,14 yet still imperfect. Like a tutor15 it shows what must be done, but does not of itself give the strength, the grace of the Spirit, to fulfill it. Because of sin, which it cannot remove, it remains a law of bondage. According to St. Paul, its special function is to denounce and disclose sin, which constitutes a “law of concupiscence” in the human heart.16 However, the Law remains the first stage on the way to the kingdom. It prepares and disposes the chosen people and each Christian for conversion and faith in the Savior God. It provides a teaching which endures for ever, like the Word of God.**

The New Law:

**1968
The Law of the Gospel fulfills the commandments of the Law. The Lord’s Sermon on the Mount, far from abolishing or devaluing the moral prescriptions of the Old Law, releases their hidden potential and has new demands arise from them: it reveals their entire divine and human truth. It does not add new external precepts, but proceeds to reform the heart, the root of human acts, where man chooses between the pure and the impure,22 where faith, hope, and charity are formed and with them the other virtues. The Gospel thus brings the Law to its fullness through imitation of the perfection of the heavenly Father, through forgiveness of enemies and prayer for persecutors, in emulation of the divine generosity.23
**

You can read the entire section here:
usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect1chpt3.htm#13

This is critical to understanding the Sabbath/Sunday issue.

The Catechism sees Sabbath as distinct from Sunday:

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:107


At the same time, there is a recognition of the natural law, that time ought to be set aside for rest and worship:

**2176
The celebration of Sunday observes the moral commandment inscribed by nature in the human heart to render to God an outward, visible, public, and regular worship "as a sign of his universal beneficence to all."109 Sunday worship fulfills the moral command of the Old Covenant, taking up its rhythm and spirit in the weekly celebration of the Creator and Redeemer of his people.
**

So then, this brings us back to the Adventist allegation that the Catholic Church “changed” the Sabbath……

(cont. next post)
 
Dear SDA2RC

Please don’t ever say that God only gave the Sabbath to the Jews – THERE WERE NO JEWS IN GENESIS 2:1 – THAT WAS 2500 YEARS BEFORE ANY JEW EXISTED, and Jesus already blessed the sabbath in the Garden of Eden, set it aside as a holy day to remember for all His followers!

God bless
Friedrich
Dear Friedrich,

I see that you reference Gen. 2:1. Would you be interested in dialoging with me about the Creation story? Genesis chapters 1 and 2. If so, go to the thread titled “Why is sunday instead of saturday the sabboth” and look at the posts between Richard Kastner and me (they are the last posts of the thread), and let me know if you would be interested in taking up where he left off…which fortunately is right at the very beginning, so at least we haven’t wasted much time.

I look forward to hearing from you!!!

God bless all!!!

Patrick Murebil
 
Dear Friedrich,

Do please read what MarysRoses is posting before and after my two posts here…what she is saying is very important and very informative for you to understand Catholic thought and teaching on this matter.

God bless all!!
 
(cont. from previous post)

“Sabbath” sometimes means simply rest, and not specifically the seventh day of the week. It was very common in the 19th century for English speaking people to refer to Sunday as the “Sabbath”. Often Adventists will use quotes from prominent protestant preachers such as Alexander Campbell upholding “the Sabbath” to bolster their publications. Those quotes are wildly out of context, as Mr. Campbell (and others) was demonstrably talking about Sunday, not Saturday. Similarly out of context are the quotes from Catholic publications about “changing” the Sabbath. Yes, Catholics have a different day of the week as our day of rest. This was changed. And yes, the CHURCH made this change. But to a Catholic “Church” means the Church that was established on Pentecost and began with the apostles. To use those quotes to support the Adventist notion that the “Sabbath” (as in the Old Covenant day of rest) was changed by the Church (meaning in Adventist literature, an organization that arose about the time of Constantine) is to misuse them and take them out of their context.

To put the ball back in the Adventist court…

I have asked this before several times on this forum. Not one Adventist has made a reasonable attempt to answer my question.

Please show us where in the New Testament Jesus explicitly commands us to keep the seventh-day Sabbath and that our day of public worship MUST be on Saturday.

No one is denying we worship on a different day than Seventh-day Adventists, or Jews, or Moslems for that matter.

The problems is Adventists make assumptions about why we worship on a different day. We strongly disagree with their assumptions about the theology and history of Sunday. Adventists seem to think that we are “keeping” the Sabbath on the wrong day. We are saying that Sunday is distinct from the Sabbath. All that was transferred (transferred, replaced, changed, pick your word, there are hundreds of languages) was the principle of regular rest and worship as a moral precept that is spiritually beneficial.

The principle of regular rest and worship is natural, moral law.

The day of the week is arbitrary… How can one day of the week be more “moral” than another…

Adventists say that Christians must “keep” the Sabbath…
Yet… Adventists have no consistent interpretation of what ‘keeping the Sabbath’ means. Some will say going to a park is wrong, while others promote “nature walks”. Some will refuse to swim, while others find Saturday afternoon after church the perfect time for a family outing to the swimming pool. Some say not to buy or sell, yet many on the west coast will go out to eat after church or pick up something from the grocery store, because eating is a ‘necessary’ activity. Adventists where I live wouldn’t dream of being seen in a restaurant on Saturday. The only thing Adventists seem to agree on is that however you observe the Sabbath it MUST be on Saturday.

Adventists living in the western hemisphere are fairly consistent about observing Sabbath sundown Friday to sundown Saturday… Yet there are many different opinions on exactly when its Sabbath in the North, where in summer and winter sunsets and sunrises are notoriously inconvenient. Adventists in the South Pacific are similarly conflicted. Because of the dateline, Adventists in Hawaii are off to church on Saturday, while at the same time a few hundred miles to the south, on the same line of longitude in Kiribati, Sunday keeping Christians are off to church and the Adventists are having a workday. Some Adventist pastors in the South Pacific in the past, have worshiped on Sunday… but then, there’s nothing to distinguish them from the Sunday keepers, so that solution was dropped…

I point this out for a very important reason. If “Saturday” is an imutable part of the moral, natural law, then there must be some way to find “Saturday”. As I have posted in the past, it can be difficult if not impossible to find “Saturday” with any reliability in some parts of the word, or out of it. Not one Adventist has offered any opinion at all as far as how to tell what day would be Sabbath on the international space station. The tendency of Adventists is to be practical about the international dateline, they keep their Sabbath on whatever happens to be “Saturday” where they are in the world. That seems very reasonable, but it leaves them following whatever civil government is in power where they are as far as what day they worship on. Adventists in Hawaii and Adventists in Kiribati worship on two different days… yet they are on the same line of longitude because the dateline takes a dogleg jog around Kiribati to the south. Does it make sense that the Catholic Church is wrong and Sunday is the “Mark of the Beast” (in Adventist theology), yet the nation of Kiribati can “change” the day of worship by moving the international dateline by a civil decree… And that’s ok? The dateline is an invisible, artificial, and totally man made abstraction remember.

worldatlas.com/aatlas/infopage/dateline.htm

The international dateline, and the habits of Sabbath keepers who follow the dateline in choosing their day of worship, to me PROVES that there is absolutely NOTHING moral about the day chosen for worship. Why would God give us something impossible to follow with any accuracy? The day of the week is a ceremonial requirement gone with the old law. Specifying a particular day of the week is possible when a Law is intended for a specific group of people in a particular place and time (see SDA2RC’s posts for that information). It makes little sense for a people who will be in places where there are no days or weeks!

(Adventists will argue that Catholics have no problem identifying Sunday, Saturday then would be the day before. The problem with that argument, is that we allow that the Church has the authority to define when Sunday will be observed, something easily accomplished. Sunday on the international space station, is observed according to the standard time adopted for space, based on the line of longitude which goes through Geneva Switzerland. Adventists claim a biblical authority for their day, yet there is no identifiably biblical way to identify the sabbath outside the middle east. There are significant disagreements among Jews as to when to observe sabbath outside of Israel. In the eastern hemisphere, by civil reckoning, Saturday there comes before Sabbath is observed in Jerusalem. In the west, some groups are concerned because of the possibility that the sundown to sundown of the bible refers to the time in Jerusalem, not their local time.)

Why not talk about why you keep Sabbath and we will tell you about why we keep Sunday. That seems more productive. All you seem to be able to say is that we are wrong for worshiping on Sunday. In the old covenant, the Sabbath was about much more than attending a worship service. As I’ve pointed out, the actual commandment says nothing about assembly. Sunday is about much more than a rest day. I quit clinging to the empty shadow of the Sabbath when I saw the beauty of the 8th day symbolism in Sunday. As Christians, the Eucharist and the Resurrection are our focus, not the old covenant or tables of law.

I once had an Adventist relative upset with me. She was so angry she was shaking. She pointed her finger right in my face, jabbing at me to make her point. She said “You are profaning the very LAW OF GOD that he WROTE IN STONE with HIS OWN FINGER!!!” Having had this accusation made to me many times, though not so dramatically, I knew what to answer. I am a Christian and his law is written on our hearts, not on dead stones."

It would seem the Bible supports my view, not my relative’s…

2 Corinthians 3:6-8
6Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

7But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

8How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?

To sum up this long post…

Regular rest and worship is a matter of natural law, and making provision for it in Church law AND civil law, is a matter of providing for the public good.

Arguing Saturday over Sunday seems like a matter of the letter over the spirit. Christians have long found meaning in the Christian symbolism of Sunday. Adventist arguments against it always seem to boil down to a narrow legalism that God wants to see us keeping Saturday instead of Sunday as a ‘test’ of our loyalty… Where in the bible do you find that?

God Bless,
MarysRoses
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top