Doug Batchelor: His Catholic Church Attacks

[Exporter]

**James 1234,**You did not identify yourself in your personal information. Therefore, I suspect you are some type of Protestant who is just posting that garbage from a Mr. Batchelor to try to see what Catholics would say about it.

Are you “undercover”? Be a man and stand up for yourself.

You have lost my confidence in you as a reliable poster.

If you wanted to “bait” Catholics why didn’t you find something at least partially believable? Black Entertainment Television is not a good source for Anti-Catholic material.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

: will give you one example. In 300 years the Spanish inquisition executed perhaps 3000 people. Compare that to the hundreds of thousands of Catholics brutally tortured and killed by good Bible believing Protestants :

That’s sheer nonsense. why are you substituting your own inflated mythology for that of Mr. Batchelor? The Spanish Inquisition’s persecutions were only part (and by no means the most vicious or deadly part) of Catholic persecution of Protestants (generally, civil governments were far more brutal and ruthless than the Inquisition). But more to the point, there is no evidence whethever that “hundreds of thousands of Catholics” were tortured and killed by Protestants. A few hundred Catholics were killed in Elizabethan England,

FWIW, 357 (perhaps 361) have been considered for canonisation.​

243 more are “pending”, praetermissi; those “passed over” for lack of evidence of martyrdom sufficient to establish the cause of their deaths as purely religious and therefore genuinely martydom, or, for some other reason

Total: about 600

Of the 357, 42 have been canonised; about 274 beatified; and 43 are Venerable.

One of those beatified was one George Douglas, a Scot, who for some reason (probably his being put to death in England) is included among the English & Welsh Martyrs; the other Scot is St.John Ogilvie.

Although imprisonment and fines and a variety of methods of harassment were used against English and Scottish Catholics, the number of those executed is fairly low - all executions took place between 1535 and 1680 (St. Oliver Plunkett, Archbishop of Armagh, who was put to death in 1681, is one of the Irish Martyrs); and persecution tended to be fairly intermittent - 30 of the English martyrs were killed in the “No Popery!” scare of 1678-81.189 died in the period 1570-1602; 30 of these in 1588, the year of the Armada. So it’s a mistake to think of thousands being killed in large numbers more or less continuously. It would be more accurate to think of a drizzle of harassments of various kinds throughout the period 1535-1692, punctuated by the occasional burst of martyrdoms;these in turn occuring in large groups only at times of unusual tension and excitement.

There are 257 Irish Catholics for whom the opening of a cause for canonisation has been considered. 857 - which we can round up to a thousand, for the sake of argument - is much lower than the “thousands” sometimes claimed. ##

and probably the number executed by other Protestant governments would be far lower–indeed, there are almost no instances of Catholics being judicially executed for religious reasons elsewhere than in England (I think two Catholics were executed in Scotland).

And about 20 Protestants, ending in 1558 with the execution of a priest. One can hardly count the Scottish Lollards as Protestants, since the Lollard movement predated the Reformation. The Scottish Reformation, though a time of considerable suffering for Catholics, was not bloody.​

Most Catholics were killed in mob violence, and they may run into the hundreds throughout Europe. But in that case you have to count the thousands of Protestants killed in Catholic mob violence. The only way you can get anything like equal numbers on both sides is to count the people killed in religious wars.l

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[RNRobert]

**James 1234,**You did not identify yourself in your personal information. Therefore, I suspect you are some type of Protestant who is just posting that garbage from a Mr. Batchelor to try to see what Catholics would say about it.

Are you “undercover”? Be a man and stand up for yourself.

You have lost my confidence in you as a reliable poster.

If you wanted to “bait” Catholics why didn’t you find something at least partially believable? Black Entertainment Television is not a good source for Anti-Catholic material.

Exporter:
I know James from work, and he is a fellow Catholic. He had asked me about this “Amazing Facts” stuff, and I told him it was a front for the SDAs. BTW, almost got sucked into the SDAs about a dozen years ago when I came across their book National Sunday Law, which advertised a book which told of the ‘true church.’ I sent off for it and got one of E. G. White’s books. I went along with it until she started talking about William Miller, a false prophet who said the world would end in 1843 (and when that didn’t pan out, 1844). At that point I heard a whooshing sound which was SDA credibility flying out the window (along with their books).
Also I happened to have the Crossing the Threshold of Hope (which James has at the moment). The passage that Bachelor mentions is in there, but it’s not the Pope who says that, but what the author (whose name I can’t recall at the moment) says the Pope is. I hope this clears things up.

 

[steve_b]

James1234:

Hi Catholics,

Let’s begin on what Mr. Batchelor preached:

Catholic Church Attack #1

The leader of the Catholic Church is defined by the faith as the Vicar of Jesus Christ (and is accepted as such by believers), The Pope is considered the man on the earth who represents the Son of God, who ‘takes the place’ of the second person of the omnipotent God of the Trinity. page 3

Mr. Batchelor stated this is blasphemy. He states “The Bible states that God is Holy, Holy and reverened is His Name.” He argued that the Pope is man and since he is man he is human. Human falls short in the Glory of God.

Dispite Bachelor’s “vicar of Christ” mischaracterization, the position of a “human” spokesman, and “vicar for Jesus”, is clearly seen in Jesus words to Peter. “I [Jesus, second person of the Blessed Trinity, the one whom ALL things were made] give YOU [Peter the one I call Rock] the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever YOU bind on earth [with these keys I give YOU] are bound in heaven, and whatever YOU loose [with these keys] are loosed in heaven.”[Mt 16:18…] And we know Jesus kingdom will last forever and not even the gates of hell will prevail against His Church that He builds on Peter. Therefore, the position of chief spokesman for Jesus succeeds to all the popes

James1234:

Catholic Church Attack #2

Mr Batchelor stated “Where in the Bible states that Sunday is the holy day of obligation?” He said “A long time ago Saturday was the holy day of obligation, it was a Catholic Tradition. Constantine wanted to satisfy the Romans so he made Sunday the holy day of obligation for the Romans because that day was assigned as the Sun God.” Mr. Batchelor said “Check this out, this is why Catholic Tradition falls short and that is why there is no scripture to back this up.”

It is true that Catholics switched the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday, and the Catholics who did this were the Apostles themselves in Acts 20:7, and 1Corinthians 16:1-2. :yup:
and as we all know, the Catholic Church had existed from ( 33 A.D.) before Saint Luke had written the book of Acts in 63 A.D… By the time Paul writes Romans, the Church of Rome’s faith had been heard around the world. [Rm 1:7…]

James1234:
Catholic Church Attack #3
Mr. Batchelor said that the Catholic Church was brutal in persecuting non-believers or didn’t believe in the Catholic way. If someone was caught preaching against the Church they would capture him, tie hiim up and let him dehydrate. So once the unbeliever became thirsty they would crack glass in a small towel and soak it in water and let him swallow it so that the glass will cut off his vocal cords so he can’t preach heresy. He continued saying that the Catholic Church would bury women alive who were unbelievers and execute children right in front of the parents face. He said it was a ***total of 50-70 million people executed. ***He quoted this on Popes V2, p.334

The source for that, has been fully debunked. It was put out by the Baptists. The title was something like, Trail of blood. Bachelor can only point to a human founder not to the Divine founder, for the origin to his denomination. And he spends an inordinate amount of time trying to justify that.

 

[James1234]

Socrates:

I have that book and I don’t recall any such thing being in there. Many people willfully misinterpret the Catholic view of the papacy as placing the pope on equal footing with Christ though, so it would not surprise me if Batchelor did the same thing. If it’s someone’s intention to bash the Catholic Church there are plenty of things that they can deliberately misinterpret in order to mislead people.

I imagine this is yet another case of an anti-Catholic railing against something that he hasn’t made an effort to understand or it’s a deliberate obfuscation of true Catholic doctrine. It’s tiresome how some folks will interpret words in the most damning way possible even if it means completely disregarding how they were intended by the speaker/writer.

In reading someone else’s words, one can either seek to learn the truth as the author understands it or one can simply seek to confirm their own prejudices. Books can have very different meanings depending on which approach the reader chooses. Fortunately, truth is truth and does not change just because someone chooses to disbelieve it.

Socrates, the Pope should have not put his name in the book by His Holiness if it had one line of untruth. Read my new post about Exporters comments. The pope is not 2nd to the trinity. But how can I a Catholic defend an attack from a protestant who says on page 3 the pope is 2nd to the trinity by his holiness John Paull II?
How do you defend that? You can’t b/c it is in clear legible ink. He should not have signed that book without reading it.

 

[RNRobert]

James1234:

Socrates, the Pope should have not put his name in the book by His Holiness if it had one line of untruth. Read my new post about Exporters comments. The pope is not 2nd to the trinity. But how can I a Catholic defend an attack from a protestant who says on page 3 the pope is 2nd to the trinity by his holiness John Paull II?
How do you defend that? You can’t b/c it is in clear legible ink. He should not have signed that book without reading it.

James,
you have to realize, the Pope didn’t actually WRITE the book- another fellow did, whose name I can’t recall (you have my copy- the man’s name is inside). He simply posed the questions to the Pope, and he answered them. The intros to each chapter were written by the man, and it was HE who wrote the bit about the Pope standing in for Jesus). I agree though, the book should have been examined more closely before publication- I dodn’t recall whether it has an imprimatur or not- if it does, whoever gave it should have looked at it closer. In any case, it is not in any way an ‘official’ Church document. As Cestus Dei pointed out, the SDAs avoid using the Catechism (or any other official church document- they find quotes in ‘Catholic’ books and twist them out of context.

 

[RNRobert]

Socrates:

I have that book and I don’t recall any such thing being in there. .

I have that book, too, and have it in front of me(James returned it to me). Page 3 reads:
The Pope is considered the man on earth who represents the Son of God, who “takes the place” of the Second Person of the omni-potent God of the Trinity."
The thing of it is, according to the introduction, Vittorio Messori (the editor of the book who posed the questions to the Pope, and who made the above statement) is a lay Catholic, so he ought to have known better than to say that (blame it on lousy catechesis, I suppose). Also, there is no imprimatur, so nobody really checked the book over before publication.

 

[bengal_fan]

RNRobert:

I have that book, too, and have it in front of me(James returned it to me). Page 3 reads:
The Pope is considered the man on earth who represents the Son of God, who “takes the place” of the Second Person of the omni-potent God of the Trinity."
.

(as posted on a similar thread…)

i am not sure i see your point. this is a true statement. the pope is the “vicar of Christ” and he is the steward of the kingdom. the steward (or prime minister) is the one who takes the place of the king when the king is not present. that is the office of peter and those keys (carried by the steward) have been passed down all the way to today with john paul II. this statement does not mean he died on the cross instead of Jesus, it means he is the physical representation of Christ, the head of the church on earth.

 

[RNRobert]

(as posted on a similar thread…)

i am not sure i see your point. this is a true statement. the pope is the “vicar of Christ” and he is the steward of the kingdom. the steward (or prime minister) is the one who takes the place of the king when the king is not present. that is the office of peter and those keys (carried by the steward) have been passed down all the way to today with john paul II. this statement does not mean he died on the cross instead of Jesus, it means he is the physical representation of Christ, the head of the church on earth.

You are absolutely correct. However, the part of “taking the place” of Jesus can be misconstrued as saying He “is” Jesus, which is what Mr. Batchelor did. However, Mr. Batchelor’s probably did not make an honest mistake in understanding the passage, but twisted it to suit his own agenda.

 

[bengal_fan]

RNRobert:

You are absolutely correct. However, the part of “taking the place” of Jesus can be misconstrued as saying He “is” Jesus, which is what Mr. Batchelor did. However, Mr. Batchelor’s probably did not make an honest mistake in understanding the passage, but twisted it to suit his own agenda.

exactly, so why should (as another poster suggested and nearly demanded) the pope have that passage changed because some one else could miscontrue it? if it is a true statement taken in context and alongside church teachings, why then is it the pope’s fault? (i’m not saying you are saying this but it has been brought up).

 

[RNRobert]

bengal_fan:

exactly, so why should (as another poster suggested and nearly demanded) the pope have that passage changed because some one else could miscontrue it? if it is a true statement taken in context and alongside church teachings, why then is it the pope’s fault? (i’m not saying you are saying this but it has been brought up).

As I told James personally (we work together) the Pope did not actually WRITE the book, and probably had very little to do with it’s production. He answered a bunch of questions, which Messr. Messori edited and published. In any case, it seems that many anti-Catholics (Jack Chick, the SDAs) can take a fragment of something written by the Church (or one of it’s members) and twist it to suit their agenda. I remember reading a book published by the SDAs (it didn’t mention their name, like all their publications, but I recognized it from their Sabbath-vs-Sunday tripe) and it quoted Newman when he said some Catholic practices were pagan in origin. The attitude of the author seemed to be,“SEE, Catholicism is pagan!” Of course, in that vein, Protestant couples would have to throw their wedding rings away, since that’s of pagan origin. Heck even things in Jewish worship that were approved by God (like the ark of the Covenant, animal sacrifice) had parallels in pagan religion.

 

[Socrates]

This is very much an artificial controversy being discussed here. From what I know, Vittorio Messori is hardly someone who can be accused of having had poor catachesis. And there’s no reason to be defensive about his choice of words.

The book records an interview of the pope by a well informed lay-Catholic. Their discussion assumes the common ground of Catholic belief. Messori’s initial question is meant to be somewhat “inflammatory,” if you will, in order to show the contrast between modern thinking and the Church’s connection with Christ Himself.

Neither Pope John Paul II nor Vittorio Messori believe that the pope is divine or even remotely equal to Christ Himself. Anyone who reads it that way is just willfully finding that which they wish to find in a Catholic document. Period. End of story.

All of the Apostles in a sense “took the place” of the second person of the Trinity when Christ told them “Whomever hears you hears me.” This became especially true after Christ’s Ascension. Their successors continued to “take the place” of Christ throughout history. The successor of Peter “took the place” of Christ in a unique way in that he retained the special authority, primacy, “keys to the kingdom,” etc. granted to him by Christ.

Agree or disagree with that if you will, but it is absolutely ludicrous to infer a meaning from an interview that neither the interviewer nor the interviewee would believe or promulgate.

I find it telling that anti-Catholics typically don’t rail against works of Catholic apologetics which attempt to present a Catholic worldview to those who don’t share that worldview. Instead they choose to look for isolated passages in works that take a Catholic formation for granted. It’s easier to work people up with things that are easily misunderstood. These people don’t seek answers or understanding, only conflict and division.

 

[daro2096]

the Catholics who did this were the Apostles themselves in Acts 20:7, and 1Corinthians 16:1-2

And upon the first [day] of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight. Acts 20:7

In a Bibical day a new day begins at sun down. In Acts 20:7 the first day of the week is actually Saturday night. This isn’t a Sunday morning worship service.

Upon the first [day] of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as [God] hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. 1 Corinthians 16:2

Paul was telling them to put aside some money at home on the first day of the week. People got paid on Fridays which was the preparation day for the weekly Sabbath and Paul was telling them to not sort their money out for the next week until after the Sabbath had past. This text has nothing to do with collecting money in a worship service. Then Paul would collect the money as he was passing through.

 

[daro2096]

“The Pope is of so great dignity, and so exalted that he is not a mere man, but as it were God. and the vicar of God.”
Ferraris Ecclesiastical dictionary

“All names which in the Scriptures are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope.”
On the Authority of the Councils, book 2, chapter 17

“The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth.”
Pope Pius V, quoted in Barclay, Chapter XXVII, p. 218, “Cities Petrus Bertanous”.

“…the Pope is as it were God on earth, sole sovereign of the faithful of Christ, chief of kings, having plenitude of power.”
Lucius Ferraris, in “Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica, Juridica, Moralis, Theologica, Ascetica, Polemica, Rubristica, Historica”, Volume V, article on “Papa, Article II”, titled “Concerning the extent of Papal dignity, authority, or dominion and infallibility”, #1, 5, 13-15, 18, published in Petit-Montrouge (Paris) by J. P. Migne, 1858 edition.

“The Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth…by divine right the Pope has supreme and full power in faith, in morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true vicar, the head of the entire church, the father and teacher of all Christians. He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils; the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God himself on earth.” Quoted in the New York Catechism.

These words are written in the Roman Canon Law 1685: “To believe that our Lord God the Pope has not the power to decree as he is decreed, is to be deemed heretical.”

Father A. Pereira says: “It is quite certain that Popes have never approved or rejected this title ‘Lord God the Pope,’ for the passage in the gloss referred to appears in the edition of the Canon Law published in Rome in 1580 by Gregory XIII.”

Writers on the Canon Law say, “The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in heaven and earth.”
Barclay Cap. XXVII, p. 218. Cities Petrus Bertrandus, Pius V. - Cardinal Cusa supports his statement.

Pope Nicholas I declared: “the appellation of God had been confirmed by Constantine on the Pope, who, being God, cannot be judged by man.”
Labb IX Dist.: 96 Can. 7, Satis evidentur, Decret Gratian Primer Para.

“The pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not a mere man …. he is as it were God on earth, sole sovereign of the faithful of Christ, chief of kings, having plenitude of power.” Lucius Ferraris, «Prompta Bibliotheca», 1763, Volume VI, ‘Papa II’, pp.25-29

“The supreme teacher in the Church is the Roman Pontiff. Union of minds, therefore, requires… complete submission and obedience of will to the Church and to the Roman Pontiff, as to God Himself.”
Leo VIII, «On the Chief Duties of Christians as Citizens», Encyclical letter, 1890

“God separates those whom the Roman Pontiff, who exercises the functions, not of mere man, but of the true God…dissolves, not by human but rather by divine authority.”
Decretals of Gregory IX», Book 1, Chapter 7.3

“Hence the Pope is crowned with a triple crown, as king of heaven and of earth and of the lower regions (infernorum).”
Lucius Ferraris, «Prompta Bibliotheca», 1763, Volume VI, ‘Papa II’, p.26)

“Innocent III has written: “Indeed, it is not top much to say that in view of the sublimity of their offices the priests are so many gods.”
The dignity of the priesthood by Liguori p, 36

“The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh.”
Catholic National July 1895

“We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty”
Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894

“For thou art the shepherd, thou art the physician, thou art the director, thou art the husbandman, finally thou art another God on earth.”
Labbe and Cossart’s “History of the Councils.” Vol. XIV, col. 109

Roman Catholic Canon Law stipulates through Pope Innocent III that the Roman pontiff is
“the vicegerent upon earth, not a mere man, but of a very God;” and in a gloss on the passage it is explained that this is because he is the vicegerent of Christ, who is “very God and very man.” Decretales Domini Gregorii translatione Episcoporum, (on the transference of Bishops), title 7, chapter 3; Corpus Juris Canonice (2nd Leipzig ed., 1881), col. 99; (Paris, 1612), tom. 2, Devretales, col. 205

 

[daro2096]

“The pope is the supreme judge of the law of the land… He is the vicegerent (replacement) of Christ, who is not only a Priest forever, but also King of kings and Lord of lords.”
La Civilia Cattolica, March 18, 1871, quoted in Leonard Woosely Bacaon, An inside view of the Vatican Council (American Tract Society ed.), p.229

“Christ entrusted His office to the chief pontiff;… but all power in heaven and in earth has been given to Christ;… therefore the chief pontiff, who is His vicar, will have this power.”
Corpus Juris chap. 1 column 29, translated from a gloss on the words Porro Subesse Romano Pontiff

“The pope is the supreme judge of the law of the land . . . He is the vicegerent of Christ, and is not only a priest forever, but also King of kings and Lord of lords”
La Civilta Cattolica, March 18, 1871.

“All the faithful must believe that the Holy Apostolic See and the Roman Pontiff [the Pope] possesses the primacy over the whole world, and the Roman Pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and is true vicar of Christ, and heed of the whole church, and father and teacher of all Christians; and that full power was given to him in blessed Peter to rule, feed, and govern the universal Church by Jesus Christ our Lord.”
First Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ, “Eternal Pastor,” published in the fourth session of the Vatican Council, 1870, chap. 3, in Philip Schaff, Creeds of Christendom. vol. 2, p. 262.

“The Pope’s authority is unlimited, incalculable; it can strike, as Innocent III says, wherever sin is; it can punish every one; it allows no appeal and is itself Sovereign Caprice; for the Pope carries, according to the expression of Boniface VIII, all rights in the Shrine of his breast. As he has now become infallible, he can by the use of the little word, “orbi,” (which means that he turns himself round to the whole Church) make every rule, every doctrine, every demand, into a certain and incontestable article of Faith. No right can stand against him, no personal or corporate liberty; or as the [Roman Catholic] Canonists put it—“The tribunal of God and of the pope is one and the same.”
Ignaz von Dollinger, “A Letter Addressed to the Archbishop of Munich” 1871; as quoted in MacDougall,

“The Saviour Himself is the door of the sheepfold: ‘I am the door of the sheep.’ Into this fold of Jesus Christ, no man may enter unless he be led by the Sovereign Pontiff; and only if they be united to him can men be saved, for the Roman Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ and His personal representative on earth.”
(Pope John XXIII in his homily to the Bishops and faithful assisting at his coronation on November 4, 1958).

“This is our last lesson to you: receive it, engrave it in your minds, all of you: by God’s commandment salvation is to be found nowhere but in the Church; the strong and effective instrument of salvation is none other than the Roman Pontificate.”
(Pope Leo XIII, Allocution for the 25th anniversary of his election, February 20, 1903; Papal Teachings: The Church, Benedictine Monks of Solesmes, St. Paul Editions, Boston, 1962, page 653).

“Furthermore, in this one Church of Christ no man can be or remain who does not accept, recognize and obey the authority and supremacy of Peter and his legitimate successors.”
(Pope Pius XI, Encyclical, Mortalium animos, January 6, 1928, The Papal Encyclicals, Claudia Carlen, I.H.M., McGrath Publishing Co., 1981, pp. 317, 318).

“We define that the Holy Apostolic See (the Vatican) and the Roman Pontiff hold the primacy over the whole world.”
A Decree of the Council of Trent, quoted in Philippe Labbe and Gabriel Cossart, “The Most Holy Councils,” col. 1167.

 

[daro2096]

“But as for you and your companions, you certainly sin, if, having heard the decrees of the Apostolic See, and of the universal Church, and the same is confirmed by Holy Writ, you refuse to follow them; for, though your fathers were holy, do you think that their small number, in a corner of the remotest island, is to be preferred before the universal Church of Christ throughout the world? And if that Columba of yours (and, I may say, ours also, if he was Christ’s servant), was a holy man and powerful in miracles, yet could he be preferred before the most blessed prince of the Apostles to whom Our Lord said ‘Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, and to thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven’?” When Wilfrid had spoken thus, the king said, “Is it true Colman, that these words were spoken to Peter by Our Lord?” He answered, “It is true, O king!” Then says he, “Can you show any such power given to your Columba?” Colman answered, “None.” Then added the king, “Do you both agree that these words were principally directed to Peter, and that the keys of heaven were given to him by Our Lord?” They both answered. “We do.” Then the king concluded, “And I also say unto you, that he is the door-keeper, whom I will not contradict, but will, as far as I know and am able, in all things obey his decrees, lest, when I come to the gates of the kingdom of heaven, there should be none to open them, he being my adversary who is proved to have the keys.”
(St. Bede, Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation, quoted in Readings from Church History, Volume I, edited by Fr. Colman Barry, O.S.B., The Newman Press, Westminster, MD, 1966, p. 273.)

 

[reneeville]

I have seen him years ago and wasn’t “drawn”. I just googled his name with sda… he is the senior pastor of the sacramento central sda. yikes!!
saccentral.org/ourstaff/dougb.aspx

Doug Batchelor is one of the biggest apologists for the Seventh Day Adventists.

 

[daro2096]

1. Sunday was stated in the Bible several times as the Lord’s Day. Constantine did not change the day to Sunday, that’s another lie they like to promote. Read Justin Martyr’s First Apology (written in the 2nd century). The Mass and Sunday is described in there.

The early Christian church kept the 7th day sabbath for the first 300 years of its history.

The Lord’s Day only appears once in the Bible in Revelation chapter 1.

Using the Bible and only the Bible it is quite clear that “The Lord’s Day” is the weekly 7th day sabbath.

Exd 16:23 And he said unto them, This [is that] which the LORD hath said, To morrow [is] the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake [that] which ye will bake [to day], and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.

---

Exd 16:29 See, for that the LORD hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.

---

Exd 20:10 But the seventh day [is] the sabbath of the LORD thy God: [in it] thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that [is] within thy gates:

---

Exd 31:15 Six days may work be done; but in the seventh [is] the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth [any] work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.

---

Exd 35:2 Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death.

---

Lev 23:3 Six days shall work be done: but the seventh day [is] the sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work [therein]: it [is] the sabbath of the LORD in all your dwellings.

Deu 5:14 But the seventh day [is] the sabbath of the LORD thy God: [in it] thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thine ox, nor thine ***, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that [is] within thy gates; that thy manservant and thy maidservant may rest as well as thou.

---

Deu 5:15 And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and [that] the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day.

Isa 58:13 If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, [from] doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the LORD, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking [thine own] words:

Mat 12:8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.

---

Mar 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.

---

Luk 6:5 And he said unto them, That the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.

 

[daro2096]

I have seen him years ago and wasn’t “drawn”. I just googled his name with sda… he is the senior pastor of the sacramento central sda. yikes!!
saccentral.org/ourstaff/dougb.aspx

Satan is wroth with the true church of God so it doesn’t surprise me when the Seventh-day Adventist movement gets attacked so much. Jesus said woe to you if people start talking well of you.

And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. Revelation 12:17

 

[daro2096]

It’s doubtful that they are mainstream Protestant - the status of Mrs White is a sticking point, as is the SDA doctrine of soul-sleep; and some other points. The most one cam say, IMO, is that they are closer to Evangelical Protestantism than most cults.​

The late Walter Martin argued that they were Protestants with a few special points of their own; A. A. Hoekema argued they are a cult - I think Hoekema is right. ##

Did you know the early Christian church was called a cult.

The sect of the Nazarenes.

Act 24:5 For we have found this man [a] pestilent [fellow], and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes:

The dead sleep until the day of the resurrection.

These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead. John 11:11-14

Men [and] brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, Acts 2:29, 34

The Bible says death is a dreamless sleep some 54 times. The greek word for hell is hades which means the grave.

Psa 146:4 His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.

Ecc 9:5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.

Ecc 9:6 Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any [thing] that is done under the sun.

Ecc 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

Job 21:32 Yet shall he be brought to the grave, and shall remain in the tomb.

Psa 115:17 The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence.

Psa 88:10 Wilt thou shew wonders to the dead? shall the dead arise [and] praise thee? Selah.