When Jesus died, the Sabbath died.  If we insist upon observing the festal, weekly Sabbath shadow that pointed to Jesus, the true Sabbath Rest, we are actually denying the reality of Christ. Jesus said, “Come unto Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and YOU WILL FIND REST FOR YOUR SOULS. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light” (Matt. 11:28-30 NASB).

There is no doubt that the Sabbath ceased in Christ because he is the truth by the presence of which all images vanish. He is the reality at whose advent all shadows are abandoned.  The New Testament never commands Christians to observe the Sabbath. Obviously, we cannot base our theology upon total silence. Our sovereign God never leaves us to wonder, with any degree of uncertainty, about our moral expectations as His image-bearers. The truth is that the festal, weekly Sabbath never was a moral law and it is not now.

Interestingly, contrary to the directives of the Torah to not seek personal pleasure on the Sabbath, in Talmudic Judaism, the performance of the marital act was considered a very old religious law. According to the Talmudic tradition, one of the ten ordinances introduced by Ezra was that one should eat garlic on the eve of the Sabbath, because garlic makes one happy, multiplies the semen, arouses love, and kills jealousy. Some sages attributed such importance to the performance of the act on Friday night that nothing was supposed to keep them from it. These Friday night directives would certainly have annoyed, perhaps even frightened, the SDA prophetess (smile).

Dennis Fischer

New Mexico I was actually referring to myself. I’m the one who would want to cling to Sabbath just to hedge my bets and play it safe. Even though I now understand Grace and that I can’t earn my salvation ... there is still something inside my DNA that says play it safe, keep Sabbath ... and because I always loved Sabbath, returning to it is indeed a temptation, but if I had to look God in the face and explain to Him why ... at the root of my returning would be salvation fear ... that makes it an idolatry issue for me.

It is also my understanding that if I put myself back under the law as a means to earn salvation, rather than remain in Grace ... then I am required to keep ALL of the law with 100% accuracy. Since the Sabbath mandate is ONLY found in the law, placing myself back into Sabbath observance to hedge my bets would require that I keep ALL 613 commands found in the Law. Who can do that?

For as many as are of the works of The Law are under a curse; for it is written, Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of The Law, to perform them. Now that no one is justified by The Law before God is evident; for, the righteous man shall live by faith. However, The Law is not of faith; on the contrary, he who practices them shall live by them. Galatians 3:10-12

For whoever keeps the whole Law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all. James 2:10

It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery. Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you. And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by Law; you have fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness. –Galatians 5:1-5

...for not the hearers of The Law are just before God, but the doers of The Law will be justified. –Romans 2:13

My question arose because I hear you and others saying Sabbath is still mandatory ... but for me to return to it would be doing exactly what Paul warned about in Galatians 2:20-21 ... I would be negating what Christ did for me on the cross.

I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me. I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.” –Galatians 2:20-21

Sabbath was never a burden for me, I LOVED it! I always wondered why the rest of the world didn’t want it also. But now that I have the 24/7 rest instead, the Hebrews 4 rest with Christ as my true Sabbath rest ... I’m experiencing something more blessed and phenomenal than I ever experienced under all my 7th Days Sabbaths ever combined.

And please understand, I’m not saying those who observe the 7th Day can’t experience what I am, I’m saying that I never did.

New Mexico ... just because I attend church on Sunday ... does not mean I’m a Sunday keeper.

In fact most of the people I attend church with on Sunday would have no idea what you mean by that. They worship on Sunday, but they don’t keep Sunday.

Can you point to me where in Scripture we are ever told there is ever a wrong time to worship?

Also you said:

When interpreting scripture it is always necessary to consider the culture and the specific circumstances in which the statement was written. This applies equally to the Old Testament and to the New Testament. In other words, we always have to consider the human factor in the scriptures. What we are looking for are the deeper principles of righteousness and not the exact details of how the principle was applied at a certain time. This is not abrogation of scripture, but proper exegesis. It is what Paul called moving from milk to meat.

How is what you are saying and doing any different than what you have been suggesting that what those of us who believe Sabbath was fulfilled are saying and doing?

And I always understood Paul’s moving from milk to meat to mean ... the baby Christians eventually need to step up to the plate and become more spiritually mature ... so I’m having a hard time understanding what you mean by that in the context of exegesis.

As for challenging your Colossians exegesis ... I believe Stan and Greg both have already done that extensively.

Ane said:

New Mexico I was actually referring to myself. I’m the one who would want to cling to Sabbath just to hedge my bets and play it safe. Even though I now understand Grace and that I can’t earn my salvation ... there is still something inside my DNA that says play it safe, keep Sabbath ... and because I always loved Sabbath, returning to it is indeed a temptation, but if I had to look God in the face and explain to Him why ... at the root of my returning would be salvation fear ... that makes it an idolatry issue for me.

That puts things into an entirely different light.  My personal goal in this discussion is not to try to convince you or anyone else to feel guilty about how or if you keep Sabbath but to try develop the principles which guide those decisions. From what Jesus said, I’m personally convinced that the Sabbath is God’s gift to us and it is completely our choice how we wish to relate to that gift.  I don’t think you or I will be saved or lost because of how we keep the Sabbath, but we could miss a blessing if we ignore it. 

Ultimately, I believe the discussion in Paul’s writings concerning the law is about the gospel itself, not a discussion about whether we derive the rules we follow from the New Testament, The Old Testament, or both.  I understand Paul, in his statement that we are not under the law, means we are not under any law whatsoever, either from the New Testament or from the Old Testament.  Obedience based on law with rewards and punishments is ultimately service based on self interest, whereas the only service which is acceptable to God is service based on love to God and love to other people.  Only when we are free from coercion can we give God the unselfish service He desires.  Although we may disagree on some of the details, that doesn’t matter since in the end the gospel is what really counts.

New Mexico you said: I’m personally convinced that the Sabbath is God’s gift to us and it is completely our choice how we wish to relate to that gift.

And that is exactly what I’ve done with Sabbath ... it just looks extremely different than how you probably choose for your Sabbath rest to look.

And I’m telling you brother, the blessings I’m experiencing under the 24/7 rest in the Person Jesus Christ is nothing compared to what I experienced under the 24/1 rest of the 7th day.

Again, I’m not saying the person who prefers the 24/1 can’t experience what I am ... I just don’t think I received the tremendous blessing because my heart was doing it all for the wrong reason ... to earn salvation.

Ane said:

And I’m telling you brother, the blessings I’m experiencing under the 24/7 rest in the Person Jesus Christ is nothing compared to what I experienced under the 24/1 rest of the 7th day.

Again, I’m not saying the person who prefers the 24/1 can’t experience what I am ... I just don’t think I received the tremendous blessing because my heart was doing it all for the wrong reason ... to earn salvation.

I think your answer contains the real problem, a misunderstanding of the gospel.  If we do anything to “earn salvation” we are already missing the mark.  The Adventist Sanctuary teaching seems to the the root of the problem.

Ane said:

As for challenging your Colossians exegesis ... I believe Stan and Greg both have already done that extensively.

I’m not sure what you are referring to.

I do understand the Gospel now. I do understand my salvation is based on faith alone now. And that’s why I can only rely on Christ now as my Sabbath rest.

Ane said:

I do understand the Gospel now. I do understand my salvation is based on faith alone now. And that’s why I can only rely on Christ now as my Sabbath rest.

As your answer indicates, unfortunately there are many Adventists who don’t understand the gospel, although in my experience it is clear that this is not universal since there are a few Adventists who do understand the gospel and resist the “orthodox” position.  There are many Adventists who will explain that they keep the law because they are saved, not in order to be saved.  Biblical theology presents no conflict between the Sabbath and the gospel. 

The real source of difficulty in Adventist theology is the sanctuary doctrine which, to a significnt extent, nullifies the gospel.  It is disappointing that the most prominent Sabbitarian church, which attracts members primarily because they wish to keep the Sabbath, then tries to force those members to acknowledge the authority of Ellen White and to embrace a limited version of the gospel, and if they resist then pushes them out the back door.  This unfortunate behavior by the Adventist church brings the Sabbath into disrepute by leaving the impression that Christians have to choose between celebrating the Sabbath or resting in the gospel.  The ugly face of legalism and judgmentalism becomes the only image people see of the Sabbath.

What is so sad is that it didn’t have to be this way.  There have been many first class theologicans within the SDA church who could have prevented this disaster.  Unfortunately the leadership of the church chose to reject Biblical truth at Glacier View when Desmon Ford pointed out some of the errors in the sanctuary doctrine.  Instead they elevated Mrs. White to the status of inspired Bible commentary who must be obeyed at all times.  They then encouraged a tsunami of persecution against church members who cherished the gospel and upheld the primacy of the Bible.  This activity by a corrupt leadership destroyed any legitimacy the church ever enjoyed.

The particular problems in the Adventist church may be unique, but the same cavaler attitude towards truth is endemic to organized religion in general.  It is not that the SDA church is uniquely bad; all heirarchies tend to become corrupt as leaders, who think it is God’s will that they exercise power, consolidate their authority through theology.  All bureaucracies fail for the same reason, because even those leaders with the best of intentions also seek security and power, and gradually alter the organization to ensure their own advantage even when it is detrimental to the original intent for which the bureaucracy was established.  Therefore, our standing before God has to be an individual matter apart from any organization.

New Mexico, I agree with you. The problems in the Adventist church can be traced back further than Glacier View, since they were well-known to those in attendance at the 1919 Bible Conference. Unfortunately the minutes from that conference were buried for decades and the status quo was maintained. Other men including John Harvey Kellogg, Albion Ballenger, Charles Stewart, and D.M. Canright knew of the problems, but were marginalized to protect the viability of the church. Even James White knew of the problems with his wife’s “gift”, but he had more to gain from publishing books than he did from facing the truth.

Surely we cannot tie our salvation to the fate of a church which exists for its own power and purposes. New Mexico, you are absolutely right that our standing before God must be an individual matter apart from any organization.

Greg

[quote author="Greg"]Surely we cannot tie our salvation to the fate of a church which exists for its own power and purposes. New Mexico, you are absolutely right that our standing before God must be an individual matter apart from any organization.

Greg

As the song goes from Southern gospel songwriter, Squire Parsons..

It’s not what’s over the door of the church that you attend

That makes you a child of God and a heavenly citizen.

As the eyes of the Lord look this world o’er, there’s just one thing He’s looking for.

Can’t you see that it’s what’s in your heart and not what’s over the door.

Hi everyone,

Again, what a great thread to read. I am sorry that I haven’t been able to participate. (See the prayer thread.)

But the topic came up above about the importance of doctrine.

I see a disturbing trend among former SDAs as well as many professing Christians to want to minimize the importance of doctrine. They want to talk about Jesus, and love Jesus, but they don’t want to contend for the doctrines that Jesus clearly taught. I don’t see how it is possible to separate the true Jesus of the Bible from the doctrines that He taught. And Jesus taught a lot of doctrines that many don’t want to believe. The Jesus of the Bible talked a lot about hell and the wrath of God. He also talked a lot about the doctrine of election and salvation.

It is impossible to separate the Law from the Law Giver.
Christ was the lawgiver on Sinai, as well as the God man who expanded on the law in the sermon on the mount.

For those of you who would want to minimize doctrine, I would invite you to listen to the White Horse Inn at http://www.whitehorseinn.org and not only be entertained, but taught as to why the doctrines of the Reformation are so important. On tonight’s show, they were talking about those who would want to compromise with the doctrine of Justification by faith alone. This essential doctrine of the Christian faith, and also the foudation of the gospel, is being attacked on all sides. Tonight they talked about a movement among Reformed circles called the “Federal Vision” doctrine. This doctrine is the same as the SDA doctrine of the Investigative Judgment! Really, I kid you not. You must listen and you will be amazed. They really do say, that yes, you are saved by grace, but then you must prove by your life that you are saved, or you will be in peril of losing your salvation! Where have we heard this before?

But, if we are not grounded in the firm teachings of the gospel, then we will be led astray by all kinds of winds of false doctrine that are blowing out there. There really is quite an ignorance of the basic doctrines that Jesus taught, but at the same time, these folks claim to love Jesus, but somehow won’t face what He taught, and some will not even attempt to obey Jesus.

Doctrine however is not supposed to be an intellectual head trip. They must also be received at the “heart” level.

Nothing is more comforting in the storms of life, which we have been enduring lately, than to be comforted by the firm and sure teachings of God’s Word. Not only is there full assurance of salvation, but also a resting 24/7 in Christ’s Sabbath rest. We also are assured that God is indeed sovereign over all. He has planned for us to go through trials, but by applying the promises of His Word, we are truly comforted, and we have an Anchor for the soul.

Because we are grounded in the clear teachings of grace, we as Christians can truly sing the song “It is well with my soul”, but we could not sing that song with all our hearts, if we did not have the absolute promises that are firmly taught as “doctrines”.

Stan

Well, I could be wrong but it seems that this thread outlived it’s relevancy about 15 posts ago as we went off track on Colossians and the Sabbath,and what not.

Perhaps it is time to put this to bed and start another thread more relevant to some of the things we are discussing?

[quote author="New Mexico"] The covenant with Israel was a national covenant about a piece of land in the Middle East and didn’t include promises of salvation or eternal life. Those promises are found only in the New Covenant. I think this is one reason Paul called the Old Covenant the “ministration of death” since it offered nothing but a temporary relationship with God which would inevitably end with death . In contrast the New Covenant offers everything found in the Old Covenant plus eternal life.

I think New Mexico is on to something with how we should understand Paul’s use of the phrase, “ministration of death”. It makes sense to me anyway. Taken on its own Paul’s words can seem pretty contradictory to much of what we find elsewhere in the Bible. It threw me for a loop when I re-read it recently.

This has been a great discussion so far. Maybe, like Guibox suggested, the last dozen posts or so could be moved to a different thread and given another title.