Guibox,

But aren’t the three previous chapters in Galations about how Judaizers had entered into the Galatian churches and introduced, among other things, the rites of circumcision as a requirement for salvation?

If so, it would seem that the members of Galatia were being misled by Jews or Jewish Christians from Jerusalem, which in turn led to Paul’s critique. That the Judaizers were also apparently trying to add reverence for the feast days in addition to practicing circumcision, seems to have been Paul’s concern here. The context of the book indicates that it wasn’t pagan rites the Galatian members were falling back into, but Jewish ones. 

Glenn, your points are exactly the ones I was thinking about.

If anything, Paul reached out to the pagan Gentiles in rebuking Peter for slipping back into Jewish practices when the “men from James” came to visit him (Galatians 2:11-14).

Dismissing Paul’s message to the Galatian church is not as simple as “that’s your interpretation,” because his meaning is very clear.

Greg

That Paul was dealing with both paganism and Judaism throughout his epistles is true. However, we must be careful in distinguishing when and in what fashion he does this. We must also take into account the fact that the Jews did not proselytize and the pagans were new converts from Paul’s time. The Galatians were already Christian by this time. It is highly unlikely that many of these pagans in Galatia were previously converted to Judaism and then to Christianity by the time Paul was writing this letter.
Especially to the point that they were so steeped in Judaic practices that they would want to “go back” to it.

Paul’s biggest problem with the Gentiles was not Judaism but backsliding paganism.

The aforementioned passage in Galatians cannot be used to derive Judaic practices (never mind the Sabbath day) but have hints of pagan ritualism and worship. This same thing permeates Colossians 2 as well.

glennspring, if you don’t mind, I’m having a difficult time understanding from what background you are coming from. Are you an SDA or a former?

Just curious…

Guibox,

I will have more on this later, but I must strongly disagree with what you have said here about Paul’s warnings to the Galatian church being directed against their pagan practices.  You haven’t addressed the text where he warns Peter about slipping back into his Jewish practices.  In other epistles, he also has strong warnings to Jews who thought their Jewish beliefs would save them, particularly with reference to the Decalogue in 2 Corinthians 3 and to their belief in being saved by their cultural heritage in Romans 11.

There is nothing of pagan origin in view in either of these chapters or in Galatians.  The clearest and simplest message Paul wished to convey was that none of the Jewish practices were able to save them, including their insistence on observing holy days.

Greg

Guibox,

I am still troubled some by your answer to Greg about whether keeping the Sabbath is necessary to salvation.

You wrote:

“No, ultimately I don’t believe that Sunday worshippers are all going straight to hell. However, I must believe the Bible when it calls us to be different, holy, set apart and obedient to His word and commands.”

“If I don’t obey His words, why am I even a Christian and if I basically tell God through my actions that He is not worthy to be served and obeyed, why should He save me?”
------------------------------------------------------------

Another way to ask the question would be from the SDA perspective:  “What if SDAs leave Adventism, and then give up keeping the Sabbath, and go to a church where the gospel is proclaimed more freely, but they worship on Sunday?

This is the rub. Because, officially SDAs do believe that there are many in Sunday churches who are true Christians, but that it is because they haven’t seen the light of the third Angels’ message yet. But it was specifically stated even lately by GC president Paulson that if SDAs left the third angels message, then their salvation would be in jeopardy. This statement is reviving the Galatian heresy.

Guibox, you seem to try to explain away the three major NT texts that would cast doubt on whether Sabbath-keeping is binding, but, wouldn’t it seem quite apparent that if the Sabbath was going to be the FINAL TEST of whether we are faithful to God, then would not one of the apostles in their epistles at least even mention one gentle reminder to keep the Sabbath?

In all the lists of sins in the New Testament, there is not one list that says Sabbathbreaking is a sin that will keep you out of heaven.

Revelation 21:8:

8But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.”
-----------------------------------------------------------

Since God knows the end from the beginning, and knew there would be a Sabbath controversy, then why not inspire John to include Sabbathbreakers asamong those who will be consumed in the lake of fire?

All this Ellen White emphasis on the Mark of the Beast, and a final test for salvation is just unbiblical. These ideas are foreign to the New Testament.

Jude 3:  “The faith once for all delivered to the saints”

Hebrews 1:1-3:

1Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, 2but in THESE LAST DAYS he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. 3He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,”

All this is evidence that there is no need for any last day prophetess proclaiming a last day test that the New Testament knows nothing about.

But according to SDA theology, if we give up the Sabbath, then we are lost.

Stan

I must also respectfully disagree that Judaic Old covenant laws are the issue here in this passage and not pagan practices.

As Bacchiocchi points out:

In the immediate context, Paul reminds the Galatians that in their pre-Christian days they “were slaves to the elemental spirits of the universe” (Gal 4:3). The “elemental spirits–stoikeia tou kosmou” have nothing to do with the Old Covenant since the Mosaic Law was unknown to the Corinthians in their pagan days. Most scholars interpret the “elements” as the basic elements of this world, such as the earth, water, air, and fire, or pagan astral gods who were credited with controlling human destiny.
The context clearly indicates that Paul rebukes the Galatians for turning back to their pagan days by reverting to their pagan calendar. Thus, the issue is not their adoption of Jewish Holy Days but their return to observing pagan superstitious days - Sabbath in Crisis

Another interesting comment Bacchiocchi makes concerning another scholars work:

Two recent articles by Troy Martin, published in New Testament Studies and the Journal of Biblical Literature, make a significant contribution to the understanding of the passage under consideration. Martin points out that the time-keeping scheme found in Galatians 4:10 ("days, and months, and seasons, and years") is clearly different from that found in Colossians 2:16 ("a festival or a new moon or Sabbaths"). He shows that while the list in Colossians 2:16 is unquestionably Jewish, because the temporal categories of festival, new moon, and Sabbaths are characteristic of the Jewish religious calendar, the list in Galatians 4:10 of “days, and months, and seasons, and years” “describes a pagan calendar unacceptable to Paul and his communities.”
Martin reaches this conclusion by examining not only the time structure of pagan calendars,39 but especially the immediate context where Paul condemns the Galatians’ attempt to return to their pagan practices (Gal 4:8-9) by reverting to the use of their pagan calendar. “As the immediate context clearly states, Paul is worried that he has labored for the Galatians in vain since they have returned to their former pagan life as evidenced by their renewed preconversion reckoning of time. Because of its association with idolatry and false deities, marking time according to this pagan scheme is tantamount to rejecting Paul’s Gospel and the one and only true God it proclaims (Gal 4:8-9).- ibid

I think ultimately whether it be pagan or Judaic, even if it is the Sabbath, the issue was ‘salvation by works’ and not necessarily validity of observances. One could still believe that the Sabbath is spoken of here but still believe in its validity. Salvation by works is never acceptable. Though all the commandments are valid, they can also be condemned for observing them to be saved.

Paul’s concern is not to expose the superstitious ideas attached to these observances but to challenge the whole system of salvation which the Galatians’ false teachers had devised. By conditioning justification and acceptance with God to such things as circumcision and the observance of pagan days and seasons, the Galatians were making salvation dependent upon human achievement. This for Paul was a betrayal of the Gospel: “You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace” (Gal 5:4).

It is within this context that Paul’s denouncement of the observance of days and seasons must be understood. If the motivations for these observances had not undermined the vital principle of justification by faith in Jesus Christ, Paul would only have recommended tolerance and respect, as he does in Romans 14. The motivation for these practices, however, adulterated the very ground of salvation. Thus the Apostle had no choice but strongly to reject them. In Galatians as in Colossians, then, it is not the principle of Sabbathkeeping that Paul opposes, but rather the perverted use of cultic observations which were designed to promote salvation as a human achievement rather than as a divine gift of grace - ibid

“glennspring, if you don’t mind, I’m having a difficult time understanding from what background you are coming from. Are you an SDA or a former? “

current SDA. Sorry for any confusion. As you can probably gather, I’m not particularly orthodox. But I still attend an SDA church. I’m not really impressed by any alternatives at the moment.

I think I largely share your pre-advent judgment view: I don’t see it in Daniel 8 (or in Daniel anywhere) although I think there is some basis for believing it’s possible to lose one’s “salvation”, a term I put in quotes because I think it can be understood in a variety of ways--a current sense of salvation of being in Christ, and the prospect of a heavenly reward, which to me is far less certain in any event.

My SDAism might come across more in other posts I’ve left lying around here.

Are you still current SDA?

Guibox, I want to caution you from using one primary commentator on Galatians, particularly Dr. Bacchiochi, since his views on this issue have not found acceptance among respected scholars.  I’m mostly thinking about the book edited by D.A. Carson, “From Sabbath to Lord’s Day: A Biblical, Historical and Theological Investigation,” where much of Bacchiochi’s teachings on the Sabbath were subjected to close scrutiny and were not found to be as conclusive as he has asserted.

I don’t discount Bacchiochi’s exegesis out of hand, but I would urge caution about using him as your primary source on this issue without consulting other commentators.  Furthermore, a plain reading of the Bible should be the final guide, even though I think commentators can be very helpful.

I’d also like to hear your response to Stan’s questions in the post just before yours.

Greg

ACtually, I didn’t even see Stan’s arguement when I first posted. I was surprised in coming back and seeing it before my post.."Hmmm, how did that get there?” So here I go…

Stan your argument about those outside the city not including ‘sabbath breakers’ seems a valid one if the endtime emphasis on the Sabbath is so important.

But I must mention two things on this..

We can also assume that those who receive the mark of the beast are outside the city as well. The Bible doesn’t mention those who got 666 tattooed in their forehead or received the chip under their skin or can’t use the electronic barcode on their products. Whatever the mark of the beast is, it ends up ending badly for those who have it and they are left outside the city. Therefore the lack of mention of the Sabbath and all other endtime scenarios doesn’t negate it’s possibility of endtime importance.

Second, there are numerous places where sins and commandments are mentioned in partial. If we needed an entire list all the time to prove validity, we would have chapters and chapters of sins and commands. And then we could still nit-pick about what isn’t in there. “I don’t see where it says kicking the crutch out from under old men in there is a condemned action.”

Though I am starting to veer away from the end time SDA eschaetology (though the current clap-trap of Tim LaHaye and Jack VanImpe is even less appealing as any alternative), I don’t feel that minimizing commands of God makes it better or safer.

It seems that obedience is sacrificed on the altar of grace. I believe that because of our sinful bodies good works are not going to come naturally. We are called to do things simply because we are commanded to do so and it is the right thing to do. If I want to take grace far enough, I can pretty much explain away any command or duty of the Christian and just wait for the Spirit to move in me and judge what is right by that.

I see that as potentially dangerous and a fulfillment of what Paul was dealing with when he said ‘Do we make void the law through faith?’ People using ‘grace’ and ‘good works come automatically through the Spirit’ to sweep away commands that ‘don’t have anything to do with salvation’.

Where does the line get drawn?

[quote author="guibox"]Therefore the lack of mention of the Sabbath and all other endtime scenarios doesn’t negate it’s possibility of endtime importance.

Guibox, this is not very good logic or exegesis.  You could insert anything, no matter how obscure, into this sentence as possibly being of endtime importance, just because it was never explictly excluded as not being important.  Wouldn’t you say it’s better to stick with what the Bible says IS important?

This is why so many former Adventists get frustrated in interacting with Adventists, because the topic always veers back to the Sabbath and its end-time importance.  A straightforward reading of the New Testament would not bring such questions naturally to mind.

[quote author="guibox"]Though I am starting to veer away from the end time SDA eschaetology…

[quote author="guibox"]...(though the current clap-trap of Tim LaHaye and Jack VanImpe is even less appealing as any alternative), I don’t feel that minimizing commands of God makes it better or safer.

And you have not seen us minimize the commands of God found throughout the Old and New Testaments, I hope.  Again, this discussion always seems to center around ONE commandment–the fourth.  But if we pin everything on this commandment, we still need to deal with the other 9 commandments inside the decalogue that we’re still not measuring up to, even in our saved condition (and this isn’t counting the rest of the Mosaic law or the commandments of Jesus and the apostles).  Again I refer you to Romans 7:13-25.

[quote author="guibox"]Where does the line get drawn?

The line is drawn in John 14:6.

Greg

Guibox,

Again you are wanting to point out bad theology like La Hayes’ Fiction, as to somehow justify a scenario which makes the SDA schema of eschatology that makes all end times events revolve around a small faithful band of Sabbath Keepers.

How could something so important and essential as Sabbath keeping somehow get totally ignored by the apostle to the Gentiles? The Old Testament prophets emphasized the Sabbath thruout. What is the emphasis of Pauls’s preaching? Christ and Him crucified. Does that make sense in light of the Sabbath being a shadow pointing to Christ? This argument is even more forceful considering Paul was the strictest Sabbath keeper ever before he came to Christ. Paul receved his gospel by revelation directly from Christ himself in the desert of Arabia (Galatians 1), and certainly the Lord would want to insure that His Sabbaths were kept by just telling Paul to remind the Gentiles that they also must keep the Sabbath, and then give some practical instructions.

It is this problen of elevating the Sabbath to the level of a last day eschatological event in which Sabbath keepers will be the final target, is the issue Anthony Hoekema used to finally write in his book that SDA is a cult--it was not on SDAs Christological theology.

Final tests of salvation are clearly outlined in the New Testament. The one final clear test of salvation is: Are we trusting in the merits of Christ alone for our salvation?

Stan

Guibox,

I think Stan has raised some important points here.  It’s incredible that Adventists consider the end-time test of salvation to be Sabbath observance, in effect minimizing Jesus who is THE ultimate test.  In so magnifying an Old Testament command not emphasized in any way by the apostles, Adventists miss the forest for the trees.

What do you think?

Greg

The endtime test of salvation will be a matter of obedience and allegiance regardless of the specifics. If we are to believe that the endtimes will be so deceptive that Satan “if it were possible could deceive the very elect”, the endtime ultimate test isn’t going to be as simple as ‘accept Christ or not’. This is the choice we have today.

I really don’t think that anything Revelation 13 turns out to be will be something the Bible emphasises in specifity. I think when we are told to give our allegiance to God and obey His commandments and told to abide in Him to withstand the trials at the end, the endtime test could be about anything. Then couple that with the study into the third angel’s message and identifying the beast of Revelation 13 and his mark, and the Sabbath becomes prominant.

Before we go any further Guibox, when you say “the Sabbath becomes prominent,” do you mean that those who don’t keep the Sabbath will be lost, or will it only be those who “knew the truth about the Sabbath and rejected it?”

How is it that the only Christians who espouse this eschatology end up being Adventist?  Is the other 99.9% of the Christian world not part of the very elect?  Can you point to one non-Adventist theologian who has arrived at the view you are promoting from a study of the Bible alone?

It’s quite disturbing to see faith in Jesus being trivialized...there is nothing simple about Christ bearing the full weight of my sins on the cross so that I can be reconciled to God and marked with his true seal–the Holy Spirit–who is a deposit guaranteeing my inheritance (Ephesians 1:13-14).

Jesus himself made the most unbelievable promise in guaranteeing the salvation of those who believe in him: “All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:37-40 ESV)

Even Revelation 13:8 refers to the Lamb’s book of life in which the names of the elect were written before the foundation of the world.  This should be very reassuring to anyone who knows the Lord and is tempted to be nervous about passing an end-time test of salvation.

Finally, Romans 8:33-39 says, “Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died–more than that, who was raised–who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? As it is written,

‘For your sake we are being killed all the day long;
we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.’

No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

Those who have been saved by Jesus have every reason to remain confident in his love, and no end-time test, real or imagined, will separate us from it.

Greg

Greg,

I guess it all depends on whether one believes in OSAS or has the choice to separate themselves from God. If I believe that I am called from the foundation of the world, and play the seemingly meaningless charade of accepting Him merely to fulfill what was already destined and am forever saved, then there isn’t such a thing as an ‘endtime test’. There isn’t anything such as temptation or future sin either. And for every person who by accepting God’s grace fulfills that which already was, there are many that even though we are preaching to them, can never be saved. Christ’s grace doesn’t reach all after all.

If however, I believe that there is a choice we make to serve God and only those who ‘run the race’ and remain faithful will receive the consummate fufillment of Christ’s grace, then an endtime test is very plausible.

I can’t fully reconcile the events of Revelation 13 with predestined fates already decided. Those who ‘receive the mark in their hands’ are not making any choice whatsoever to receive the mark of the beast or to even be deceived: it is predestined for them to be lost.

The events of Revelation 13 are merely nothing but a pre-scripted movie of parallel fates already decided and of which have no bearing on the other. Christians cannot be deceived and nobody chooses to receive the mark (especially not Christians).

There is no great tribulation either (strange how there can be a great multitude of the saved who have gone through it) for there are no trials that can fell us when we are already sealed.

The whole book is a ritual of redundancies.

I’m sorry, but like universalism and moral influnce theorists who deny the propiation of Christ, there is just way too much biblical evidence to overcome to believe it.
If it were that clear cut, then everybody would be Calvinist don’t you think? It sounds nice (just like the two aforementioned) but I don’t see it reconciled with much of what I read in scripture.

As far as the ‘Sabbath/Sunday’ playing out as is believed by SDA eschaetology..I remain agnostic on the matter.