Sunday Worship is not sanctioned in Scripture.

[winsome]

Christians are under the Law of Christ according to Scripture...
...Which is ALL the moral or natural law found in the law of Moses.
...With additional commands added in.

What Christians are in no way obligated to observe are the "ceremonial aspects" of the Law of Moses or ceremonial or ritualistic laws that predated Moses.

In the first 70 years of the Christian Church there was much liberty granted to Christians who came from a Jewish background - these Christians continued to frequent the Synagogue and Temple AND even participate in Jewish religious practices - these Jews were green lighted by the Church to do this PROVIDED that they DIDN'T teach that those practices, as found in the law of Moses, were essential to Salvation.

The weekly (sabbaths), the Monthly (new moons) and yearly (solemnities such as the Passover, Day of Atonement, etc) are identified as "Shadows"  along with animal sacrifices & circumcision.

As Saint Paul explicitly said:

"We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle."

The whole context of the Book of Hebrews is against the Judaizers (the Party of the circumcision) who maintained that to be saved a Christian must be circumcised, observe the Jewish Sabbath, eat kosher, etc, etc, etc. The Book of Hebrews is clear that if a person thinks observing ANY of that stuff saves them they are not even entitled to take Christian communion.

Hi Cathlodox,
Not sure if you are disagreeing with me or not.
However I entirely agree with the points you are making above and in reply #54.

[Texas Conservative]

What do you mean shuffled and renumbered?

Generally, if you trace SDA theology back to it's roots it's discovered that ultimately they claim "Jesus" was who changed times and laws. I'm not being sarcastic here in the least. Traditional or Historic SDA's don't believe Jesus was God (Like the Father is God) therefore the Trinity is false and given that Jesus didn't have the Authority to fulfill the Sabbath day.

The SDA Pioneers called this quandary 'The Sabbath God Vs. The Sunday God'.

The SDA Pioneers were speaking of "THE FATHER" and the concept was that the Sabbath God was a flesh, bone & functional organ hominid God while the Sunday God was a false 'spirit god' that lacked a body of flesh with intestines. The SDA's would publish articles in the Church papers alerting the reader to know the difference between the Sabbath God and the Sunday God and the critical importance of KNOWING Father God was a flesh God.

http://documents.adventistarchives.org/Periodicals/RH/RH18540307-V05-07.pdf

All one needs to know is that the SDA church was built on the sands of Millerism.  Jesus did not return in 1844, and to make the lack of return make sense, they then taught that Jesus entered the Holy Sanctuary in 1844, which is a blasphemy of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ.

I won't say there are no Christians who are SDA's, but if there are it is in spite of the SDA church, not because of it.

[seekingHiswisdom]

Nowhere in the scriptures do you find one word which sanctions Sunday worship, you can search in the Old as well as the New Testament there is nothing.

 

Very simple,

Do as the Catholics do. They have a daily mass and many people attend daily. End result.... they are certain to worship on a day that you claim God approves of.

   Matthew 28:1, "After the sabbath, as the first day of the week was dawning, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb. And suddenly there was a great earthquake...." Jesus was crucified on Friday.

Mark 16:9, "Now after he rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons."This verse simply records that, after His resurrection early on the Sunday morning, Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene.   

Jesus' Resurrection....

Webster defines resurection as:

Definition of resurrection

1acapitalized : the rising of Christ from the dead
boften capitalized : the rising again to life of all the human dead before the final judgment
c: the state of one risen from the dead

FACT: Jesus rose after the Jewish Sabbath.

Why do you think that is? I submit because not only was it the first day of the week, it was because HE, and only HE offered a new beginning. A new beginning for those who would be following him in action and faith.

A new way. A new everything.

It is only proper that worship of Him would be separate from any other  Jewish and or Pagan worships.

It separates us. It separates the wheat from the chaff if you would.

He offered us a new beginning. A new life. An everlasting life into eternity.

How WRONG it would be to try and blend that into any other religious days or practices.

Jesus said

Revelation 1:8 King James Version (KJV)
8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

repeated:

Revelation 22:13
“I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.”

He began on the first day of the week.

He waited until the Passover Sabbath was ended and the weekly Sabbath was ended.

It is only proper for us to worship him on the day he began.... NOT after a week had gone by until Fri. sundown.

           Jesus was crucified on Friday.   

NO HE WAS NOT!

This has been discussed in other threads. Do a search.

[Cathlodox]

Hi Winsome,

My position pertaining to the ceremonial aspects within the law of Moses is that the Jewish Sabbath, along with the rest of it was fulfilled by Christ. I believe that Scripture is very clear that an "Apostolic Order" was given that Christians were to "assemble themselves together" and that failing to do this was a "sin". The only day given in Scripture that Christians "broke bread & took a collection was on the 1st day of the week.

All the examples given in Scripture where the Synagogues or Temple were visited is identified in Scripture as presenting the Gospel to unbelievers. Granted that THAT took place many times on the Sabbath however when Christians assembled "themselves" together in Devotion of the Eucharist, preaching & the prayers.

Acts 2, 42
And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.

I've heard SDA's claim that when Scripture uses the phrase "breaking bread" it simply means participating in a common meal - this is absurd. Unless one would find it reasonable that the Apostles had a "devotion" to eating common meals this very odd interpretation belongs in the trash can.


Acts 20,7
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.


1 Corinthians 16, 1
Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. 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.

If Christians expected to see Paul "on the 1st day of the week" its logical to conclude that was then they [Christians] were Massing. It's when they were assembling themselves together as Christians. In any event Jews DON'T take a collection on the Sabbath.

1 Corinthians 10, 16
The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.


1 Corinthians 11, 20
When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? what shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.


NOT assembling as Christians, according to Scripture, is a sin...
...And if the day the Apostolic Church assembled was on Sunday.
....It stands to reason this Apostolic Tradition is Biblical.

Hebrews 10,23
Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;) And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching. For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries

Hopefully this clarifies my position and hopefully we are in agreement :) 

[beam]

While it is true from scripture that the first day of the week was referred to several times there is nothing in the New Testament indicating that it held any special value like was the Sabbath given only to Israel, the one that ended at Calvary.  Christians have the free will to worship where and when prompted by the Holy Spirit.  No church has the right to dictate when and where.  The last paragraph of the above post is all Christians have relating to gathering together.  We should  "Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is;".  I take it as a command and join in with believers most every week.

[Cathlodox]

While it is true from scripture that the first day of the week was referred to several times there is nothing in the New Testament indicating that it held any special value like was the Sabbath given only to Israel, the one that ended at Calvary.  Christians have the free will to worship where and when prompted by the Holy Spirit.  No church has the right to dictate when and where.  The last paragraph of the above post is all Christians have relating to gathering together.  We should  "Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is;".  I take it as a command and join in with believers most every week.

1 Corinthians 16,1
Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. 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.

[beam]

1 Corinthians 16,1
Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. 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.

Study the verse.  It says nothing about gathering as a collective body on Sunday and giving contributions.  What it is saying is for the believers to account for the past week's income and store the contribution from those funds they would at some point be giving.

[Cathlodox]

Study the verse.  It says nothing about gathering as a collective body on Sunday and giving contributions.  What it is saying is for the believers to account for the past week's income and store the contribution from those funds they would at some point be giving.

If when they (the Christians in that area) were all assembled together on the 1st day of the week AND that was the day Paul expected to see them AND take the collection its established that the early Church was meeting, for worship, on Sunday - exactly as were the Churches in Galatia.

[4WD]

If when they (the Christians in that area) were all assembled together on the 1st day of the week AND that was the day Paul expected to see them AND take the collection its established that the early Church was meeting, for worship, on Sunday - exactly as were the Churches in Galatia.

There is not a single verse in the whole of the NT that calls people to gather together to worship.  They were called together for fellowship, for study, for encouraging one another, for a number of things, none of which were worship.

[Cathlodox]

There is not a single verse in the whole of the NT that calls people to gather together to worship.  They were called together for fellowship, for study, for encouraging one another, for a number of things, none of which were worship

Acts 20, 7
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.


1 Corinthians 10, 15
I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

1 Corinthians 11, 20
When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? what shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.

That sounds like Church to me and it sounds like Church on the 1st day of the week.

[beam]

If when they (the Christians in that area) were all assembled together on the 1st day of the week AND that was the day Paul expected to see them AND take the collection its established that the early Church was meeting, for worship, on Sunday - exactly as were the Churches in Galatia.

The fact is that nowhere is there a command or directive to meet on any day of the week.  You have proven nothing to counter that fact.

I am not opposed to meeting on any day.  Sunday is the day most worship on and is fine with me.  I assemble with believers most every Sunday.  I do not consider it to be the Sabbath and if I want to buy or sell on that day I do.  I could care less who and when it all started or who sanctioned it to be the Christian Sabbath.  To me it is a convenient day to assemble.  What I am opposed to is anyone telling me I have to worship on a certain day of face the consequences.

[4WD]

Acts 20, 7
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.


1 Corinthians 10, 15
I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

1 Corinthians 11, 20
When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? what shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.

That sounds like Church to me and it sounds like Church on the 1st day of the week.

And not one of those speaks about worshiping; rather you insert your own definition and meaning of worship into those passages.  I personally believe that some of the waning "Christianity" today is due to the fact that worship has come to be defined as the gathering together on Sunday morning.  That is for a lot of things as presented in the passages you posted, but it is not for worship.  Worship is a whole 'nother thing.

[winsome]

Hi Winsome,

My position pertaining to the ceremonial aspects within the law of Moses is that the Jewish Sabbath, along with the rest of it was fulfilled by Christ. I believe that Scripture is very clear that an "Apostolic Order" was given that Christians were to "assemble themselves together" and that failing to do this was a "sin". The only day given in Scripture that Christians "broke bread & took a collection was on the 1st day of the week.

All the examples given in Scripture where the Synagogues or Temple were visited is identified in Scripture as presenting the Gospel to unbelievers. Granted that THAT took place many times on the Sabbath however when Christians assembled "themselves" together in Devotion of the Eucharist, preaching & the prayers.

Acts 2, 42
And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.

I've heard SDA's claim that when Scripture uses the phrase "breaking bread" it simply means participating in a common meal - this is absurd. Unless one would find it reasonable that the Apostles had a "devotion" to eating common meals this very odd interpretation belongs in the trash can.


Acts 20,7
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.


1 Corinthians 16, 1
Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. 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.

If Christians expected to see Paul "on the 1st day of the week" its logical to conclude that was then they [Christians] were Massing. It's when they were assembling themselves together as Christians. In any event Jews DON'T take a collection on the Sabbath.

1 Corinthians 10, 16
The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.


1 Corinthians 11, 20
When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? what shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.


NOT assembling as Christians, according to Scripture, is a sin...
...And if the day the Apostolic Church assembled was on Sunday.
....It stands to reason this Apostolic Tradition is Biblical.

Hebrews 10,23
Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;) And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching. For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries

Hopefully this clarifies my position and hopefully we are in agreement :) 

Hi Cathlodox,
I don't disagree with any of that.

I usually approach SDAs and their Sabbath keeping by pointing out that the Old Law (of the Mosaic Covenant) has been abolished/abrogated/ended and that includes the Ten Commandments as Covenant law. The moral commands that are codified in the Ten Commandments are still applicable because they reflect the Natural Moral Law which exists for all people for all time - which I think you were referring to in reply #54. That approach also covers the making of images but I have no quarrel with your approach.

The Catechism of The Council of Trent puts it well: But, lest the people, aware of the abrogation of the Mosaic Law, may imagine that the precepts of the Decalogue are no longer obligatory, it should be taught that when God gave the Law to Moses, He did not so much establish a new code, as render more luminous that divine light by which the depraved morals and long-continued perversity of man had at that time almost obscured. It is most certain that we are not bound to obey the Commandments because they were delivered by Moses, but because they are implanted in the hearts of all, and have been explained and confirmed by Christ our Lord. 
(my emboldening)
 

[Cathlodox]

Winsome,

AWESOME!!!!

[Amo]

The Ten Commandments were not shuffled and renumbered.
If you look at the list in Deuteronony (and Exodus is similar), there are actually 12 commandments.
Deuteronomy 5:7-21
1. You shall have no other gods before me. 
2. You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth;
3. you shall not bow down to them or serve them; ……
4 You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain:……..
5. Observe the sabbath day, to keep it holy, as the LORD your God commanded you. ...
6. Honor your father and your mother, ……
7. You shall not kill.
8. Neither shall you commit adultery.
9. Neither shall you steal.
10. Neither shall you bear false witness against your neighbor.
11. Neither shall you covet your neighbor's wife;
12. you shall not desire your neighbor's house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or anything that is your neighbors.

In order to get to ten some of the commandments have to be conflated into one.
Catholics, Jews and Lutherans conflate 1,2 &3, presumably because they all concern the same topic. Most Protestants (except Lutherans) & Orthodox conflate 2&3, and 11&12 (as do Jews)
 Jews make up 10 because they treat the preceding verse “I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” as the first “saying” or “declaration”
 (see - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments).

The Catholic list was (I think) derived from Deuteronomy.All lists have all the same commands in them except Christians do not include Ex 20:2 or Dt 5:6 as the Jews do.

P.S. The link you gave is a typical protestant distortion of the truth.

Exo 34:28  And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

Deu 4:13  And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.

Deu 10:4  And he wrote on the tables, according to the first writing, the ten commandments, which the LORD spake unto you in the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly: and the LORD gave them unto me.

Some people actually believe the testimony of scripture above human speculation and or tradition.

[Amo]

All "Moral" or "Natural" Commandments in the Law of Moses are indeed binding on Christians...
...Man is commanded by nature to honor God (god's) & dedicate some type to worship.
...Man was never commanded by nature or set aside a specific time to do this.

Thus, the 3rd Commandment is moral as far as every culture has set aside time to honor it's Deities...
...The Sabbath Commandment required knowledge of it to be communicated supernaturally.
....Like the Day of Atonement, New Moons, Passover, etc. AT SPECIFIC TIMES.

This makes the TIMING ceremonial and subject to change.

The other thing that appears to have been missed by those who adhere to Ellen White's interpretation is that all the examples given of the Apostles going to the Temple or Synagogue are NOT examples of Christian Assembly or Worship. These are only examples of Christians spreading the Gospel where Jew's gathered in mass.


Saint Paul was explicit that Christians were to "ASSEMBLE THEMSELVES TOGETHER".

Hebrews 10, 20
By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; And having an high priest over the house of God; Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;) And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching. For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

It is unlawful in Judaism to have "a collection" on the Sabbath...
...It's was the same way back then - at the time of the Apostles.
...Scripture is CLEAR that Christians assembled themselves together.

ON THE 1st DAY OF THE WEEK.

1st Corinthians 16, 1 - 3
That's the day the Christians assembled themselves together. Notice also that this isn't a request - it's an Apostolic COMMAND.

Furthermore Scripture is explicit that the assembly above WAS specifically Christian Worship.

1st Corinthians 11, 17
Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse.
18 For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.
21 For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken.
22 What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? what shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.
23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

The above would NOT have been done in a Synagogue OR on the Sabbath for the simple fact practicing Jews didn't take up a collection on the Sabbath, period.

Christians meeting on Sunday is of Apostolic origin and claiming otherwise is simply an old anti-Trinitarian teaching.

Quite a bit of extra biblical crap.

[Amo]

Hobbie,

The Command to set aside time for God is without doubt part of the Moral or Natural Law...
...This is observed in any culture throughout all of recorded history.
...The specific TIMING of observance is absolutely ceremonial.

Here is how it went down:

"Then said the Lord unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no." Exodus 16,4

Them / They = The Children of Israel and it's at the point of Exodus 16,4 that we 1st find out that God is going to test "the Children of Israel" to see if "THEY" will do what God tells THEM to do.

The Children of Israel didn't know about the Sabbath prior to being informed of it.

Exodus 10,26
Our cattle also shall go with us; there shall not an hoof be left behind; for thereof must we take to serve the Lord our God; and we know not with what we must serve the Lord, until we come thither

So, they didn't know how or in what way they were to worship.

As for the point made about the Catholic Church "renaming" or rearranging the Commandments I'm afraid they were here 1st - by a long shot. If someone wants to following the Talmudic numbering of the 10 Commandments I have no problem with that. Luther numbered the Commandments like the CC did after his separation from the CC.

Sunday is the ceremonial sabbath of human tradition. The seventh day is the Sabbath of God, as identified many times over in scripture. You have chosen and propagate lies. So be it.

[Amo]

Hobbie,

The Command to set aside time for God is without doubt part of the Moral or Natural Law...
...This is observed in any culture throughout all of recorded history.
...The specific TIMING of observance is absolutely ceremonial.

Here is how it went down:

"Then said the Lord unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no." Exodus 16,4

Them / They = The Children of Israel and it's at the point of Exodus 16,4 that we 1st find out that God is going to test "the Children of Israel" to see if "THEY" will do what God tells THEM to do.

The Children of Israel didn't know about the Sabbath prior to being informed of it.

Exodus 10,26
Our cattle also shall go with us; there shall not an hoof be left behind; for thereof must we take to serve the Lord our God; and we know not with what we must serve the Lord, until we come thither

So, they didn't know how or in what way they were to worship.

As for the point made about the Catholic Church "renaming" or rearranging the Commandments I'm afraid they were here 1st - by a long shot. If someone wants to following the Talmudic numbering of the 10 Commandments I have no problem with that. Luther numbered the Commandments like the CC did after his separation from the CC.

Natural law, natural law, natural law. Show us your natural law from scripture, we're not papists.

[Amo]

What do you mean shuffled and renumbered?

Generally, if you trace SDA theology back to it's roots it's discovered that ultimately they claim "Jesus" was who changed times and laws. I'm not being sarcastic here in the least. Traditional or Historic SDA's don't believe Jesus was God (Like the Father is God) therefore the Trinity is false and given that Jesus didn't have the Authority to fulfill the Sabbath day.

The SDA Pioneers called this quandary 'The Sabbath God Vs. The Sunday God'.

The SDA Pioneers were speaking of "THE FATHER" and the concept was that the Sabbath God was a flesh, bone & functional organ hominid God while the Sunday God was a false 'spirit god' that lacked a body of flesh with intestines. The SDA's would publish articles in the Church papers alerting the reader to know the difference between the Sabbath God and the Sunday God and the critical importance of KNOWING Father God was a flesh God.

http://documents.adventistarchives.org/Periodicals/RH/RH18540307-V05-07.pdf

More twisted info and lies no doubt.

[Michael2012]

2 And the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. 3 And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt. 4 And when the Lord saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. Ex 3:2-4 (KJV)

The angel of the Lord and God in the above are one and the same, both speaking to Moses out of the midst of the bush.

Not really.

Angel of the Lord, it says. That in itself makes some distinction between the angel and the Lord. To deny that is a dishonest reading of scriptures.

Now concerning the Sabbath day worship issue, I'd like you to consider what the scriptures tells us in Colossians 2 about Christians:

8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

Why then judge others in respect of the Sabbath?

[Jaime]

How was the 10 commandments “AGAINST” them? Certainly the 613 man written laws were against them, but the 10 commandments?

The sabbath certainly wasn’t against man, since the sabbath was made FOR man.

[winsome]

Exo 34:28  And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

Deu 4:13  And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.

Deu 10:4  And he wrote on the tables, according to the first writing, the ten commandments, which the LORD spake unto you in the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly: and the LORD gave them unto me.

Some people actually believe the testimony of scripture above human speculation and or tradition.

Where in scripture are the individual commandments numbered?

[winsome]

Sunday is the ceremonial sabbath of human tradition. The seventh day is the Sabbath of God, as identified many times over in scripture. You have chosen and propagate lies. So be it.

Wrong again  Amo.
Sunday is not the sabbath, ceremonial or otherwise. It was given the the Jews as part of the Mosaic Covenant as a sign of that Covenant.
Christians are in a different Covenant and the day to assemble and worship together is not prescribed. But the early Christians chose to assemble and worship together on Sunday as Cathlodox has amply demonstrated.

[winsome]

Quite a bit of extra biblical crap.

Really?
All that scripture is extra biblical?
Doesn't your Bible have 1 Corinthians and Hebrews?

[winsome]

Natural law, natural law, natural law. Show us your natural law from scripture, we're not papists.

When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts (Rom 2:14-15)

[Cathlodox]

When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts (Rom 2:14-15)

+ 1

That is explicit that there were moral and ceremonial aspects in "the law".

Well done Winsome!

[beam]

How was the 10 commandments “AGAINST” them?

Hi Jamie, I think I have the answer to your question or comment.  Paul writes in 2Cor3 the following:
7 Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, transitory though it was,

Paul here is referring to the 10 commandments as the ministry that brought death.  That has to mean that the 10 commandments were against them.   They brought death because not one Israelite was able to keep them.  Even Moses broke them and wasn't allowed to enter Canaan.  All the commandments could do is condemn man.  They could not save anyone.

The sabbath certainly wasn’t against man, since the sabbath was made FOR man.

Have you ever tried to really keep the Sabbath according to scripture?  Are you able to keep your thoughts on Holy things and turn your foot from doing your own pleasure on the Holy day?  Well, do you think the Israelites were any different than you?   I became a very legalistic SDA after I was baptized.  Every week after Sabbath I critiqued myself and the results were very disappointing.  I always failed to live up to the Biblical standard.  My conversations with other SDAs were like any other day.  My thoughts ran rapid just as they did any other day.  Yes, the Sabbath was against me.  I couldn't do it so why even try.


If you will read the remaining words of Paul in that paragraph 2Cor 3:8-11 you will see that Christians have a new Guide that took the place of the 10 commandments given only to Israel.  The Holy Spirit, Paul writes, is more glorious that the commands written with the finger of God.  He is our guide.  Notice all that is written about the 10 commandments is in past tense.

Certainly the 613 man written laws were against them, but the 10 commandments?

First of all the 613 laws contained in the book of the law included the 10 commandments.  God dictated the 603 laws to Moses and they contained the laws of love to God and to our fellow man.   Any law that God gives man and he fails to keep is against him.   The 603 were not any different than the 10.  God gave them all to Israel as the laws of the covenant.

[Jaime]

After reading some of Jesus’s writings where he refined some of the definitions or filled up the letter with the spirit of the Law, he said if yoir donkey is in a ditch on the sabbath, is it not right to get him out. Also, he said is it not right to do good on the Sabbath, seemingly to imply that it’s a judgement call a lot of times and not a hard and fast rule to trip us up.

God indicated to the israelites several times that if they obeyed him, he would bless them. Deut 11: 26-28. I don’t believe he ever expected PERFECT obedience. If he did, it seems rather unfair for him to expect perfection, with them incapable of perfection. It isn’t reasonable to say God expected perfect obedience when man is incapable of that. The verse in Deut 11 indicates that God would have indeed blessed their obedience. Whatever that would look like. He did as always expect an effort which a lot of times they simply gave up or didn’t try.

[Michael2012]

Now concerning the Sabbath day worship issue, I'd like you to consider what the scriptures tells us in Colossians 2 about Christians:

8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

Jaime commented:

How was the 10 commandments “AGAINST” them? Certainly the 613 man written laws were against them, but the 10 commandments?

The sabbath certainly wasn’t against man, since the sabbath was made FOR man.

2 Cor.3 :6 Who 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.

7 But 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:

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

9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.

10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.

In the above quoted passage, one could see two ministration spoken of. In verse 6, we can identify them as one of the letter and the other of the spirit. If you'll accept, Paul takes reference to the ministry of the Law (Law of Moses, of the letter), and to the ministry of the Spirit (of the spirit).

Now, the ten commandments are included and embodied in the Law of Moses. As such they are of the ministry of the Law. Paul speaks of this ministry of the Law as being of the letter and that which killeth (v.6). So that in verse 7, Paul calls it the ministration of death. He also calls it the ministration of condemnation. Now, don't you see it and agree then that the Law given to Israel through Moses, which were written and engraven in stones, is AGAINST them (Israel), which brought them condemnation and death? As Paul explicitly declared concerning the ministry of the Law, that is, "the letter killeth".

Needless to say, concerning the Sabbath commandment, being one among the ten commandments, it too then is against them. 

[Michael2012]

After reading some of Jesus’s writings where he refined some of the definitions or filled up the letter with the spirit of the Law, he said if yoir donkey is in a ditch on the sabbath, is it not right to get him out. Also, he said is it not right to do good on the Sabbath, seemingly to imply that it’s a judgement call a lot of times and not a hard and fast rule to trip us up.

God indicated to the israelites several times that if they obeyed him, he would bless them. Deut 11: 26-28. I don’t believe he ever expected PERFECT obedience. If he did, it seems rather unfair for him to expect perfection, with them incapable of perfection. It isn’t reasonable to say God expected perfect obedience when man is incapable of that. The verse in Deut 11 indicates that God would have indeed blessed their obedience. Whatever that would look like. He did as always expect an effort which a lot of times they simply gave up or didn’t try.

After reading scriptures, I came to the knowledge that the former covenant that God made with Israel, when He took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, was replaced with a new covenant. Paul, in 2 Cor.3, speaks of the former covenant as a ministration of condemnation and death, and speaks of the new covenant as the ministration of righteousness and life. The former is said to be of the letter that killeth and the new is said to be of the spirit and gives life.

You said "I don’t believe he ever expected PERFECT obedience" and reason to argue that "If he did, it seems rather unfair for him to expect perfection, with them incapable of perfection." Well that may well be what one will think if one looks at the man in the likeness of what had become of the first Adam. On the other hand, I see the Word (John 1:1, 14), who had become like one of us in the person of Jesus, the second Adam.

You see, the Law was given because of transgressions. In other words, if not of transgressions, the Law would not had been given. For Paul, in his first letter to Timothy, said this about the Law:

9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

Now with regards your other statement where you said "The verse in Deut 11 indicates that God would have indeed blessed their obedience.". In my take, it presents the principle/law, that obedience brings about blessing and disobedience brings about curse. 

[beam]

Exactly Michael.  If only those who still believe Christians are under the laws of the Sinai covenant would read what that covenant was all about they would see it in a different light.  God, in EX19:5-6, speaking directly to Moses told Moses what the covenant was all about.   5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6 you[a] will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.’   Not one word that God spoke in verses 5 and 6 said that the covenant would save one Israelite.  Salvation came to the Israelites just as it did for Abraham.  The covenant was not about salvation.


And yet we have the leader of the SDA church, Ellen White, telling us that we will be lost if we do not observe the Sabbath.  Old covenant Sabbath keeping had nothing to do with salvation.  How did it morph into being a salvational issue?  It all happened by a group of people that didn't understand scripture.  Today, no matter how much scripture we present to the otherwise, blinders are so perfectly fitted on Adventists they keep most of them from seeing the truth.

[Jaime]

I’m not arguing salvation. I am arguing why would God expect perfect obedience from beings incapable of perfect obedience? Scripture said he will bless them if they obey and curse them if they don’t. (Except for the small issue that they CAN’T). Again, not at all talking about salvation. The Law was never about salvation. At the very best, their sins were only temporarily atoned for until the next annual sacrifice on the day of Atonement. Of course we all agree Christ’s sacrifice was once and for for all.

By the way, blinders also fit many that aren’t SDA. If not the pages of this entire forum would be empty or at least in full agreement. Hardly any topic falls in that category.

[beam]

After reading some of Jesus’s writings where he refined some of the definitions or filled up the letter with the spirit of the Law, he said if yoir donkey is in a ditch on the sabbath, is it not right to get him out. Also, he said is it not right to do good on the Sabbath, seemingly to imply that it’s a judgement call a lot of times and not a hard and fast rule to trip us up.

God indicated to the israelites several times that if they obeyed him, he would bless them. Deut 11: 26-28. I don’t believe he ever expected PERFECT obedience. If he did, it seems rather unfair for him to expect perfection, with them incapable of perfection. It isn’t reasonable to say God expected perfect obedience when man is incapable of that. The verse in Deut 11 indicates that God would have indeed blessed their obedience. Whatever that would look like. He did as always expect an effort which a lot of times they simply gave up or didn’t try.

Hi Jamie, Jesus didn't live under the new covenant of Grace, He lived under the laws of the Sinai covenant as did all the Jews He came to teach and save.  His words to them had to be in sink with the laws they lived under.  When we understand that we then can understand what happened after Calvary.  Jesus, at His death, fulfilled the new covenant prophecy of Jeremiah 31.  He ratified the new covenant with His own blood.  He appointed Paul to be His ambassador to explain the new way of life and and eternal life.  Paul preached that the works of the Law could not save one soul and that Christians are not under the laws of the Sinai covenant.  Gal 3 is one of the best chapters to learn this fact.

The plan of salvation was formulated before the foundation of the Earth.  God knew man would fail and Jesus had to come, take on our sins, die and overcome the grave so that all men might also have eternal life.   Why He used man the way it happened is beyond our pay grade.  Why He set up a nation that failed the laws He gave them, but furnished the lineage of the One who became our Savior will be one of the questions I will like for Jesus to answer.  It was and is the way of the Plan of Salvation.  I accept it on faith.

[4WD]

Why He used man the way it happened is beyond our pay grade.  Why He set up a nation that failed the laws He gave them, but furnished the lineage of the One who became our Savior will be one of the questions I will like for Jesus to answer. 

It is not beyond our pay grade at all.  It is not at all unknown.  Paul described all of that quite nicely in his writings, most specifically in Romans 9-11.

[Jaime]

Again Beam, I wasn’t and haven’t been talking about salvation. I am talking about COULD the Jews have obeyed in order to be blessed by God and not cursed? I say YES or God was a liar in making the promise to them. Would it have to be perfect obedience? Obviously NOT if they are incapable of that.