The important phrase is “Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.” If Christians were expected to observe the Sabbath, Paul would be encouraging them to keep the Sabbath, trying to convince them of a certain point of view, not giving them freedom to do what they feel is right. He would not say that both those who ate meat and those who did not eat meat both gave thanks to God, right alongside saying those who keep the day honour God by doing so, and those who don’t also honour God by not doing so, if the Sabbath were indeed as important as Adventists claim it is.
Apr 11 2004
Apr 11 2004
Paul starts by mentioning that the law is nailed to the cross, and he goes on to mention a few laws as examples. One law that he mentions is the Sabbath. Sabbatarians try to argue that this word does not mean the 7th day Sabbath in this context. That argument is unscriptural and illogical for two main reasons.
Apr 11 2004
Some Adventists try to avoid accepting that Jesus appeared on the Sunday of his resurrection, and the Sunday after that. But Luke 24:29 is pretty explicit that this was STILL Sunday. Look at the wording. In my RSV, it says that “it is TOWARD evening and the day is far spent.” This says that the day is NEARLY over, but still the same day … not yet Monday, sunset has not yet passed. This is a desperate attempt to defuse the evidence by destroying ANY Sunday visits by Jesus. But the Bible again proves the Adventist position wrong.
Apr 11 2004
God also refers to circumcision as a perpetual covenant in Genesis 17:11-13, to incense as one in Exod 30:8, to the Levitical priesthood as one in Exod 29:9. All these so-called perpetual covenants have been done away with at the cross. Just because they are called perpetual covenants does not mean that their purpose will never come to an end. Circumcision was for ALL Abraham’s generations, yet although we are part of that people, circumcision if not necessary for Christians. The same goes for the Sabbath.
Apr 11 2004
Any Sabbath observance that Jesus did would have to explained to people who did not keep the Sabbath and who were unfamiliar with it. And therefore, when we see that Jesus’ Sabbath visit to the synagogue was actually explained, we need to ask WHY it needed to be explained. And, if we look at what the Bible and history show about first century Gentile Christians, we see that Luke needed to explain Jesus’ Sabbath customs because the Christian Gentiles were not familiar with the Sabbath at all. So, surprise! The text used to prove that Jesus went to the synagogue on the Sabbath, actually helps prove that Christians do NOT need to do that!!!
Apr 11 2004
Adventists claim that these passages show that the Sabbath is still in effect, and Christians are obliged to keep it. They claim that Mark 2:27, in saying that the sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath, proves that the Sabbath was not given to Israel alone, but to all mankind. … By removing the verse from its context, Sabbath keepers turn the meaning around. This is a well-documented logical fallacy, called the false dichotomy. The verse, out of context, is presented as presenting two points (the false dichotomy) – the Sabbath was made for man, or the Sabbath was made for Jews. But in context, the actual dichotomy is between the legalist/Pharisee perspective (the Sabbath was more important than those keeping it) and Jesus’ perspective (the Sabbath was made to serve those keeping it.)
Feb 16 2004
Here is a lovely example of the hate mail I get from my website. I think it speaks for itself. If he’d bothered to read my website, he’d notice that I do not call Adventism “satan’s church.” He’s also pretty hung up about his own church’s members being put to death when some imaginary law gets passed. He also didn’t name the “colobian official” and I doubt that this is anything more than just rumour within their community to try to foster paranoia and fear of other Christians. His final remark is really nice. Let this be a lesson to Adventists and non-Adventists out there.
Dec 31 2003
The Sabbath command is the only one of the Ten Commandments which can be altered in any way, because only it is a part of the ceremonial law. This is taught by the Roman Catechism issued after the Council of Trent: “The other commandments of the Decalogue are precepts of the natural law, obligatory at all times [and for all people] and unalterable. Hence, after the abrogation of the Law of Moses, all the Commandments contained in the two tables are observed by Christians, not indeed because their observance is commanded by Moses, but because they are in conformity with nature which dictates obedience to them
Dec 27 2003
The decision of the Apostles was that the Old Covenant laws did not apply to Christians except for “meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication.” No mention of the Sabbath. This is a far stronger argument than Adventism’s argument from silence. This is a list if things that Gentile Christians were told to do. If they had to keep the Sabbath, then it would have to have been included in this list. It was not included. That says a lot.
Nov 27 2003
I know people who, because of a few comments in Ellen White’s book The Great Controversy, have a great fondness for the Albigensians (or Cathars), who were also considered heretics. Many were killed for their faith. These Cathars were very different from the Waldensians. They believed that Jesus was an angel, denied Jesus was really a man who died and was resurrected, and believed the Old Testament came from Satan. They discouraged marriage. They were in their day what David Koresh’s Branch Davidians are in ours. Were they heretics or martyrs? Could they be both?
Nov 27 2003
Yes, Acts 13 is referring to a Sabbath service, but look where the service is! Is this a Christian service, organised by Christians, for Christian worship? Or is this a Jewish service, organised by Jews, for the usual synagogue service that had been going on in the synagogues for decades prior to Christ’s lifetime? … Where does Acts 13 use the word “worship” in relation to the actions of Paul? Nowhere – not one of the words used indicates worship by Paul. The text of Acts 13 itself demonstrates that Paul is NOT observing the Sabbath. The assumption that his presence in the synagogues on the Sabbath means his observance of it as a holy day is a mistake Sabbatarians make because they want to find texts where the Apostles keep the Sabbath. In fact, there are NO such texts in the entire Bible!
Nov 27 2003
Many Adventists continue the principle of the Pharisees that dictates how far one may walk on the sabbath before one is considered to have “worked.” Apart from places where the term “sabbath day’s journey” is used, they have no support for this in the Bible.
Nov 27 2003
1 Cor 16:2 is quite good evidence for regular Sunday observance. It shows that every week – regularly, weekly – on a certain day, the people collected money for mission work done by Paul. This day was the first day of the week. The passage does not directly state that there are worship services on the first day of the week, but one can deduce from the context that this had to be so. The money was brought together weekly to one place – when else but the weekly day of worship? What better day to collect such donations than the day on which the Christians came together as a group? If they kept the Sabbath, then this would have been the Sabbath. But it was Sunday Paul chose, which indicates that Sunday was an easier day to collect things into one place than the Sabbath was.
Oct 08 2003
From time to time I get some vicious remarks from Adventists who don’t want to discuss the Bible, but feel they should take the opportunity to insult those of us who do take it seriously. Here are a few of the best, along with some statements that, without being nasty, demonstrate the real nature of Adventist anti-Catholicism.
Oct 08 2003
To walk too far on the Sabbath was to break the Sabbath, and Christians should pray not to break the Sabbath by having to flee Jerusalem on that day. … He, who permitted the saving of a sheep’s life on the Sabbath by pulling it from a pit, who told the paralysed man to get up and carry away his bed on the Sabbath, said we should pray not to have to break the Sabbath by saving our own lives?
Feb 09 2003
Dr Frank Steyn, PhD, sociologist, and previously SDA pastor in the Columbia Union within the Ohio Conference. I receive several items of hate mail at times from Adventists who simply cannot stomach what my website has to say. They accuse me of all sorts of things, but few of them ever actually quote the Bible for me, and usually they just rant on with anti-Catholic propaganda that has no basis in history or rational thinking.
Feb 01 2003
I have posted 3 e-mails here, from a Dr Frank Steyn. Note that all he was willing to do was insult. No response with reasoned arguments from the Bible or other sources. At present he has started debating, but does not stick to one topic or discuss one concept in full, and after each reply I send, he changes to a new topic. Topic hopping and verse hopping are common among Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses and others whose doctrines are not firmly based on the Bible.
Jan 26 2003
The Seventh-day Adventist church teaches that the wine referred to in the Bible as permissible is unfermented grape juice. They claim that the Bible condemns the use of fermented grape juice, and only permits the use of unfermented grape juice. Many Adventists – pastors and laity alike – have questioned this, and gone to the Bible and discovered that this teaching is not found there. Instead, the Bible permits drinking of alcoholic beverages in moderation. But many Adventists, as well as other groups such as certain Baptists, continue this teaching.
Nov 28 2001
Why is this the case? Pam H, and all other Adventists who are so willing to attack Catholicism backed up only by myths and propaganda they hear in anti-Catholic sermons and read in grossly inaccurate tracts passed out on street corners – why are you willing to insult, ridicule, and slander something and then refuse to engage in any form of mature discussion when your views are questioned?
Nov 05 2001
If I understand the Catholic position correctly, they say the Pope did not change the Seventh Day Sabbath to Sunday. They contend this was done by the Apostolic Church and there is no record of a “Pope” making the change, but it was done on authority of the Catholic Church.