Dr Samuel Bacchiocchi, defender or shaker of beliefs?

[John317]

Obviously! To you perhaps but it is obvious to me that most of the members of the church are in no way represented ay the G C in session. You should check out who the delegates are and how they became delegates.....mel

Are you saying you do not believe that the GC in session is a representative body at all?

I've looked into it and have attended a GC session myself. I know that all the world conferences have a certain number of representatives depending on the numbers of church members in each conference. The delegates from the conferences include a certain percentage of lay people, along with conferences presidents (who, of course, are themselves elected), teachers, pastors, editors, etc., from all around the world.

When it comes to doctrinal changes, the church has several years of discussion, and articles written, before they put the issue to a vote in the GC in world session; and then at the GC they have more papers presented and the delegates present their views.

Before I joined the church, I studied the Bible and the church's doctrines, as well as read several books by Ellen White. I joined the SDA church because I believe in its fundamental beliefs.

How about yourself?

[Reddogs]

Originally Posted By: melvin mccarty

Quote "In the final analysis let every man make up his own mind" Do you really mean that? If one such as Dr Ford comes up with a conclusion that differs from the creed he is a rebel and a heretic. By the way how many of the votes on the famous 28 were unanimous? Were the people who were voting actually representative of the membership?

The story is told that when the original model T Ford was in the planning stage the question of color came up. Henry Ford said people could have any color they wanted.....as long as it was black. ........mel

What I am saying is that everyone needs to study these things and decide personally whether they believe the doctrines of the SDA church. If I don't believe them and have disagreements with the church, honesty requires that I won't keep accepting money from the church while teaching against the doctrines of the church.

The church needs to constantly re-examine its beliefs and positions in the light of the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy. Individual members also need to examine their convictions in the light of the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy. It's important to know what you believe and why you believe it. That doesn't mean that no matter what my conclusions are, I stay in the Adventist church. If I conclude that the Sabbath is actually the first day of the week, obviously I wouldn't want to stay in the church.

It isn't necessary to agree with every belief of the church, but it does mean that members are going to be in general agreement with the doctrines of the church, particularly with the foundational truths, and won't be agitating for fundamental doctrinal changes while working as a representative of the church.

In the case of Ford, whom you mention, he came to the conclusion that a foundational pillar of our faith is in error. That is his right. But it is not a right to teach that position from a pulpit while being paid by the tithes of members of the church.

Votes on the doctrines of the church by the world church in General Conference don't have to be unanimous in order to be effective.

Well since we are going to receive eternal life as a individual not as a member of this or that church, doctrine, or theology, everyone should certainly personally decide what and whether they believe what has been given to us through Adventism. But if not the pillars of Adventism, where would you go, the churches of the Reformation are drifting aimlessly or back to the Catholic Church and its paganism, and I dont think Islam or the other world religions have anything to offer...the truth recides in its fullest within the Adventist movement, no other religious group, movement or church comes even close as far as I can see...

[John317]

[guibox]

Dr.Bacchiocchi (May he rest in peace), though conservative and an SDA apologist for the most part, was not afraid to follow the bible to whatever conclusion it came to, regardless of whether it followed the SDA party line. This is what has brought him under fire so much of the time by many conservative SDAs. Even though he is very apologetic and conservative in issues of dress, adornment, music and other standards, he has presented radical views that differ from the church's stance:

1) His view of EGW is blasted by conservatives everywhere (He believes as Graeme Bradford, Arthur Patrick, George Knight and a few others)

2) He moved away from the literal interpretation of the 1260 years, opting more for a symbolic interpretation

3) He presented a view that the 'little horn' was not the papacy all the time in Daniel but represents an 'anti-Christ' power that manifests itself in different ways at different times in history.

4) He moved away from a literal counting of the number '666' opting for a more symbolic interpretation

Though I disagreed with much of Bacchiocchi's conservative stances on issues of standards and music, I respect him greatly for being a true 'sola scriptura' believer no matter where it took him.

[John317]

Dr.Bacchiocchi (May he rest in peace), though conservative and an SDA apologist for the most part, was not afraid to follow the bible to whatever conclusion it came to, regardless of whether it followed the SDA party line. This is what has brought him under fire so much of the time by many conservative SDAs. Even though he is very apologetic and conservative in issues of dress, adornment, music and other standards, he has presented radical views that differ from the church's stance:

1) His view of EGW is blasted by conservatives everywhere (He believes as Graeme Bradford, Arthur Patrick, George Knight and a few others)

2) He moved away from the literal interpretation of the 1260 years, opting more for a symbolic interpretation

3) He presented a view that the 'little horn' was not the papacy all the time in Daniel but represents an 'anti-Christ' power that manifests itself in different ways at different times in history.

4) He moved away from a literal counting of the number '666' opting for a more symbolic interpretation

Though I disagreed with much of Bacchiocchi's conservative stances on issues of standards and music, I respect him greatly for being a true 'sola scriptura' believer no matter where it took him.

I feel somewhat the same as you do about Dr. Bacchiocchi. I certainly didn't see him as an enemy. Actually I corresponded with him a number of times in the last year of his life, and I posted notices from his family about his health and his passing.

I certainly enjoy his books, and I favor freedom of expression and thought. I highly recommend his book on wine in the Bible. It caused me to decide to stop drinking. (Yes, I enjoyed drinking vodka, whiskey, etc. Haven't touched it in about 3 years.)

The first time I saw him, about 1976, I did think it was strange that this Seventh-day Adventist would almost brag about getting a medal from the pope.

All in all, I think Dr. Bacchiocchi was a positive experience for the SDA church. But to be completely honest, I do believe it is possible that he was influenced heavily by Jesuits of the church. After all, he was educated in a school where the professors had been trained in Jesuit philosophy. That doesn't mean, however, that he was not a genuine SDA. I don't see any reason to doubt His devotion to Christ or his love of the church.

[Gail]

I was kind of fond of ol' Sam as well... I told the folks who design the Adventist trading cards that he should be included.

[oldsailor29]

I certainly enjoy his books, and I favor freedom of expression and thought. I highly recommend his book on wine in the Bible. It caused me to decide to stop drinking. (Yes, I enjoyed drinking vodka, whiskey, etc. Haven't touched it in about 3 years.)...

All in all, I think Dr. Bacchiocchi was a positive experience for the SDA church. ... I don't see any reason to doubt His devotion to Christ or his love of the church.

I agree he was a positive influence for our church, but he was wrong about wine. texts that differentiate fermented from unfermented always indicate it by an additional adjective like "new." Most references do not differentiate. Fall wine could be unfermented, while wine in any other part of the year is safely assumed to be fermented.

Additionally, there is no solid Biblical condemnation on drinking alcoholic beverages per se. Abstention is a 19th century idea.

[Ted Oplinger]

I do believe we are under the admonition of E.G. White herself to not only study and probe our foundation beliefs, but to try and shake them! Only as they prove unshakable in our convictions are we to get back up on them as the bedrock for our beliefs (Paul's reference to each being convinced in his own mind comes in here).

This I believe Dr. Bacchiochi did. That so many so-called "conservative" Adventist attacked him for doing just this is quite telling. I enjoyed (and reference often) "From Sabbath to Sunday", and thought his treatise on wine in the Bible was a very good work (though it is attacked quite often today).

Sister White tells us to keep digging, keep probing, for at no time are we to be content with the light given. God desires to shed greater amounts of light upon His people, and this our sister recognized.

The 4th Angel of Rev. 18 carries a message that lights the entire world with glory. Where is that light going to come from, if we don't probe and dig into the Word of God more deeply, and delve more deeply into Christ's revealed love?

[Reddogs]

Problem is that for many it is hard to believe that he was allowed to study among the Jesuits and no one questioned what he was doing there, so it raises some questions...

[The following is the text of the Jesuit Extreme Oath of Induction...

(The Superior speaks:)

My son, heretofore you have been taught to act the dissembler: among Roman Catholics to be a Roman Catholic, and to be a spy even among your own brethren; to believe no man, to trust no man. Among the Reformers, to be a Reformer; among the Huguenots, to be a Huguenot; among the Calvinists, to be a Calvinist; among other Protestants, generally to be a Protestant; and obtaining their confidence, to seek even to preach from their pulpits, and to denounce with all the vehemence in your nature our Holy Religion and the Pope; and even to descend so low as to become a Jew among Jews, that you might be enabled to gather together all information for the benefit of your Order as a faithful soldier of the Pope. You have been taught to plant insidiously the seeds of jealousy and hatred between communities, provinces, states that were at peace, and to incite them to deeds of blood, involving them in war with each other, and to create revolutions and civil wars in countries that were independent and prosperous, cultivating the arts and the sciences and enjoying the blessings of peace; to take sides with the combatants and to act secretly with your brother Jesuit, who might be engaged on the other side, but openly opposed to that with which you might be connected, only that the Church might be the gainer in the end, in the conditions fixed in the treaties for peace and that the end justifies the means. You have been taught your duty as a spy, to gather all statistics, facts and information in your power from every source; to ingratiate yourself into the confidence of the family circle of Protestants and heretics of every class and character, as well as that of the merchant, the banker, the lawyer, among the schools and universities, in parliaments and legislatures, and the judiciaries and councils of state, and to be all things to all men, for the Pope's sake, whose servants we are unto death. You have received all your instructions heretofore as a novice, a neophyte, and have served as co-adjurer, confessor and priest, but you have not yet been invested with all that is necessary to command in the Army of Loyola in the service of the Pope. You must serve the proper time as the instrument and executioner as directed by your superiors; for none can command here who has not consecrated his labours with the blood of the heretic; for "without the shedding of blood no man can be saved". Therefore, to fit yourself for your work and make your own salvation sure, you will, in addition to your former oath of obedience to your order and allegiance to the Pope, repeat after me:

[Reddogs]

How he was allowed to go into such extensive research and deep study of things that you would think would be sensitive in the eyes of the Catholic church, is a mystery even to a layman. So you see that things might not always seem to be as they are, and until those questions are answered, there will always be some who feel uneasy..

[Tammy]

I for one, will never trust him....I really do believe he was a Jesuit and a wolf in sheeps clothing...

Quote:

EndrTimes

AND THE THIRD ANGEL FOLLOWED THEM, SAYING WITH A LOUD VOICE, IF ANY MAN WORSHIP THE BEAST AND HIS IMAGE, AND RECEIVE HIS MARK IN HIS FOREHEAD, OR IN HIS HAND. *** REVELATION 14:9

Saturday, December 06, 2008

From Sabbath to Sunday: The Bacchiocchi Agenda

From Sabbath to Sunday: The Bacchiocchi Agenda

Which "Sabbath" Does He Truly Support?

From Sabbath to Sunday, Divine Rest for Human Restlessness, The Sabbath in the New Testament, The Sabbath Under Crossfire--these are some of the many books authored by Samuele Bacchiocchi, the purported Seventh Day Adventist scholar, which have received great accolades from many "Church of God" organizations for their apparent defense of the seventh day Sabbath. A deeper examination of his books though actually reveals his ecumenical concern--not concern for the Scriptural Sabbath, but for a Sabbath--be it the last, or the first day of the week.

The following quote is from Bacchiocchi, as posted on his website "Biblical Perspectives" [bold face emphasis mine throughout article ~bh]:

"I grew up as a Seventh-day Adventist in Rome, Italy, a stone-throw from the Vatican wall in the days when considerable hostility existed against religious minorities. I vividly remember the ridicule and rejection I experienced, especially for honoring the Savior on the Sabbath. For example, my classmates called me "Il Giudeo–the Jew," or "L'eretico-the heretic" because I would not attend school on Saturday and would not play soccer with them on that day.

These painful experiences instilled within me the desire to know more about which is God's Holy Day and how should it be observed by Christians today. As a teenager I would have never imagined that the Lord would one day make it possible for me to research and publish my dissertation at the most prestigious Jesuit University in the world, the Pontifical Gregorian University, founded by Ignatius Loyola [founder the Society of Jesus (the Jesuits)~bh] himself, over 450 years ago.

The idea of attending the Gregoriana was suggested to me by a beloved Catholic priest, Father Ravasio, whom I came to know in Ethiopia where I was serving as a missionary. One day I told him that I had been accepted at Yale for a doctoral program in Church History. He replied: "Sam you are a Roman and should go to study at the Gregoriana." How can I? I replied. Surely they will never accept a heretic like me. "Don't say that!" he said. "After Vatican II you are no longer a heretic. You are a separated brother. If you apply, you stand a good chance to be accepted." I followed his advice.

Truly I can say that though I was accepted as a "Separated Brother," I was treated as a real Christian brother. I treasure the pleasant memories of the five years I spent at the Gregoriana. The professor who directed my dissertation, Father Vincenzo Monachino, S. J., [society of Jesus--that is, he is a Jesuit ~bh] is brilliant, godly and open minded. At first he was reluctant to allow me to investigate the origin of Sundaykeeping, because he had worked on the same subject for the previous two years with a Jesuit priest C. S. Mosna, who also wrote his dissertation on the history of Sunday during the first four centuries (STORIA DELLA DOMENICA --HISTORY OF SUNDAY). When he noticed my keen interest he graciously approved my proposal and spent many hours with me reexamining the Biblical and historical data. It takes a great scholar to be willing to reconsider one's conclusions. Prof. Monachino was such a scholar whom I will respect for the rest of my life.

My dissertation FROM SABBATH TO SUNDAY was first published in 1977 by the Pontifical Gregorian University Press with the official Catholic imprimatur (approval). Since then it has been reprinted 13 times in English and has been translated in a dozen of languages. The French translation was done by two Belgian Benedictine monks as a labor of love and published by a Catholic press in Paris." [this info is quite similar to that which he included in the book itself (p.5) ~bh]

"Since Dr. Bacchiocchi seems intent on pushing his books based upon the fact that he has an imprimatur on one of them [From Sabbath to Sunday ~bh], it is important to know what the word imprimatur means. Simply stated, it means that there is nothing in the book that is contrary to the teaching of the [Catholic ~bh] Church." (Ed Faulk, Usenet Catholic Newsgroup message, December 15, 1997)

Merriam Webster's dictionary defines imprimatur as follows:

" im*pri*ma*tur (noun) [New Latin, let it be printed, from imprimere to print, from Latin, to imprint, impress -- more at IMPRESS] First appeared 1640

1 a : a license to print or publish esp. by Roman Catholic episcopal authority

b : approval of a publication under circumstances of official censorship

2 a : SANCTION, APPROVAL

b : IMPRINT

c : a mark of approval or distinction "

One must ask themselves, if this book truly proves and advocates Seventh Day Sabbath, why would it receive this Catholic imprimatur, and yet further, why would Sunday keeping monks translate his work "as a labor of love" if it disproved or went against what they stand for? Recall the hatred that the Catholic Church has had for the Seventh Day Sabbath throughout history.

Let us further examine this book:

"How can the pressing problem of the secularization of the Lord's day be resolved?" (Samuele Bacchiocchi, From Sabbath to Sunday, back cover).

How can the "secularization" of a secular day (Sunday) be seen as a "pressing problem" that needs be "resolved"--especially by a professing Seventh Day Sabbath observer??

"Should Sunday be viewed as the hour of worship rather than the holy day of rest to the Lord?" (ibid, p.303).

Should it be viewed by anyone, especially one who claims to be a 7th day Sabbatarian, as either one of these??

"To find the answer to these questions, Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi spent five years at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, examining the most ancient available documents. The results of this investigation are presented in From Sabbath to Sunday." (ibid, back cover)

Notice carefully the reason for this book: "To find the answer to these questions..." Which questions? One of them is "How can the pressing problem of the secularization of the Lord's day be resolved?"

This fact of seeking a Sabbath basis for Sunday as being the purpose for his research and writing of From Sabbath to Sunday is bore out further in the following quote:

"To accomplish a sound theological reappraisal of Sunday it is necessary to investigate its Biblical basis and its historical genesis. On the other hand, the many studies on this topic, though excellent, have not given a fully satisfactory answer because of the lack of consideration of some of those factors which in the Church of the first centuries contributed to the concrete genesis and development of a day of worship different than the Jewish Sabbath."

"On account of this, the new work of Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi is to be welcomed."

"We gladly mention that the thesis that Bacchiocchi defends regarding the birth-place of Sunday worship: for him this rose not in the primitive Church of Jerusalem, well-known for its profound attachment to the Jewish religious traditions, but rather in the Church of Rome."

"The event of Christ's resurrection on that day, had naturally signifigance importance."

"The strict scientific orientation of the work does not prevent the author from revealing his profound religious and ecumenic concern. Conscious that the history of salvation knows not fractures but continuity, he [bacchiocchi] finds in the rediscovery of the religious values of the Biblical Sabbath, a help to restore to the Lord's Day its ancient sacred character. This is in reality the exhortation that already in the fourth century the bishops addressed to the believers, namely to spend Sunday not in outings or watching shows, but rather to sanctify it by assisting at the eucharistic celebration and by doing acts of mercy (St. Ambrose, Exam. III, 1, 1.)."

"Rome, June 29th, 1977, VINCENZO MONACHINO, S.J. Chairman of Church History Department, Pontifical Gregorian University." (From Sabbath to Sunday, pp.7,8) [This is from the "brilliant, godly and open minded" Jesuit which directed Bacchiocchi's study and writing of this subject]

Some more on this, from Samuele himself: "Many well-meaning Christians view Sunday observance as the hour of worship rather than as the holy day of the Lord. Having fulfilled their worship obligations, many will in good conscience spend the rest of their Sunday time either engaged in making money or in seeking pleasure." (ibid, p.10)

"Some people, concerned by this widespread profanation of the Lord's day, are urging for a civil legislation that would outlaw all activities not compatible with the spirit of Sunday. To make such legislation agreeable even to non-Christians, sometimes appeal is made to the pressing need of preserving natural resources. One day of total rest for man and machines would help safeguard both our power resources and the precarious environment. Social or ecological needs, however, while they may encourage resting on Sunday, can hardly induce a worshipful attitude." (ibid, p.10).

As noted above, Bacchiocchi is one of these very people who are "concerned by this widespread profanation of the Lord's day." He therefore makes these very appeals himself in his book, Divine Rest For Human Restlessness, chapter VI, part IV The Sabbath as Service to our Habitat, pp. 204-214 (ecological appeal), and chapter VII Good News of Divine Rest for Human Restlessness, pp. 217-226 (social appeal).

"Might not more hopeful results be expected from educating our Christian communities to understand both the Biblical meaning and experience of God's 'holy day'?" (From Sabbath to Sunday, p.11) [is this not exactly what the Jesuit Vincenzo Monachino (quoted above) stated was Bacchiocchi's purpose for this investigation? To provide understanding for how to keep Sunday from being "profaned" by looking into the Scriptural Sabbath. Recall: "he {Bacchiocchi} finds in the rediscovery of the religious values of the Biblical Sabbath, a help to restore to the Lord's Day its ancient sacred character."]

"In introducing our study we posed several vital questions: What are the Biblical and historical reasons for Sunday-keeping? Can Sunday be regarded as the legitimate replacement of the Sabbath? Can the fourth commandment be rightly invoked to enjoin Sunday observance? Should Sunday be viewed as the hour of worship rather than the holy day of rest to the Lord? We stated at the outset that to answer these questions, and solve the pressing problem of the widespread profanation of Sunday, it is indispensable to ascertain both the Biblical basis and the historical genesis of this festivity." (ibid, p.303)

"Our study has shown (we hope persuasively) that the adoption of Sunday observance in place of the Sabbath did not occur in the primitive Church of Jerusalem by virtue of the authority of Christ or of the Apostles, but rather took place several decades later, seemingly in the Church of Rome, solicited by external circumstances." (ibid, p.309)

"On what ground then can Sunday rest be defended? Mosna finds a 'fundamental reason' in the fact that the Church 'influenced Constantine's decision to make Sunday a day of rest for the whole empire, and this undoubtedly in order to give to the Lord's day a preeminent place above the other days.' Therefore, Mosna argues that the Church 'can claim the honor of having granted man a pause to his work every seven days.' This explanation harmonizes well with the traditional claim that Sunday observance 'is purely a creation of the Catholic Church.' But if Sunday rest is an ecclesiastical-imperial institution, how can it be enjoined upon Christians as a divine precept? What valid ground can this provide to enable theologians to reassess the meaning and function of the Lord's day for Christians today? One can hardly hope to cope with the widespread profanation of the Lord's day, merely by invoking ecclesiastical authority without providing an adequate theological rationale." (ibid, pp.312-313)

Samuele continues as such: "Should we then conclude that Sunday is to be regarded as the hour of worship rather then the holy day of rest to the Lord? Apparently it is toward this direction that some Christian churches are moving." (ibid, p.313)

"To say the least, this interpretation not only reduces the obligation of the Lord's day to the attendance of a church service, but it even accomodates the social and recreational priorities of modern Christians. Does this view of the Lord's day as the hour of worship reflect correctly the Biblical teaching of the sanctification of the Sabbath, accomplished by renouncing the utilitarian use of its time? Hardly so." (ibid, pp 315-316).

"Does this proposal contribute to solving or to compounding the problems associated with Sunday observance in our time? Does not this provide Christians with a rational justification for spending most of their Sunday time in either making money or in seeking pleasure? Is this what Sunday observance is all about? To divorce worship from rest, regarding the latter as non-essential to Sunday observance, it means to misunderstand the meaning of the Biblical commandment which ordains the consecration not of a weekly hour of worship but of a whole day of interruption of work out of respect for God. Undoubtedly for some Christians the reduction of Sunday observance to an hour of worship is unacceptable, but our study has shown that both the historical genesis and the thelogical basis of Sunday observance offer little help to encourage the consecration of the total Sunday time to the Lord." (ibid, p.317)

"Is there a way out of this predictament? The proposal which we are about to submit may at first appear radical to some, but if it were accepted by Christians at large it could indeed revitalize both the worship and the real content of the Lord's day. Since our study has shown that Sunday observance lacks the Biblical authority and the theological basis necessary to justify the total consecration of its time to the Lord, we believe that such an objective can be more readily acheived by educating our Christian communities to understand the Biblical and apostolic meaning and obligation of the seventh-day Sabbath." (ibid, p.318). [Please note that he is not suggesting that all "Christians" begin to keep the seventh day Sabbath, but rather, that they get educated as to the meaning and obligation of it, and apply it to Sunday.]

"Sabbath observance in this cosmic age can well be for modern man the fitting expression of a cosmic faith...a faith that would treat the Lord's Day as God's holy day rather than as a holiday." (ibid, p.321) [Again, the Sabbath observance he is speaking of is NOT to occur on the seventh day, but rather on the "Lord's Day" (i.e., sunday)].

The following are some "scholars' " comments on Samuele's books. Please, when you read their words, take notice that they are Catholics:

"The warning has gone out, Sunday is in trouble....In order to gain a much needed perspective on this issue, a practical and worthwhile reading of FROM SABBATH TO SUNDAY is needed."

Thomas G. Simmons, Director

CATHOLIC DIVINE WORSHIP APOSTOLATE

Review, MODERN LITURGY MAGAZINE

"DIVINE REST FOR HUMAN RESTLESSNESS invites every reader to a penetrating and suggestive analysis of the tradition and significance of Sabbath keeping."

Most Reverend Cardinal Joseph L. Bernardin

ARCHBISHOP OF CHICAGO

Richard Nickels, of Giving and Sharing, & the Bible Sabbath Association, gave the following review of Bacchiocchi's God’s Festivals in Scripture and History :

"More than one intelligent, well-educated Sabbath-keeper has mentioned to me that they think Samuele Bacchiocchi is a Jesuit. They have presented no proof for this assertion, and as a result, I place such accusations in the category of malicious gossip....Nevertheless, there are a number of disturbing tendencies that have come to light with the publication of Bacchiocchi's books on the Holy Days.

(1) He is more of a salesman than a scholar. The shoddy work on his first book on the Holy Days is ample proof that he rushed to make a commercial deadline, rather than carefully doing his research.

(2) Time and again, he says that the Bible alone doesn't tell us much of how to keep the Holy Days, and thus he turns to church tradition. Although he stops short of saying that church tradition is above the Bible, by citing and supporting extra-Biblical customs, he elevates these traditions above the Bible.

(3) He lauds and honors Catholic "fathers," even well-known enemies of the true faith, such Origen, Jerome, and Augustine. He acts as if Patrick of Ireland, Columba, Vigilantius Leo, and heroes of the Sabbath-keeping Church of the East did not exist. I care little what Catholic fathers said, but I would be interested in learning more of what Sabbath-keeping church leaders said about the Holy Days.

(4) He liberally quotes from apocryphal sources, as authoritative guides, that prescribe our Christian practices of today, such as his support for a Passover vigil, so-called Lord's Supper, and agape feast.

(5) At times he seems to be purposely ambiguous, even contradictory. He sometimes takes stands on several sides of the same issue, and rarely speaks plainly. [Nickels notes many of such instances, such as the following: "On page 169, Bacchiocchi agrees with Alfred Edersheim, Josephus, and Philo, on the Sivan 6 date for Pentecost. Yet later on, on page 233, he agrees with a Sunday Pentecost. He was either in a hurry to publish his book, or he purposely straddled the fence."]

(6) He ignores plain Bible commands, or minimizes them, and instead concentrates on what men say about the Bible.

What is the common denominator of these tendencies of Bacchiocchi? They are traits of the Jesuits! Jesuits believe and practice that the end justifies the means. The Jesuit-led Council of Trent, the touchstone for Catholic success over Protestantism, upheld the Catholic dogma that tradition is above Scripture. Jesuit techniques include the eradication of all history about 'heretics,' the ascendancy of the Apocrypha and translations such as the Vulgate Bible, based on the corrupt Vaticanus and Sinaiticus texts, supported by Origen and Jerome. The Catholic Church in general, and Jesuits in particular, ignore plain Bible commands so as to uphold their anti-Biblical traditions.

Rene Fulop-Miller says of the Jesuits, 'In actual fact, the Jesuit casuists [reasoners about what is right or wrong] deal with two forms of permissible deception: that of 'amphibology' and that of reservatio mentalis. 'Amphibology' is nothing else than the employment of ambiguous terms calculated to mislead the questioner; 'mental reservation' consists in answering a question, not with a direct lie, but in such a way that the truth is partly suppressed, certain words being formulated mentally but not expressed orally,' (cited in Facts of Faith, page 281[by Christian Edwardson]). Dr. Bacchiocchi is so steeped in the study of the Catholic Church early fathers that he cannot help himself from thinking like them. Truly, you become what you read!...I am not accusing him of being a Jesuit. But, I am warning others to reject Bacchiocchi’s Jesuit tendencies. After thoughtful consideration, we will not continue to recommend his books on the Holy Days. We do, indeed, recommend books even if we do not agree with the author on every point. But the tone of Bacchiocchi’s books on the Holy Days, is, in my opinion, Catholic rather than Biblical, and that is something that I will not support." (Richard Nickels, Giving and Sharing newsletter review of Samuele Bacchiocchi's God’s Festivals in Scripture and History)

From Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary :

"Jesuit ...1 : a member of the Roman Catholic Society of Jesus founded by St. Ignatius Loyala in 1534 and devoted to missionary and educational work 2 : one given to intrigue or equivocation"

"intrigue ... 1 : a secret scheme"

"equivocate ... 1 : to use equivocal language especially with intent to deceive 2 : to avoid committing oneself in what one says- synonym see LIE"

"equivocal ... 1 a : subject to two or more interpretations and usually used to mislead or confuse"

J.I. Rodale, The Synomym Finder :

"equivocate ... doubletalk ... talk out of both sides of one's mouth"

William Lutz, Double-Speak :

"Doublespeak is not a slip of the tongue, or language used out of ignorance, but is instead a very conscious use of language as a weapon or tool by those in power to achieve their ends at our expense." (p. xii)

"Doublespeak enables speaker and listener, writer and reader, to hold two opposing ideas in their minds at the same time and believe in both of them." (p. 9)

"Andrews University, the Seventh-Day Adventist world headquarters where Samuele Bacchiocchi is a professor, has been so heavily infiltrated with ecumenical theologians that its yearbook has used illustrations of nuns, priests, and people giving the papal sign." [John Osborne and Bob Trefz (independent Seventh Day Adventists), Jesuit Agenda for the Seventh-Day Adventist Church, video tape, 1992].

The above cited SDA minister, Bob Trefz, reportedly wrote a letter to a Church of God member which stated: "I know Bacchiocchi. He is doing the very work that one would expect from a Jesuit. Of course he was trained at the highest Jesuit University in the world...Bacchiocchi is best friends with the leaders of the Lord's Day Alliance--the premier organization pushing for a National Sunday Law. Bacchiocchi arranged for the Lord's Day Alliance to come to Andrews University where the SDA theological seminary is located. We believe he is pushing the Jesuit Agenda." [bacchiocchi actually had the head of the Lord's Day Alliance, Dr. James P. Wesberry, write the forward to his book Rest For Human Restlessness--bh].

This man, Samuele Bacchiocchi, is supported by many "Church of God" organizations, and defended by (including against allegations that he is a Jesuit) Ron Dart of Christian Educational Ministries. You have just read of the "fruits" of Bacchiocchi, whom Ron refers to as "one of the strongest advocates of sincere Sabbath observance in the world." (Understanding Deception, point 6, Ron Dart). Do you agree with him? Just which "sabbath" is being advocated?

Author: Brian Hoeck

Source: http://www.truthontheweb.org/samuele.htm

Posted by Arsenio A. Lembert Jr. at 10:53 AM

Labels: BACCHIOCCHI, INFILTRATION, JESUITS, SDA

[A_G_Brito]

It is no mystery how and why Bacchiocchi attended the Pontifical Gregorian University, related to the Vatican, dear friends, brothers and sisters. He explained very well everything.

I remember when I was a youngman, a newcomer to S. D. Adventism in the 60's, how I liked to read evertything about Ecumenism and the "union of Churches" so much talked about in our midst by then, as the Council Vatican II was under way. I remember reading about a new decision by said council which allowed non-Catholics scholars to enroll in Catholic schools. I thought to myself, "Very interesting, but that certainly won't apply to any Seventh-day Adventist". But it did!

Bacchiocchi tells how difficult it was for him to get enrolled there, not because of being a 7th-day Adventist, first of all, but because of being a non-Catholic, for until then nobody had taken advantage of the Catholic's new educational rules.

He explained that firstly he was contemplating to look for a doctoral title in another university, but a friend of his who was Roman Catholic recommended him the Gregoriana exactly because this new rule had been decided and it was a very good and well reputed school of high learning, with ample libraries, especially suited for his research interests on Church History.

I think that these insinuations are really ludicrous (that he would be a Jesuit agent infiltrated in our midst), if not for any other reason, but for his so prolific production of materials on subjects that would cause a "mortal wound" on Roman Catholicism. The Sunday real origins in paganism was clearly documented, plus his research on the immortality of the soul issue, as in his wonderful book which I had the privilege of translating into Portuguese, Immortality or Resurrection?.

Maybe you should also check the problems he faced later on, as Vatican educational authorities tried to dismiss his claims of having attended the Gregoriana, finding pretexts to deny his academic achievements, which led him to come to the point of even thinking of resorting to legal actions against his detrators. That doesn't sound like a treatment by Catholic chiefs to someone being one of their own agents. . . Read about his defense of these false allegation in his website:

(http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/ -- Newsletters ## 201-204)

Besides, was it a coincidence that after the tremendous repercussions of his research publication by the Gregoriana press itself, they decided to undo their openness, closing the school's doors to any non-Catholic?

But, anyway, I know that these "conspiracy theories" will always be circulating around, especially among offshoot movements, like the SDA Reform Church, which for almost 100 years has been predicting the "fall of the SDA 'Babylonian Church'". What can we do about it?

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

I certainly enjoy his books, and I favor freedom of expression and thought. I highly recommend his book on wine in the Bible. It caused me to decide to stop drinking. (Yes, I enjoyed drinking vodka, whiskey, etc. Haven't touched it in about 3 years.)...

All in all, I think Dr. Bacchiocchi was a positive experience for the SDA church. ... I don't see any reason to doubt His devotion to Christ or his love of the church.

I agree he was a positive influence for our church, but he was wrong about wine. texts that differentiate fermented from unfermented always indicate it by an additional adjective like "new." Most references do not differentiate. Fall wine could be unfermented, while wine in any other part of the year is safely assumed to be fermented.

Additionally, there is no solid Biblical condemnation on drinking alcoholic beverages per se. Abstention is a 19th century idea.

Have you studied Bacchiocchi's book?

If so, what specific argument and evidence does he give that you disagree with?

[Ted Oplinger]

To all,

Quote:

"Since Dr. Bacchiocchi seems intent on pushing his books based upon the fact that he has an imprimatur on one of them [From Sabbath to Sunday ~bh], it is important to know what the word imprimatur means. Simply stated, it means that there is nothing in the book that is contrary to the teaching of the [Catholic ~bh] Church." (Ed Faulk, Usenet Catholic Newsgroup message, December 15, 1997)

It may beggar the mind to some, but Dr. Bacchioci's work detailing the transfer of worship from Sabbath to Sunday is something the Vatican does not hide, nor do they deny.

For a non-Roman Catholic to venture within their most prestigious university, use their resources, and trace the history of the Vatican's own work, right down to how they promote it, is not something I would earmark for a Jesuit conspiracy. The Vatican is simply too honest and open about this subject, even writing it into their catechisms they teach in their Confirmation and New Converts classes. They hide nothing about Sunday worship; why so many other churches feel they must go through so many usless mental gymnastics on the issue is a source of both sadness and amusement to me.

In fact, since the late 1800's, it is a great irony that the Roman Catholic Church is the SDA's biggest supporter when it comes to several issues. They have consistently maintained that if a person is going to base their beliefs upon the Bible and the Bible alone, then they must be honest and become Seventh-day Adventists. Every other church organization, in one way or another (they claim) pays homage to the Vatican's authority in doctrine, and (according to their reasoning) must return to or become Roman Catholic.

It is not often that diametric opponents are so honest concerning those they are enemies of.

If one wishes to believe Dr. Sam was Jesuit infiltrator - OK...to each their own. I happen to disagree.

[Dr. Rich]

I find it interesting that Dr. Samuel Bacchiocchi never replied to any of my questions concerning his view on salvation. I now see that since he had died that his daughter is taking over where he left off.

As for my own findings on everything that Sam wrote, he would say alot but there was never any 'meat' to his statements. Everything he did was to make money. I don't think he actually had any clue as to the real truth of the matter concerning salvation. But then---the majority of those who call themselves Christian don't either. How sad!

Dr. Rich

[Ted Oplinger]

Quite a bit of generalizations there, Dr. Rich, aa well as a substantial lack of evidence to back your assertions.

Reminds me of another particularly annoying poster who wrote via the same MO a long time ago...

We can simply leave it at the point you disagree with the late Dr. Sam...and his daughter. I would say that if he didn't reply to your questions, he either had his reasons, or (more likely) you may have asked in a very antagonistic manner. Either way, he can't help you now.

[Dr. Rich]

Some of us have a job where we can't be on this site all the time. I am sorry about the postings being few and far between, but I just don't have the time to answer everything. One can always contact me by phone or email and many have.

Dr. Rich

[Dr. Rich]

Sorry about that--I have been known to annoy people before with my questions. Almost got kicked out of law school for that. I am not Jesus, but I see that His questions got Him into trouble too. (So did His answers). If you find a question of answer (or statment) of mine to be annoying, please let me know.

Dr. Rich

[Ted Oplinger]

Well, Dr. Rich, I've also got one of pesty little things called a full-time job. I can't post all I want here, either!

[Ted Oplinger]

No matter. I get in trouble for upsetting the apple cart too many times myself. Upset it too many times, then the church will give you a position of responsibility....

As for the annoyance comment...you're not even close to getting under my skin yet. Not even for being in California....

However, I have tangled with several VERY annoying posters in years past, and the way you phrased your points was a small part reminiscent of a couple particularly annoying types. That said, it will do well to also say some here find me annoying as well, so what goes around, comes around.

[BobRyan]

Quote "In the final analysis let every man make up his own mind" Do you really mean that? If one such as Dr Ford comes up with a conclusion that differs from the creed he is a rebel and a heretic. ...mel

Mel is right.

We have something of a creed in the form of our voted statement of beliefs and if a pastor decides he can not teach it - he should find some other line of work - or find a denomination that shares his doctrinal convictions.

There is no sense in paying a man to teach what the denomination views to be doctrinal error.

in Christ,

Bob

[Stephanus]

I joined the SDA church because I believe in its fundamental beliefs.

[guibox]

I for one, will never trust him....I really do believe he was a Jesuit and a wolf in sheeps clothing...

The view that Dr. Sam was a Jesuit spy is so laughably ridiculous and without any merit that it amazes me that logical, rational people still argue about it and believe it.

People simply say things and close their minds to all other possibilities because they just want to hear themselves talk and convince themselves of their own drivel.

None of the evidence supports such a ludicrous assumption and his writings completely go contrary to what a Jesuit infiltration would support or be a part of. Bacchiocchi addressed these arguments in 4 of his newsletters. It seems it is much easier to stick their heads in the sand and promote paranoid nonsense than to actually get the facts.

There is a link to a Pastor Hughes in Tennessee (a YouTube clip) that has him going off on how LeRoy Froom and Roy Allen Anderson were Catholic priests and how our current President Jan Paulsen is basically a Jesuit trained plant in our church who's goal is to move us toward ecumencism.

What idiotic, cultic ramblings. He should be sued for slander.

I don't have access to You Tube at work but I will try to get those clips posted in all their vile glory!

[John317]

Originally Posted By: Tammy

I for one, will never trust him....I really do believe he was a Jesuit and a wolf in sheeps clothing...

The view that Dr. Sam was a Jesuit spy is so laughably ridiculous and without any merit that it amazes me that logical, rational people still argue about it and believe it.

People simply say things and close their minds to all other possibilities because they just want to hear themselves talk and convince themselves of their own drivel.

None of the evidence supports such a ludicrous assumption and his writings completely go contrary to what a Jesuit infiltration would support or be a part of. Bacchiocchi addressed these arguments in 4 of his newsletters. It seems it is much easier to stick their heads in the sand and promote paranoid nonsense than to actually get the facts.

There is a link to a Pastor Hughes in Tennessee (a YouTube clip) that has him going off on how LeRoy Froom and Roy Allen Anderson were Catholic priests and how our current President Jan Paulsen is basically a Jesuit trained plant in our church who's goal is to move us toward ecumencism.

What idiotic, cultic ramblings. He should be sued for slander.

I don't have access to You Tube at work but I will try to get those clips posted in all their vile glory!

I completely agree with you, particularly as regards Froom and Roy Allen Anderson. I knew Anderson personally as he worked in the ministry with my father during the last 10 years of Anderson's life.

I certainly don't agree with everything RAA wrote or did, but he wasn't a CAtholic or a priest. That is total nonsense.

People can be influenced the wrong way without being priests and Catholics.

During the 1970s Roy Allen Anderson taught classes in Daniel and Revelation at Loma Linda University in which he proved over and over again that the Roman CAtholic Church and the papal system are the antichrist power of prophecy. To say that this man was a supporter of the papal system is beyond ludicrous and ignorance.

[guibox]

Here is a clip from Pastor Bill Hughes. More Jesuit conspiracy nonsense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOORftKTt...=PL&index=6