The Sabbath Law

[BobRyan]

When the Sunday Laws come (as they did already in the case of the blue laws no longer being enforced) they start off simply as a restriction against work on Sunday. But eventually over time - the next wave that is to come will progress to the point of forbidding Sabbath worship as well.

This is only because of what we see in the Rev 13 sequence - where signs and wonders and calling fire down from heaven precedes that more Bible-denying form of the new Sunday Law.

in Christ,

Bob

[fccool]

Quote:

laws against murder and theft are moral law but are not considered religious moral laws. so your response is out of context to what i was saying, and selective from my text.

Not really, and I'll show why.

Quote:

but yes there is a great difference between passing laws that are punishing if you do not observe religious laws, and passing laws that bring punishment those who do social harm, these laws are civil laws,. yes they are found in the ten commandments, but they remain civil laws in the land.

Isn't religious law against social harm, and the claim is that all of the civil law is based on religious law? Isn't the claim that breaking the Sabbath is as harmful to society as killing someone?

Quote:

these civil laws do not require people to be good, they merely state there will be civil punishment for doing social harm.

What does "being good" mean in this context? Doesn't it mean obeying God's law? What other criteria would you judge goodness by?

Isn't a law against killing someone require people to "be good" in that aspect of "goodness"?

Quote:

so if a law was passed requiring observing the Sabbath, it cannot require people to be obedient to Gods Sabbath law, it would just establish punishments for those who follow certain proscribed behavior around the Sabbath day.

Isn't that what God commanded for Israel to set up? Why was it good then, and it's bad now?

Quote:

it is extremely wrong to try to legislate religious worship. then people get the idea that can be made right with God by following a religious law of the land. And this is a serious deception. it is a religious error that human enactments can make people right with God. I believe the majority of the Christian world may believe this, and it leaves them short of being made right with God.

Again, if it's wrong to legislate the religious worship, then why wasn't it wrong in ancient Israel?

If human enactments can't make people right with God, then what can? Human enactment is the only thing that humans can do to make any decisions, or change their lives. Isn't obedience a human enactment?

Quote:

obeying stop signs does not make me right with God, anymore then obeying a Sunday or Saturday Sabbath law of the land would make me right with God.

So, why was the Sabbath law was ever given to Israel with death punishment attached to it? There were obviously quite a bit of people who did not want to follow it. So, why would God make it the law of the land, if it did not teach people how to be right with God?

Quote:

Sunday laws can be obeyed, as a Saturday Sabbath keeping Christian, as in don't open your business on Sunday and don't plow your field on Sunday, but when a Sunday law requires me to go to a house of worship on Sunday, or requires me to labor on Sabbath then i draw the line. then it enters the sacred domain of my conscience and my relationship with God in Love and Obedience.

Social control, the power to bring punishment on undesirable social behavior should never used to coerce spiritual behaviors or legislate ones relationship to God.

Again, why was it ok in the past?

Quote:

The history of governments who have done this is the history of religious persecution. Separation of church and state is designed to prevent this.

Again, all of this sounds great, but you don't really answer the deeper philosophical question that I'm after.

0) You seem to believe that Bible is absolutely true, and so is Adventist take on the Bible. Thus, being Adventist to all voluntary and loving extend of it would mean to be "most right with God".

1) On one hand you contend that people can't really be made good by means of the law, thus they absolutely have to be given a choice to worship God, and that's why Government should be separated from the church, because punishing people for not following moral law merely creates unwilling followers who do so to escape punishment.

2) On the other hand we have certain requirements to be right with God... which are codified as laws, and have even more severe punishment associated with these. People are killed by falling rocks, starvation, deseases, and whatever plagues that follow the second coming... and that's not enough... they are resurrected and then burned alive. All because they did not fit certain requirement.

3) People like you generally claim that Israel's morality enforcement as a part of the law of the land was justifiable and is somehow different than having a proper morality enforced in this day and age.

Why? What's the difference?

[OzarkWoman]

I would not allow the government to tell me when I could worship and I would not follow any Sunday laws that the government put into place. But then, I have always been one to keep my principles, no matter what.

[debbym]

Quote:

Again, all of this sounds great, but you don't really answer the deeper philosophical question that I'm after.

0) You seem to believe that Bible is absolutely true, and so is Adventist take on the Bible. Thus, being Adventist to all voluntary and loving extend of it would mean to be "most right with God".

1) On one hand you contend that people can't really be made good by means of the law, thus they absolutely have to be given a choice to worship God, and that's why Government should be separated from the church, because punishing people for not following moral law merely creates unwilling followers who do so to escape punishment.

2) On the other hand we have certain requirements to be right with God... which are codified as laws, and have even more severe punishment associated with these. People are killed by falling rocks, starvation, deseases, and whatever plagues that follow the second coming... and that's not enough... they are resurrected and then burned alive. All because they did not fit certain requirement.

3) People like you generally claim that Israel's morality enforcement as a part of the law of the land was justifiable and is somehow different than having a proper morality enforced in this day and age.

it would be helpful in responding to you if you would provide your definition of morality.

we have a secular government with a department of justice.

justice implies mercy, and there is an attempt at fairness, for the punishment to fit the crime. our secular laws serve to keep the general populace from running amok. these laws do not enforce morality, and never will. Morality is cultivated from within.

Ancient Israel was a theocracy. That is very different, every law they had was religious. i believe it is the only theocracy that has ever existed. we cannot really imagine God, let alone imagine God being the ruler of a nation personally.

last i heard no one will be punished for breaking the laws of God. Only when a person rejects the grace and forgiveness God has provided for them do they ever come under penalty.

if you go to court for a crime, and are judged and condemned, but someone is ready and provides full pardon and pays all your fines, you can either accept that or go ahead and pay... it's kind of like that. you will not be punished because you have done the crime, but only because you refused the provision made and offered to you.

i have no idea what you mean by "we have a certain requirement to be right with God."

if you believe in the rapture you might believe there are plagues that follow the second coming, my understanding is that there will be no such suffering after the second coming.

i don't believe Adventists have any monopoly with being right with God. I don't believe anyone is made right with God by manufacturing some kind of proper behavior then zap, they are righteous and in good with God. there isn't some religious secret formula for becoming right with God held in some special religion.

From what i understand, anyone that agrees with God, and does God's will is right with God. It is God's will for you to accept his love and forgiveness so you can live and not die.

If you know God you will live, there is a scripture that says that.

if you reject God, then you will die, because God is your source. like the source of oxygen, if you cut off your source of oxygen you will die.

God understand people have a real hard time knowing him, because he can see and know everything. Our personal lens for comprehending everything is very distorted and flawed. Especially when it comes to comprehending pure mercy and kindness and graciousness. we really have very little reference for anything like that.

[fccool]

Quote:

it would be helpful in responding to you if you would provide your definition of morality.

Morality is established proper behavior. Ethics on other hand, is a systematic concepts of right and wrong. I think you may be confusing "law of the land" with ethics.

How do you define morality?

Quote:

we have a secular government with a department of justice.

justice implies mercy, and there is an attempt at fairness, for the punishment to fit the crime. our secular laws serve to keep the general populace from running amok. these laws do not enforce morality, and never will. Morality is cultivated from within.

Justice does not really imply mercy. Quite the opposite. Justice is a concept of judging someone's moral actions in terms of their behavior.

Injustice would be the concept of letting the improper moral behavior go unchecked or unpunished.

Morality is never "cultivated from within". That's not how human brain work. Humans copy and pass information from one generation to another. The concept of morality is largely a generational concept. If baby is raised by wolves (literally), it will have the morality of wolves. Morality is largely learned and understood.

Quote:

Ancient Israel was a theocracy. That is very different, every law they had was religious. i believe it is the only theocracy that has ever existed. we cannot really imagine God, let alone imagine God being the ruler of a nation personally.

last i heard no one will be punished for breaking the laws of God. Only when a person rejects the grace and forgiveness God has provided for them do they ever come under penalty.

But, I think you'd agree that your concept of "rejecting the grace and forgiveness" directly relates to obeying God's law? So it's really a double-speak here. "Well, you are not punished for breaking God's law, you are punished for rejecting God... but if you accept God and reject God's law, then you are rejecting God". How is it different than saying that a person is punished for intentionally breaking God's law?

Or, perhaps you believe that a person who accepts God's forgiveness can in fact intentionally break God's law.

You say that these laws were religious? What would be the difference between religious version of "don't kill", and civil version of the same law?

Quote:

if you go to court for a crime, and are judged and condemned, but someone is ready and provides full pardon and pays all your fines, you can either accept that or go ahead and pay... it's kind of like that. you will not be punished because you have done the crime, but only because you refused the provision made and offered to you.

In context of this discussion, who is the God paying the fine to? Himself? He is the offended party in this context. If he forgives, there's no need for a fine payment. That's how true forgiveness works. If someone still has to pay the fine, then it's not forgiveness. That's someone paying for your crime, and that's by any definition called injustice.

You wouldn't say to a person "I forgive your debt, now who is going to pay it for you?". That's not forgiveness. That's someone else paying the debt. Forgiveness would mean "no-one has to pay". That's how true forgiveness works.

Now, the analogy does not work in ANY stretch of it's purpose. We have a scam in Ukraine that has people stealing son's phone and calling parents in the middle of the night telling them that their son killed someone, or done something terrible and is now in the custody of police. They tell them that they have connection with corrupt police and all they have to do is to pay a bribe of $500, and the son will be free.

The parents of course call the son. The son does not answer. They are panicking and in panic, they give scammers the money for imaginary act for which there is no proof.

The scenario that you draw up is very similar. It simply reifies an imaginary concept by means of REAL court proceedings. Very few people facing death would reject the pardon if it was asked in a process of REAL COURT PROCEEDING. What you say, no person in this entire world does, unless they are suicidal ... or they have enormous sense of personal integrity and accountability for their actions, which is not what you say is happening.

Quote:

i have no idea what you mean by "we have a certain requirement to be right with God."

I'll demonstrate it from what you've said below

Quote:

if you believe in the rapture you might believe there are plagues that follow the second coming, my understanding is that there will be no such suffering after the second coming.

Do you believe that the wicked are resurrected, and then burned alive, either forever, or for some while?

Quote:

i don't believe Adventists have any monopoly with being right with God. I don't believe anyone is made right with God by manufacturing some kind of proper behavior then zap, they are righteous and in good with God. there isn't some religious secret formula for becoming right with God held in some special religion.

What do you mean by "manufacturing". Proper behavior is learned. Is learning proper behavior equates to manufacturing it? I'll show you the double-speak in that, and I'll show you how you actually go on and refute yourself here.

Quote:

From what i understand, anyone that agrees with God, and does God's will is right with God. It is God's will for you to accept his love and forgiveness so you can live and not die.

So, here's the double-speak that I'm talking about.

1) People have to learn about God and his "will" and accept love and forgiveness.

2) The very act of accepting God's love and forgiveness constitutes proper behavior, that's learned. How else do you come to "understanding and accepting the love and forgiveness"

3) One does not merely have to accept the love and forgiveness... one has to accept God's morality along with it (rules for proper behavior). Can one really accept God's love and forgiveness and still think that killing is ok, or stealing and lying is ok? If not, then it's not much different than saying "Love God by obeying his requirements... or face the punishment", which is exactly what Adventists and most of Christian denominations teach.

Quote:

If you know God you will live, there is a scripture that says that.

Define "know". Do you understand the difference between belief and knowledge? If one knows... one no longer believes. So, do you know, or do you believe?

Quote:

if you reject God, then you will die, because God is your source. like the source of oxygen, if you cut off your source of oxygen you will die.

It's a terrible analogy in this context. No one rejects oxygen. Oxygen is self-evident. Likewise, you'll have to be quite suicidal to reject oxygen. Give me a good comparable viable scenario? No one says "I don't believe in oxygen, I'm going to go swimming underwater". There's a very good reason for it. The literally see people drowning. They know if you cut the oxygen source from a person, they would die. Almost every person on the planet is concerned with his/her survival. If they care enough not to drown or get hit by a car, do you think they'd care enough if they'd actually KNOW that God exists?

What you are saying is along the lines of "Everyone who reject God is intentionally suicidal", because refusing something constitutes intent.

So, if God is oxygen, and people are born without it, why would God care to sustain their life for a 100 years? Just to see if they will reject the vague ideas about him? Does God play games?

Quote:

God understand people have a real hard time knowing him, because he can see and know everything. Our personal lens for comprehending everything is very distorted and flawed. Especially when it comes to comprehending pure mercy and kindness and graciousness. we really have very little reference for anything like that.

Again, there's very little kindness and graciousness in terms of the God of the Bible. Think about the flood. Is it possible to end life in kindness? That sort of sounds a bit whimsical to me. Sort of sounds like when marriage is not working out too well, and the wife is whoring around, one just ... kills her, and starts over. That's not kindness.

Likewise, the core of Christian story is of God's son coming to Earth destined to die to people's sins. While it's emotionally viable, if you think about - it's a terrible concept.

1) If it's God paying the punishment to himself, then it's merely a brutal theatrics accompanied by him exchanging money from one hand to other.

2) If it's Jesus pacifying the angry God with a payment of his life, then it's a great injustice in terms of innocent person dying for guilty. Any person with a shred of integrity would not accept that, and would rather die themselves. I know I could not in good conscience accept other person dying for what I did, if I deserved death punishement. It's absurd. No person of integrity, or moral character would ever accept such a bargain. There's nothing "good" or "merciful" about that. Just think about it.

3) If God forgives people who change their hearts, then there's no need for the human sacrifice of Jesus. That's not forgiveness. If someone else absolutely has to die to satisfy the debt, then it's not forgiveness from God. That's injustice. And it's really does not paint God in a very good light, because he seems to accept human sacrifices... if the animal sacrifice concept is not brutal enough.

[M. T. Cross]

Now so many of you are sure that there will be a Sunday Law passed. But I only see it being mentioned for the U.S.

There are 195 other countries in the world.

There are 679,689,000,000 people living outside of the U.S.A.

So the end of time is going to be determined by what law is passed for the 311 million in the States?

[Woody]

Good Point EC. Pretty flimsy reasoning I would say.

[phkrause]

Now so many of you are sure that there will be a Sunday Law passed. But I only see it being mentioned for the U.S.

There are 195 other countries in the world.

There are 679,689,000,000 people living outside of the U.S.A.

So the end of time is going to be determined by what law is passed for the 311 million in the States?

The end of time will be determined by God not any law for Sunday keeping. Sunday laws are just one sign of the "end time." The reason I believe that the US is mentioned is because we will be in the lead on this and all others will follow. This is my opinion as to why the US is the only one being mentioned. There are a number of books on this point, the GC being just one. They will explain much better than I can.

[M. T. Cross]

I respectfully semi disagree PK.

I think that the U.S. is mentioned most because there are more U.S. citizens here, and from my observation a lot of (not all) U.S. citizens have a tendency to forget that there is a civilized world outside of their borders.

I actually think that if it was going to happen, it would happen first in some of the Catholic dominated countries.

[debbym]

Quote:

Quote:fccool

Quote:

debjm: laws against murder and theft are moral law but are not considered religious moral laws. so your response is out of context to what i was saying, and selective from my text.

Not really, and I'll show why.

Isn't religious law against social harm, and the claim is that all of the civil law is based on religious law? Isn't the claim that breaking the Sabbath is as harmful to society as killing someone?

laws regarding the exercise of religion are extremely different and distinct from secular laws, however much those laws are about doing right by your fellow man.

religious law is based in God's word, which says

"THOU SHALT". this is the word of God, imparting God's will to the receiver of the word. This word gives the will and the power to do right. To break the law is to break the relationship with God, to break that connection by which the believer receives a new mind, a new life.

secular is a better word then civil for this discussion. secular law merely is a huge codified system of consequences for specific behaviors. If you are ignorant of the law, you have no excuse if you break it. The consequences fall regardless.

we have separation of church and state and this began in the 1500's with the reformation. all laws pertaining specifically to the exercise of religion were separated out, with relapses that really were costly each time.

when people pass laws through a human legal system regarding that which is pertaining specifically to faith and religion they have crossed a line, where you have people acting in the position of God. Because people cannot impart power and light and the will to do right or to fulfill spiritual laws. human laws are not the voice of God. huge unspeakable differences.

Sabbath breaking for a Sabbath keeping spiritual person is impacting their relationship to God. It is denying God's word. it means nothing to the non spiritual person. It means nothing to the secular society.If society has no relationship to God in keeping the Sabbath there is no relationship to be harmed by Sabbath breaking.

[debbym]

Quote:

Again, if it's wrong to legislate the religious worship, then why wasn't it wrong in ancient Israel?

If human enactments can't make people right with God, then what can? Human enactment is the only thing that humans can do to make any decisions, or change their lives. Isn't obedience a human enactment?

no, obedience to God is not a human enactment. in ancient Israel God was present. God was a living physical reality, and when he spoke every human being heard him through their whole being until they cried out for God to stop speaking because the could not bear it. They refused to listen any further.

Exodus 20:18-20 God spoke to give them himself, so they could know and love and do God's will expressed in his commands to them. God was offering to them in his word, the path to reverence for that which is Holy.

If you do not know God then human enactment may be all you have. and to make it more interesting... there are those who have chosen to do God's will by His grace, without any religion or scripture. Jesus said to them in the story of the separation of the goats, come blessed of my father, and they asked when did we do your will? and he said, when you did it to the least of these my children you have done it unto me. so God may apparently speak to people through human need. and we may be empowered by him to do the right thing by their need, and receive the approval of God for doing his will.

[Tom Wetmore]

What does it all mean anyway? The imagery of Revelation is of forced worship, drawing heavily from the Babylonian experience of Daniel's 3 friends being forced on threat of death to bow down and worship the golden image of the man/beast of Babylon.

So how could mere Sunday laws replicate that scenario? It would have to be more than outlawing work and business on Sunday, the traditional Adventist teaching. It would have to entail forced church attendance on Sunday. But even that would not be enough. You can make me go to Catholic mass on Sunday, but I am only their as an observer, not a participant. Are they going to force-feed us the wafer and wine and make us kneel before the Pope? Well how about prohibiting church attendance and worship activities on any day other than Sunday? Good luck with that. What worship and adoration of God inside my heart are they going to be able to rip loose? WIll they force their way into our homes to make sure we are not doing it there?

The sign of grace vs. the sign of the lack of grace is what God will being looking for. Those who exhibit the sign of grace will be as Jesus predicted - loving one another. Perfect love castes out all fear. Those without the mark of grace will be forcing themselves and others to perform meaningless rituals and increasingly difficult feats perfect behavior on fear that they will die if they don't. Religion of fear is the mark of the beast. The mark on the saints will be grace, love and no fear.

So, what does the Sabbath have to do with all that?

[debbym]

Quote:

Poster: Tom Wetmore

Well how about prohibiting church attendance and worship activities on any day other than Sunday? Good luck with that. What worship and adoration of God inside my heart are they going to be able to rip loose? WIll they force their way into our homes to make sure we are not doing it there?

The sign of grace vs. the sign of the lack of grace is what God will being looking for. Those who exhibit the sign of grace will be as Jesus predicted - loving one another.

Christ is hated by Satan, and Christs followers are hated by Satan. The haters of Christ were frustrated in their attempts to secure the end of Christ. it was not until the time was right in God's time table.

The more we are like Jesus, merciful and gracious, trusting, self controlled, full of peace... the more we are targeted by the enemy of Christ. Now he works through our own selfish attributes to entangle us, this is the nature of temptation, our own lusts draw us.

But, keeping the Sabbath is experiencing the word of God speaking God's love/character into our hearts, by the authority and power of our creator and re-creator.

i read that religious persecution will follow huge disasters, that Christians who reflect Christs peace and love and who live by the word of God will be hated and targeted. The hatred of Christ was from before creation. This same enemy inspired people through his own attributes in them to the point of murder, and it will be a repeat of this again.

Then it will be time for Christ to appear in the heavens. we are fully polished in Character under the force of receiving the hatred of Christs enemy and resisting all temptations to imbibe the attributes that once ruled our lives. Those who stand in Christ's faith and Character will be only patient and loving. they have no fear but only looking upward for strength to remain in God's grace.

grace=God's character

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

all must worship the God of the Bible, from sunset Friday to sunset Saturday - how would you feel about it?

God didn't say all must but He did say remember. The fact that few believe that He meant that, indicates that most put little importance on His utterances if it doesn't fit into their plans.

God blesses!

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

Because I do not believe you can legislate a morality.

I would guess then you do not see "don't kill" and "don't steal"

as moral laws.

God blesses!

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

I would abide by a Sunday Law. I have no problems worshipping on Sunday (or any other day of the week), as long as they don't prohibit my Sabbath observance

And since Sunday has been declared the mark of her authority, while the seventh day Sabbath is a sign of God's people, one essentially chooses another above God's sign.

“Tell the people of Israel: ‘Be careful to keep my Sabbath day, for the Sabbath is a sign of the covenant between me and you from generation to generation. It is given so you may know that I am the Lord, who makes you holy."Exodus 31:13 NLT

And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Galatians 3:28 NKJV

God blesses!

[debbym]

Quote:

I would guess then you do not see "don't kill" and "don't steal"

as moral laws.

they are secular laws that are made by a secular government, passing these laws is not an act of coercion of the conscience.

if the government tries to pass laws that are in respect to religion, to enforce morality based in religion, that is another matter.

however much our laws may have been modeled after the laws of God they are not laws governing the exercise of faith and religion.

again the laws do not bring any change of heart, they can only bring consequence to behaviors.

faith is about the heart, so if the government gets into the business of controlling the exercise of the faith of people they are getting into the realm between someone and their God.

debjm