Skip to main content

So Many Religions...Is That True?

That's the way the world looks at it. Many religions and many paths to God, most people think. But is that true? I mean, look at what we got: Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Roman Catholics, Protestants, Baptists, and more. Which one is right? Now bear with me before jumping the gun about me lumping in Protestants and Baptists with that group.

How do we respond and deal with so many religions? Is there really that many? I say no! Because when it really comes down to it, there are only 2 kinds of religions...Works and Grace, Self and Christ. The works/self way leads to condemnation, the Christ/Grace way leads to eternal life in heaven. There may be many founders behind all those religions, but the one thing they all have in common is the false belief that works completely or partly saves them. It doesn't matter what name is behind it (including Christian), if they believe that sacraments, ordinances, charitable deeds, or good works helps get them to heaven, they don't believe the finished work of Christ is sufficient and believe in a false gospel which is no gospel at all. Only one way to be saved and go to heaven, that is through the shed blood, suffering, death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ for those who trust in Him with a repentant faith. May the Lord give us grace to be loving and bold to proclaim this true biblical gospel, no matter who believes the false gospels.

Comments

Justin C. said…
I don't know Bret. Yes there are two kinds of religions. But from there, they branch out into different beliefs. You most likely go to church on Sunday. Am I right? I go to church on Saturday. Why? Because it says in the bible:

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Exo 20:9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
Exo 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Part of the ten commandments. But the seventh day is Saturday. I cannot find a single text in the bible where it says to worship God and remember Sunday as a holy day. What do you think?
Pester Brat said…
Conservation Terms:
Thank you for replying again. Even though we will probably continue to disagree on the issue of the Sabbath and Sundays. Unlike many Reformed Christians (both paedo and credo baptists)I do not believe that Sunday is the sabbath. But neither do I believe that we are required to keep Saturday as the sabbath. I realize some people struggle because "keeping the sabbath" was one of the ten commandments, but there were also 603 other commandments given in the Old Covenant. The Sabbath is a ceremonial law that pointed to the Lord Jesus Christ, our sabbath rest (Heb. 4:1-11). Some people use the Book of Acts to support Saturday Sabbath worship for the church, but that was a time of transition. And the Apostle Paul and others would go to Temple on Saturdays to witness to the Jews per God's plan for him to go to them before the Gentiles on his 'missionary' journies. So that cannot be used to support the church worshiping and keeping Saturday as the sabbath. But what else sayeth the Scriptures? Col. 2:16-17 "Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day--things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ." Rom. 14:4-6 "Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God." Gal. 4:9-11 "But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how is it that you turn back again to the weak and worthless elemental things, to which you desire to be enslaved all over again? You observe days and months and seasons and years. I fear for you, that perhaps I have labored over you in vain.

Then there are verses of Scripture that shows the church gathering on Sunday: "Acts 20:7 On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to leave the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight." 1Cor. 16:2 "On the first day of every week each one of you is to put aside and save, as he may prosper, so that no collections be made when I come."
Rev. 1:10 "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like the sound of a trumpet."

Also, many Christians believe there is significance to the fact that the risen Lord appeared to the apostles on Sunday. Then there is the issue of church history. While of course it is secondary to the Holy Scriptures/Word of God, since God is sovereign, and Christ is head of the church, there is something to be said about the majority of Christians worshiping the Lord on Sunday down through the centuries. The first several centuries Christians were worshipping on either Saturday or Sunday. So it wasn't an invention by the Roman Catholic Church which by the way, was just getting started in the 4th century by Emporer Constantine's forced Christianity.

Do you want to worship on Saturday? That is between you and the Lord. But the Scriptures do not support the church being required to worship the Lord and resting on a Saturday Sabbath. Christ fulfilled and is our Sabbath rest when we are in Him by faith in Who He is and His Finished Work on the cross. The Scriptures clearly say we are not to judge another for what Day they observe. I'm not saying you are. But many in the Seventh Day Adventist Church and those of like faith do, and even go as far to say it is the mark of the beast, and/or that it is sin, and/or that people are not saved, if they do not observe Saturday as the Sabbath. Where are you in all of this my friend? Thank you...
Justin C. said…
I am glad we can have a friendly conversation in all this. A lot of people aren't as nice as you are when I talk about this subject. I am most definitely not trying to judge you. However, although what day you worship does not save you, I believe you are judged if you know truth and do not practice it. Here is my standpoint. Do you the nine commandments? Whoa, you say. Nine? Yeah. You most likely try very hard to keep the commandments. But what about the only one that starts with the word "Remember"? All the others say do not murder, do not steal. But God wrote with His own hand the word "Remember". People say, that commandment was changed after Jesus died and was ceremonial law. Really? What about the others? Were they changed as well? This is what I am wondering. I mean, Jesus kept the sabbath. From what I am getting from you, you say that it really does not matter what day you go to church on. Then, as a pastor, why do you worship on Sunday? There are a lot of people out there that tell me other wise when it comes to my sabbath keeping. I am not saying you are one of them. This is also a hard subject for a lot of people to accept. I am not trying to attack your beliefs, but really, lets try to reason and debate together. Thanks for always commenting back. And it is my pleasure to comment on your blog. Keep commenting.
Pester Brat said…
Hello again CT. I don't mind reasoning and debating together as time permits, but it will have to work both ways. Also, we must realize that when two people both believe they are right according to The Scriptures, while only one of them are right of course, there isn't much more to be done except that both continue to study the word of God regaring the issue. In my last post I made several points dealing with God's word that you did not respond to. Since this is my Blog :-) and you are challenging me on the Saturday Sabbath issue, it is your responsibility to deal with each of the points I bring up in defense. I know I didn't bring up everything that could be brought up however. Interestingly, neither Jesus or any of His Apostles or New Testament writers repeated the command to Remember the Sabbath. When the "church" started gathering and worshipping the Lord on Sunday, nothing is said by Paul, Peter, John, James, the writer of Hebrews, or Jude, except for the passages I mentioned in my last post about not judging those who don't observe the Sabbath. That would have been a good opportunity to say that the Church was to observe Saturday as the Sabbath, but it wasn't said. Also notice again in The Col. 2 passage that it says they were a "shadow for things to come." Jesus dealt with the Sabbath issue when He said that He is Lord of the Sabbath, and that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath (Mk. 2:24-28; Mt. 12:1-8). Again with this and the Heb. 4 passage I shared in my last post, the Old Covenant Sabbath for Israel pointed to, and was fulfilled by and in Christ. We don't need to remember the Saturday as the Sabbath anymore then we need to remember the passover and other feasts, the multiple tithes, circumcision, etc. I think I have given ample scriptural support that the Church is not required to rest and worship on Saturday as the Sabbath. If you would like to continue discussion that is fine (I may not always be able to respond to you on the same or following day), but I would appreciate it if you start by dealing with each of the Scripture passages I provided in this and my last post. Thanks CT. By the way, do you have a first name that you can give me instead of me calling you CT? :-)
Justin C. said…
That is fine. Only fair. I will keep commenting and wait for you reply. Lets see. That is actually my screen name. Short for conservation terms. You can call me Justin. I will be outright and honest with you. I am an SDA. Not like the loon David Koresh. We actually do not believe that people not of the sabbath keeping faith are lost. We believe that every religion in the world will be in heaven. But we believe that if you have the knowledge and ignore it, you will be judged on that knowledge. It is very hard for people to pay attention to our faith because we are the minority and we believe differently from other people. We actually that the mark of the beast is a choice that is made by everyone in their lives. To follow God, obey his commandments, and love Him, or not. But again, if someone has heard theword and ignores it will be judged on the knowledge and what he did about it. Goid won't expect a 10 year old to have the knowledge of a 40 year old. Again I am not trying to judge you, but I do have a terrible liking for debating. As far as the shadow goes, I say again that making sure you worship on the sabbath does not save you. But you could bring up the issue that whether you kill someone or not, it does not matter for it is just a "shadow of things to come". For no man is our judge. If the argument is brought up that Jesus is our judge and that He cares whether or not we kill someone, then the counter to that could be that He cares whether or not we keep the sabbath. For He is our judge. So I think that does it for the Col. verse. Now for the sabbath was made for man verse. I have read that verse many times and I say to myself, "If He is lord of the sabbath, He most likely cares whether or not we keep the sabbath". Again the Acts verse. What if that verse is pointing to them celebrating the day Christ rose? Theymayhave not Also it suggests nothing about the church changing the first day of the week to Sunday. It just says that they met to break bread. Romans 14 does not give any clue as to which day it is talking about. But it does say "The day", not "A day". So it is talking about a specific day. It says in revelation that one person will be left in a field and the other taken. It talks in this verse about two people as well. Could it be the saved and the lost? I believe that it could. Also I do not believe that you could prove that it is talking about two saved people. So see, by looking closely at these texts we cannot make a clear understanding of them. You give very good verses to support your claim, but neither you nor I can prove that they mean one thing or another. So you are right. We will have to continue to debate and reason. Right now I am reasoning. We can both see that we believe that we are right. No use hiding that. But we can continue to search the scriptures together. Next verse. For the Gal. verse you can see that it says "how is it that you turn back again to the weak and worthless elemental things". It says in different translations that they turned back to their "Old principles" Back then there was a lot of pagan beliefs. Notice he was talking to the Galatians at that time. The Galatians were pagan converts. A lot of pagans kept and worshiped days, and seasons.
Thor=Thursday
Sun=Sunday
Just a few. However it is enough evidence, I believe, to prove that Paul was not talking about the sabbath. Maybe I am wrong. We may never know on that text. Also I looked up that text in my bible. Check it out in several translations. It is talking about giving money. Like how there was a wooden box set in front of the temple. It suggests nothing about worship. The NIV version says: "Now about the collection for God's people: Do what I told the Galatian churches to do. On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income, saving it up." Nothing about the sabbath. I am not attacking your issues and beliefs, I am just going through and showing you some of the validity of your texts.(It will be your turn to do the same when you
comment:-) Going on, there is evidence that this text actually supports the sabbath. Paul is talking to the church of Corinth. This church, as well as the other churches of this day, I believe were sabbath keepers. Paul askes them to set aside their money at the beginning of the week. He says that the reason for this so that when he comes the collections will "NOT YET" be taken. That places hid arrival at Saturday. From this logic, we can see that he may have been preaching at this church. But whether he did or not does not matter. For it talking about money and collections. One could make the case that this was tithe, but it says that it wasa collection. Now for a text of my own.

John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

All the commandments I believe. The reason being? Jesus loves us. If we did not have a day set aside for rest after He rose, than we would all be stressed out. He knows that we needed a day to worship Him and RELAX. There is a site that I would REALLY like you to visit. If you have any questions in your mind, this site will answer them. Here it is: sabbathtruth.com. Explore, Pray. I will be doing the same. I will await your response. My sincere thanks for commenting back,
-Justin.
Anonymous said…
That is fine. Only fair. I will keep commenting and wait for you reply. Lets see. That is actually my screen name. Short for conservation terms. You can call me Justin. I will be outright and honest with you. I am an SDA. Not like the loon David Koresh. We actually do not believe that people not of the sabbath keeping faith are lost. We believe that every religion in the world will be in heaven. But we believe that if you have the knowledge and ignore it, you will be judged on that knowledge. It is very hard for people to pay attention to our faith because we are the minority and we believe differently from other people. We actually that the mark of the beast is a choice that is made by everyone in their lives. To follow God, obey his commandments, and love Him, or not. But again, if someone has heard theword and ignores it will be judged on the knowledge and what he did about it. Goid won't expect a 10 year old to have the knowledge of a 40 year old. Again I am not trying to judge you, but I do have a terrible liking for debating. As far as the shadow goes, I say again that making sure you worship on the sabbath does not save you. But you could bring up the issue that whether you kill someone or not, it does not matter for it is just a "shadow of things to come". For no man is our judge. If the argument is brought up that Jesus is our judge and that He cares whether or not we kill someone, then the counter to that could be that He cares whether or not we keep the sabbath. For He is our judge. So I think that does it for the Col. verse. Now for the sabbath was made for man verse. I have read that verse many times and I say to myself, "If He is lord of the sabbath, He most likely cares whether or not we keep the sabbath". Again the Acts verse. What if that verse is pointing to them celebrating the day Christ rose? Theymayhave not Also it suggests nothing about the church changing the first day of the week to Sunday. It just says that they met to break bread. Romans 14 does not give any clue as to which day it is talking about. But it does say "The day", not "A day". So it is talking about a specific day. It says in revelation that one person will be left in a field and the other taken. It talks in this verse about two people as well. Could it be the saved and the lost? I believe that it could. Also I do not believe that you could prove that it is talking about two saved people. So see, by looking closely at these texts we cannot make a clear understanding of them. You give very good verses to support your claim, but neither you nor I can prove that they mean one thing or another. So you are right. We will have to continue to debate and reason. Right now I am reasoning. We can both see that we believe that we are right. No use hiding that. But we can continue to search the scriptures together. Next verse. For the Gal. verse you can see that it says "how is it that you turn back again to the weak and worthless elemental things". It says in different translations that they turned back to their "Old principles" Back then there was a lot of pagan beliefs. Notice he was talking to the Galatians at that time. The Galatians were pagan converts. A lot of pagans kept and worshiped days, and seasons.
Thor=Thursday
Sun=Sunday
Just a few. However it is enough evidence, I believe, to prove that Paul was not talking about the sabbath. Maybe I am wrong. We may never know on that text. Also I looked up that text in my bible. Check it out in several translations. It is talking about giving money. Like how there was a wooden box set in front of the temple. It suggests nothing about worship. The NIV version says: "Now about the collection for God's people: Do what I told the Galatian churches to do. On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income, saving it up." Nothing about the sabbath
Pester Brat said…
Hello Again Justin. There is much I could say, but I'm only going to mention a couple things before I comment on something you said that I hope only needs clarification.

First, your explanation of the word "shadow of things to come." With all due respect, your explanation is very weak, and has nothing to do with the passage. It looks like it is just something you 'may' be holding onto so as not to have to worry about what the passage really says. I used to do that years ago with the word foreknow/foreknew, by believing that it meant foresight/God knowing who would believe and who wouldn't. Until I was challenged to take a closer look at the meaning of the word and what the verse says (Rom. 8:29), and how it is used in the passage in context. I encourage you to do the same. I agree with you that the Rom. 12 and Gal. 4 passages are not [as] clear, but this Col. 2 passage is. The word Shadow comes from the Greek word 'skia.' It means shadow/shade/adumbration. If you look up adumbration in the old Websters dictionary it says:
1. The act of making a shadow or faint resemblance.
2. A faint sketch; an imperfect representation of a thing.
3. In heraldry, the shadow only of a figure, outlined, and painted of a color darker than the field.
The first and second definitions aptly describe what a shadow in the Old Testament is. You can also see how the words are used in Heb. 8:5 & 10:1. Plus, it seems that you may have ignored or forgotten Col.2:16 which again says: Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath" {ESV- Glad you're not a KJV Only guy ;-)}.

Then there is your use of Jn. 14:15. This much beloved passage, and one of my many favorite verses that says "If you love Me keep my commandments." But for you to use that in defense of your position is broad and vague in my opinion. In context here it is referring to Jesus' commandments. Jesus who became God incarnate about 2000 years ago (always God, but not man until then). Jesus never commanded men to keep the sabbath. Again, that command is no where repeated in the New Testament. While you and others may make the argument that Jesus is God and therefore it is referring to all the Old Testament commandments as well, in the context and as the Son of Man, I don't think that will fit there. If Jesus had made the command to continue to keep the sabbath (which He had plenty of opportunty to do, especially when talking to His Disciples after He rose from the dead and appeared to them on Sunday, and knew that the church would start worshipping Him on Sundays), then I would say that your use of Jn. 14:15 would have a leg to stand on, so to speak :-).

But allow me to move on to my concern. If it is just clarification that I need, we should be able to resolve this in one exchange of posts. But if your use of this word is meant in the way that it is often used today, there is a concern. You said: "We believe that every religion in the world will be in heaven." If your use of the word 'religion' means 'non Christian' religions, then we have a much serious issue than that of the Saturday Sabbath vs. the Sunday Lord's Day. Perhaps you are just using it in the sense of Christian denominations? If so, that is better, but it still could be problematic depending on what you mean with that. There is no salvation and going to Heaven outside of repentant faith in the Person and Finished Work of Christ [alone]. That leaves out non Christian religions, and any [professing] Christian denomination or group that believes works and/or self contributes in any degree to their salvation, whether Roman Catholic, Protestant, Baptist[ic], or Seventh Day Adventist. So if you'd be so kind, I would like to get this straightened out before continuing our discussion about the Saturday-Sunday issue.
Thanks Justin!
Justin C. said…
Ah, no problem Bret. If you saw what I said about our beliefes in my last comment, you will see that I mentioned about how we may be judged. God, as you know, is just. He doesn't say, "This guys going and this guys not", without grounds to do so. We believe that every religion will be in heaven. Here is the reason. If a someone has never gotten to study God's word and find out for themselves what the standards are that they should live by, there is no reason that God will judge them on what they did not know. It says that the gospel will be preached unto all nations and then the end shall come. Every person will get to here what about Jesus, but not everyone will get to discern the truth about the sabbath.(Whether it is Sun or Sat.) So we believe that God will not judge people whop have never heard about these things. Now if someone knows the bible, and knows what it means, and chooses to do nohing, that is a different story. I there is anything else about this aspect of our beliefs, do not hesitate to ask. Back to the sabbah issue. I would first like to ask if you visited the site I recommended. It is your choice of course, but there is a lot more in that site then I could comment on. Now for the things we talked about last comment. Again according to the verse, I am not trying to judge you, just debating. My claim may be weak on the "Shadow", but in other tranlations including the NIV, it says "the reality is found in Christ". It is saying the exact things that we believe. That no one is to act as man's judge except Christ, and that making sure you worship on sabbath does not save you. But it is an important issue. You added in there all sorts of meanings of the word shadow, but again, those are man's translations and we do not know if that is what Christ is refering to. And again, that text may actually support the sabbath. I use both NIV and KJV in my bible studies. It says in Hebrews 8:5 "A copy and shadow of what is in heaven." So this suggest that the sabbath down here is jest a copy or shadow of what is in heaven. So although my defense in that verse is weak, respectfully, until you can actually prove through the bible that it is false, then both your claim, and mine, is still a possibility. All it is saying is that no man is to judge you on this matter. I will also add that in the verse saying that Jesus is lord of the sabbath, you must realize that a king lord of a certain thing, will expect his people to respect that thing. In this case, it is the sabbath. Also, You say that Jesus was the incarnate of God. Did God not write the ten commandment? Therefore, He(Jesus) would take on God's thoughts, mind, and beliefs. As well as His undersatnding of things. So either God is seperate from Jesus, or the two do not settle with each other. And you must also realize that Jesus rose after He was dead. If He was dead and was God, who raised Him? The Devil? I think not. And it could not have been the abgels for they do not have the power to give life. And then finaly, on your claim about Jesus having oppurtunities to share about worshiping on sabbath, the church then already worshiped on sabbath and we do not know if Jesus was all knowing then and/or if He was actually an incarnate of God. And so, from this we could make the argument that Jesus may not have known that the church would turn to worshiping on sabbath. It is again not clear. Thank you for comment back each time. I will be awaiting your next comment. Respectfully,
-Justin
Pester Brat said…
Justin: Caught me before my bedtime. Look, from my perspective, you seem to be digging a deeper hole for yourself when it comes to some basic biblical fundamental teachings. As far as I'm concerned, there is no need to deal with the Saturday Sabbath issue unless or until you repent of several of these other basic doctrines that you seem to be in error on.

The word of God is clear that there is no other way to heaven other than by grace through faith alone in the Person and Work of Christ alone: Acts 4:12; Jn. 14:6; 1Cor. 15:3-4; Jn. 3:16-18,36; 5:24; Rom. 3:1-12,23; 5:8; 6:23; 10:9-10; Eph. 2:1-10; and many many more.

It also looks like you are now saying that Jesus was/is not God. You said: "So either God is seperate from Jesus, or the two do not settle with each other. And you must also realize that Jesus rose after He was dead. If He was dead and was God, who raised Him?" I hope I'm somehow misunderstanding. Even the SDA believe that Jesus is 'God the Incarnate Son.' But more importantly the word of God says that Jesus is God in numerous places: Jn. 1:1-14; Col. 1:16-17; Heb. 1:1-3; 1Tim. 3:16; Jn. 8:58-59; 1Jn. 5:20; Jn. 20:28; and many more. You also said: "and we do not know if Jesus was all knowing then and/or if He was actually an incarnate of God. And so, from this we could make the argument that Jesus may not have known that the church would turn to worshiping on sabbath." Since the word of God says Jesus is God incarnate that should take care of it. But some argue that since Jesus emptied Himself (kenosis in the Greek in Phlp.2) that He did not know. But the word of God says otherwise. Here are just 3 examples: Jn.1:48-49 Nathanael said to Him, "How do You know me?" Jesus answered and said to him, "Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you." Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel." Jn. 2:24-25 But Jesus, on His part, was not entrusting Himself to them, for He knew all men,
and because He did not need anyone to testify concerning man, for He Himself knew what was in man. Jn. 6:64 "But there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him."

Justin, I have to be honest. It looks like you are denying some of the basics of Christ and His word. If so, you believe a false gospel and false Christ. Do you like the SDA not believe in a literal eternal punishment and Lake of Fire as well? And then there is the thing with Ellen White that I forgot about. She is no more a Prophet than Charles Russell, Joseph Smith, or Mohammed were. All of them are false Prophets. The Bible is the word of God, and final authority for God's people. I know you didn't bring up Ellen White, but I am :-). Do you agree with the SDA regarding her?

Justin, with these extra differences that are very important and crucial in evidencing whether a person is saved and heaven bound, it is just too much to deal with first, on this Blog, and secondly, just you and I period. I just encourage you to read God's word regarding these matters (including what I gave you regarding worshipping on Sunday. You're still in error regarding the 'shadow.' It was written to the Colossians and Hebrews of that day, and refers to the O.T issues mentioned being a shadow until Christ's first coming, not now until Christ's second coming and eternity)and the Scriptures I have shared with you. Jesus is God and all-knowing, and salvation is only by grace through faith alone in Christ alone. Those who are not born from above and have this faith by grace will spend an eternity in conscious punishment described as the Lake of Fire.

May God be pleased to open your eyes to these very important and fundamental biblical truths, as He has for me and many others. Thanks!
Anonymous said…
Hello all,
I had not made my Blog rounds soon enough to catch this thread while it was in progress. However, here are some thoughts as it seems to wind down.
First, I believe that if nothing else we have seen a sufficient sampling of both sides of the discussion regarding the Sabbath issue. This is neither the first nor the last time that this topic will be discussed, and it seems fair to say that while neither side has been able to give a full defense of his position (blog space being limited), a fair, representative sampling of the arguments has been presented. For that, we thank both Bret and Justin.

While I will not waste time rehashing the previous discussions, I would like to point out a couple of things.

1). I am admittedly not studied up on SDA doctrines, but the position placing so much weight on the Ten Commandments appears to be a bit inconsistent. Let me explain… It appears that Justin is stating that when Jesus came to fulfill the Law, that (contrary to the points that Bret made) it did not materially change the requirements given in what we call The Ten Commandments for believers who are now under grace. It also seems that Justin would minimize the relationship between the Ten Commandments and Jewish ceremonial law elsewhere in the OT. (Justin, if I misunderstand your points here, it is not on purpose. Sometimes it is hard to follow arguments in a blog post.) However, aside from the biblical argumentation that Bret provided, this is an inconsistent point to make. If you are going to claim that in fulfilling the law, Christ did not change (for lack of a better word) the requirements of the Sabbath listed in the Ten Commandments, then you CANNOT separate the definition of “remembering the Sabbath” to anything other then what it was understood as by the Hebrews at that time. That is to say, based on Justin’s posts, the Sabbath is primarily “a day to worship Him and RELAX.” I do not doubt that Justin’s view of the Sabbath is more comprehensive then that, but I imagine that the above definition is fairly accurate for a simple summary. But that is NOT what the Jews would have thought of when they were told to “remember the Sabbath”. Below is a list of some, but by no means all, things that are included in the definition of Remembering the Sabbath:

14 " 'Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you. Anyone who desecrates it must be put to death; whoever does any work on that day must be cut off from his people. 15 For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death. (Exodus 31:14-15)
--Notice that “remembering the Sabbath,” by definition, includes putting those to death who work on the seventh day.

"3 Do not light a fire in any of your dwellings on the Sabbath day." (Exodus 35:3)
--Notice that “remembering the Sabbath,” by definition, includes not making a fire in your home on the Sabbath. Those of us with fireplaces and candles would fall short on this one.

10 "For six years you are to sow your fields and harvest the crops, 11 but during the seventh year let the land lie unplowed and unused. Then the poor among your people may get food from it, and the wild animals may eat what they leave. Do the same with your vineyard and your olive grove.
12 "Six days do your work, but on the seventh day do not work, so that your ox and your donkey may rest and the slave born in your household, and the alien as well, may be refreshed. (Exodus 23:10)
--Notice that in this explanation of what it is to “remember the Sabbath,” you are to include your land and resources every seventh year. To truly “remember the Sabbath” today the way that the law intended in the Old Testament, a business owner would have to give all of his profits every seventh year to the poor.

These examples are just to show that if you are going to hold that Bret is wrong in all of the reasoning he gave, both biblically and logically, then you CANNOT use your own definition of what it means to remember the Sabbath. You must use God’s definition. One could try and deny this, but it is apparent that the Jews back then fully understood and believed this. After all, in Numbers 15:32-36 you will see them stoning a man to death for gathering sticks on the Sabbath. Notice that in Exodus 20, the only item that is listed as expounding upon what it is to “remember the Sabbath” is to not “labor and do all your work.” By adding the day Christians worship to the definition of “remembering the Sabbath” one must already admit that what is in the Ten Commandments regarding the Sabbath is NOT all-inclusive of how God defines the Sabbath. Therefore, it is inconsistent to “add” the day we worship to the definition of “remembering the Sabbath” and not also add every letter of the Jewish law that actually defines what the Sabbath is. When God gives us a term and then defines it throughout the entire Old Testament, we cannot just use the parts of the definition that we like the most. We have to take it all or leave it all.

My second point is concerning the Colossians chapter 2 passages. I will set aside the discussion of the meaning of “shadow” for all those who wish to review all of the posts above between Bret and Justin. I would just like to posit the idea that when the Apostle Paul wrote that chapter was for a REASON. He was not addressing other wholly unrelated topics and then decided to mention the Sabbath in verse 16 as an after-thought. It is reasonable to assume that Paul had heard arguments or received questions from those whom he knew would be reading his letter. Think of it… Somebody in the church believes that when Jesus came He fulfilled the requirements of the letter of the law regarding the Sabbath. Perhaps this person was a new Christian and was meeting with the other early Christians on Sunday. Then one of the Jewish Christians (who we know from other letters had a hard time letting go of aspects of the Jewish ceremonial law after Christ came; such as circumcision) started telling the early Christians that they were wrong and that they would be judged if they continued to worship on Sunday. How appropriate is Paul’s reply when he says in Colossians 2:16, “Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.” I don’t think that Paul’s words could have any more relevance then if he was to post a comment directly himself as a part of this blog (I’m not sure what internet connect speed they can get in Heaven… better then mine, I’m certain…). Plus, if you read ALL of chapter 2, there is not any way for an unbiased observer to make a case for the “requirements” of keeping the Sabbath on Saturday. The language in that chapter dealing with circumcision and tradition makes it clear that that chapter is directly relevant to the topic at hand. I would like to close this point by quoting verses 13 and 14, to make my point further and to show what the context was that the Sabbath was mentioned in. Paul makes his point in no uncertain terms (pay close attention to verse 14):

“13When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross."

My final point has no real relevance to the other two. I would just like to observe that I find it interesting that a “discussion” about observing the Sabbath would come up as the result of a post from Bret regarding the nature of two different classifications of religious systems: those that are by works and those that are by grace alone through faith alone. While Justin has stated that he does not believe one needs to observe the Sabbath on Saturday to be saved (and I believe him), it appears that many of those in the SDA church DO believe that. It seems that there could have been no better way to illustrate the point of Bret’s original post then to watch the discussion that followed.

In Him,
Tyson
Justin C. said…
Let me start with thus first. Here is my belief on the matter. I should have been more specific. SDA's believe in something called the trinity. Otherwise known as God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, and God the Father. Here is the text that shows that God was in heaven while Jesus was down here:

Matthew 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

You may say, well that was the Holy Spirit. Nope, it could not have been. Here is how Luke puts it:

Luke 3:22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

So the Son was on Earth, the Holy Spirit descended in the from of a dove, And the Father was up in heaven. We know this because the voice said, "Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased."
The voice said son, which means that the voice was the father. And who is the father? God. So I hope I have cleared up that matter. You are right. There is know way to heaven except through Christ and faith. But, does that mean we are to forget the ten commandments? I think not. I am not saying that works get you to heaven. But again, you are judged on how you lived your life. As a christian, our actions reflect Christ. If we do not keep the ten commandments and follows the bible, then our actions will be a poor example of Christ. In your text:
Jn.1:48-49 Nathanael said to Him, "How do You know me?" Jesus answered and said to him, "Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you." Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel."
It says, "You are the Son of God".
So from that text, we can see that it supports the trinity claim. Jesus may have known everything, but you do not have texts that support that. Neither do you have a text that supports the fact that Jesus knew the church would turn to Sun. as sabbath. I actually do ont believe in an eternal lake of fire and eternal punishment. And as for Ellen White, I do agree with her. The only reason is because unlike the other prophets, she is in harmony with the bible. You are right Tyson, much has been said on this issues. Again, I agree with Bret, in the fact that this issue may just be to big to discuss on a blog, and with just two debaters. I have found great pleasure in debating with you and sharing my beliefs. I am sure you feel the same way. I shall continue to read and comment oin your blog and hope that we may again debate on another subject. I will take your advice and will continue to search the scriptures. But I also implore you to go to sabbathtruth.com if you have not already. I consider this case closed. God bless to all,
-CT(Justin)
Pester Brat said…
Tyson: Right on with your points. I appreciate an extra head (and fingers). We can't just take certain parts of that which relates to the Sabbath, I'm sure many Christian business people would like the six/seven year set up that God had in the O.T. :-). The church doesn't continue circumcision for the reasons God gave in the O.T as well. Are commandments any less valid or important of they are not one of the 10, and are one of the other 603? Of course not. Thank Tyson!

Justin: I appreciate how you conduct yourself on the Blog. I hope that you will re-read your posts closely to see how I came to some of the conclusions I did :-).

I gald you agree that salvation is by grace through faith. But that applies whether someone heard the gospel or not. The word of God has a myriad of verses of Scripture showing the sovereignty, omnipresence, omnipotence, and omniscience of God. With that, god will always maske sure that someone who is meant to be saved, will hear the gospel from somebody. In closing though, Rom. 1 & 2 clerly show us that creation and conscience make everyone without excuse. To God Be The Glory! Bret
Justin C. said…
No problem Bret. I await your next post:)

Popular posts from this blog

Issues I Have Been Associated With Recently

The King James Only Controversy : I have been in 3 churches since the Lord was pleased to save me, the last 2 of them as a pastor. The first church was when I was not a pastor, but did teach Sunday School, and preached occasionally. It was a church that used the KJV of the bible, but neither I or the pastor was hardcore KJV Only. The second church was the first church I pastored. For the sake of some long time members in that small church, I used the King James version for sermons, but after I was there a year or two, I began using the NKJV for Scripture Readings. My third church, which is the one I'm pastoring now in Idaho, does not use the KJV. We offically use the NASB for our sermons, and the ESV many times when quoting other scriptures. I know some of my long time Christian friends from Maryland are KJV Only. I am not. I think it is an issue that we can agree to disagree on, but it seems there may be some that cannot. In the not so distant future, I'll post on the Blog why

Christian Discussions and Chem-Trails

What a title, huh? I just didn't want to post these separately :-). This morning as we were sending off our daughter, son-in-law, and grandchildren, there was a Chem-Trail right over us in the sky. Have you heard of Chem-Trails? They are chemicals being put in the sky to supposedly help with so called global warming  :-). Sadly, too many people still think this is a conspiracy theory. For those that do, I recommend you just put that in a search engine and see what comes up and just start reading. They come from the exhaust of commercial airliners, but they are not the same as "contrails." Contrails dissipate and follow the plane. Chem-trails stick around. They have certain chemicals in them (Aluminum and Barium are two of them if I recall correctly) and they just add to the list of toxins that our bodies absorb and endanger our health. If more people would pay attention and communicate with our elected officials at all levels perhaps, we could put a stop to this Lord will

Are Arminian Baptists Legitimate Biblical Churches?

With all the discussion going on about whether Presbyterians are biblical churches because of infant baptism, I would like to ask if we believe that Arminian Baptist churches are legitimate churches? If a Baptist Church, regardless of their affiliation if any, believes in a universal, insufficient atonement by Christ, issuch Baptist Church really a biblical church? And if so, how can we say that it is when it involves the very heart of the gospel in the atonement. Further, how can we say that those Presbyterian churches that believe in a particular, sufficient atonement yet infant baptism are not biblical, yet those that believe in a universal, insufficient atonement yet believers baptism by immersion are biblical churches. Inquiring mind wants to know ;- ). Thanks..... P.S. Still Baptist and thank the Lord for it!