Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uupsi!njin!paul.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: jclark@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (John Clark) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: The Sabbath ! Message-ID: Date: 3 Jun 91 06:59:04 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of California, San Diego Lines: 50 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article James.Quilty@comp.vuw.ac.nz writes: + I believe (as a matter of logic and my studies of SDA doctrine) that if there +is a 'correct' day, then those that do not keep it are not really following +God. Those that do not follow God properly out of ignorance might be spared +(under SDA doctrine) but those who hear the 'sabbath message' and reject it +(decide that you don't need to keep sabbaths, food laws, etc !) are +condemned by God and lose salvation ! But in a sense isn't this the standard line of main stream Christianity and 'hearing the message'. It always seemed to me like the court process server, he runs up and says in a loud voice "I have court documents for you!", drops them and runs. The court will now believe you have been served notce and procede accordingly. +As Ellen G White wrote: "Those who desire the seal of God in their forehead + must keep the sabbath of the fourth commandment." This is also involved with deliniating those who have the 'mark of the beast' and practice sunday worship, since the 'beast' changed 'sabbath keeping to sunday keeping. And we all know who did that, why the Catholics. As pointed out a few posts ago the practice of sunday observance was well before anything that vaguely resembled the Catholic(Roman in particular) church was formed (I have heard some say that it wasn't until the Council of Trent that an actual 'Catholic' church was formed). + + That's the whole point, really, the SDA sabbath doctrine is inconsistent with +the Bible, and salvation by faith alone, and is derived from Ellen White's +writings, rather than from a study of the Bible. But then even a few more posts back were not some saying that after faith, then came better understanding of what the Diety desired in terms of 'moral' conduct and hence the prohibitions against various practices? Why chastize the SDA's for their 'reveled' desires of the Diety and leave other practices un-criticized. As for the 'derived from so-and-so's writings....' argument, I would like to see an experiement where a person who has no other 'aid' than the Bible, not even a preacher or missionary, is given the book and comes to the same conclusion most Christians seem to think is obvious, i.e. that the Bible is the word of the Diety. Or you have all come to your knowledge of the book via some person or some person's writings. -- John Clark jclark@ucsd.edu