THE SABBATH, THE NEW COVENANT, AND THE GOSPEL

The popular evangelical attack on Seventh-day Adventist teachings relative to the Sabbath, the law, divine grace, the new covenant, and salvation continues to inflict casualties on vulnerable church members, even pastors, within our denomination.  Very recently a young pastor, following dialogue with Conference administrators in the territory where he was employed, abandoned his ministry because he no longer accepts his church’s beliefs regarding Sabbath, Sunday, the seal of God, and the mark of the beast [1].

While heartbroken as we must be at anyone’s rejection of the Bible-based teachings of our faith, especially by one entrusted with the guardianship of the Lord’s flock, we can at least admire his honesty.  From all the present writer has witnessed in the church over the decades of his life and ministry, I have good reason to believe many other denominational workers, at least in the developed world, hold views similar if not identical to this ex-pastor’s, but lack the integrity to follow his example and acknowledge the incompatibility of their convictions with occupying the sacred desk.

Our website is publishing two articles this week in response to this ex-pastor’s beliefs, on account of the central importance of the Sabbath/Sunday issue relative to end-time events and the closing of the great controversy between good and evil.  It is imperative that Seventh-day Adventists establish firmly in their minds the Biblical basis of their church’s position on this and related issues. 

Attacks on distinctive Adventist teachings—whether by non-, ex-, or current church members—usually follow the same pattern.  The premise of these attacks assumes that the disputed beliefs are based on the writings of Ellen White rather than the Bible.  Especially is this assumption ubiquitous in the continuing attacks by certain ones on Adventist eschatology, in particular the investigative judgment beginning in 1844, Last Generation Theology, and issues relative to the final crisis of earth’s history. 

The former pastor in question, like so many others, raises issues along the above lines, specifically with regard to the nature of the gospel, the definition of the new covenant, the binding claims of the seventh-day Sabbath, and the role of the Sabbath in the final stages of the great controversy [2].

The Basic Problem

But the basic shortcoming of this former pastor’s argument is his scanty use of the Biblical evidence relative to the issues in question.  Without exception, professedly Biblical arguments against Adventism take this form.  They allege conflict between one or another Adventist doctrine and the Bible, yet closer scrutiny reveals that only a small portion of the Bible has been consulted in making the case against the Adventist position.

 Seventh-day Adventist theology is based on the Biblical consensus.  We are not Old Testament Christians, New Testament Christians, Pauline Christians, Johannine Christians, or anything but strictly Biblical Christians.  Every doctrine we hold as a people takes the witness of the entire Bible into account before a conclusion is reached. 

The writings of Ellen White take this same approach to Scripture.  It is likely fair to say no Christian author in two thousand years of church history has crafted a theological system so consistently rooted in the Biblical consensus as Ellen G. White.  All one needs to do is check the Scripture Index in her standard works, such as the Conflict of the Ages series or such books as Christ’s Object Lessons, Thoughts from the Mount of Blessing, and Education.  The proportionate use of Bible passages is frankly unprecedented when compared with just about any other writer during the Christian centuries.  Not only in her standard works noted above, but throughout her writings one observes this pattern in the use of Biblical themes and content.

Whenever Adventists lose their primary focus on Scripture, together with the writings of Ellen White and their comprehensive reliance on Scripture, whenever uninspired authors (inside or outside the church) begin to dilute the worldview and affect the spiritual journey of Adventists, the authority of Scripture is compromised.  A few Bible verses (mostly from the New Testament) are quoted, but the collective witness of Scripture and its reflection in the core doctrines of Seventh-day Adventism is lost. 

This is the basic problem with allegedly Biblical objections to the Seventh-day Adventist faith, and it is the basic problem with the views expressed by the former pastor in question.

The Gospel

The former pastor defines the gospel through the following verses [##3|The Bible verses quoted by the former pastor in his statement of belief are all from the English Standard Version (ESV). By contrast, the verses quoted by the present writer are from the King James Version (KJV).##]:

            What is the Gospel (Greek: euangelion) or “good news”?

“The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29).

“Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.  For as by the one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous” (Rom. 5:18-19).

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16).

“But God shows His love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8).

“For by grace you have been saved through faith.  And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no man may boast” (Eph. 2:8-9) [4].

Toward the end of his statement of belief, the former pastor cites the following passage from Galatians:

“I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel, not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.  But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.  As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed” (Gal. 1:6-9).

Then he writes:

The Seventh-day Adventist interpretation (based on Ellen White’s writings) of the seal of God and the role of the Sabbath compromises the Gospel of Christ.  I am afraid that Paul in the book of Galatians was not merely writing to the church in Galatia, but also writing to the Seventh-day Adventist theological structure.  Within the Seventh-day Adventist denomination, Sabbath-keeping has become a type of “circumcision” that is required for salvation in the end-time context.  This puts all preachers and receivers of this theology at risk of being cursed according to Paul [5].

Unfortunately for his case, the former pastor fails to consider any number of New Testament passages which define in greater depth the meaning of the gospel and the conditions of salvation.  Moreover, he fails to explain how the verses he cites which affirm the New Testament gospel (e.g. John 1:29; 3:16; Rom. 5:8,18-19; Eph. 2:8-9) somehow annul the imperative of Sabbath-keeping or the observance of any other of God’s commandments.  The Lamb of God indeed takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29)—but what, according to the Bible, is sin?  The apostle John tells us: “Sin is the transgression of the law” (I John 3:4).  The mission of Jesus when coming to this world is defined in the Gospel of Matthew, when the angel Gabriel said to Joseph: “Thou shalt call His name Jesus, for He shall save His people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21).

The former pastor in the above statement would have us believe that Sabbath observance is a type of circumcision, presumably no longer required for salvation [6].  Yet the apostle Paul writes in First Corinthians: “Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God” (I Cor. 7:19).  In other words, just as Paul draws a contrast elsewhere between the now-obsolete requirement of circumcision and the imperative of faith working by love (Gal. 5:6) and that of becoming a new creature (Gal. 6:15), he likewise draws a contrast between the obsolescence of circumcision and the imperative of keeping God’s commandments (I Cor. 7:19).  And when Paul speaks elsewhere in his writings of God’s commandments, he clearly has the Ten Commandments (the Decalogue) in focus (see Rom. 7:7-13). 

At the beginning of His ministry, speaking in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus identified the preaching of the gospel with spiritual healing and deliverance from the bondage of sin (Luke 4:18).  Again we are reminded of the angel’s statement to Joseph that Jesus was to “save His people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21), and how the apostle John declares sin to be “the transgression of the law” (I John 3:4).  The apostle Paul writes in another passage:

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek (Rom. 1:16).

Power unto salvation from what?  Again, from the lordship of sin (Rom. 6:14), making possible the fulfillment of the righteousness of the law in the hearts and lives of believers (Rom. 8:4).

And when we turn to the book of Revelation, the first angel of chapter 14 is described as preaching “the everlasting gospel” (verse 6).  And what in fact is this gospel, in this context?

Fear God, and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment is come, and worship Him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters (verse 7).

We will return to Revelation 14 in our discussion of the Sabbath question.  But for now it should be clear that the New Testament gospel includes power for deliverance from sin (Luke 4:18; Rom. 1:16)—sin being identified elsewhere as “the transgression of the law” (I John 3:4)—together with a summons to fear God and give Him glory in preparation for divine judgment (Rev. 14:6-7).  Elsewhere in Scripture the glory of God is identified with God’s character (Ex. 33:18-19; 34:6-7; Rom. 3:23; Eph. 3:16-21)—which means that to give God glory, as commanded in Revelation (Rev. 16:7), is to reveal His character to the world and to the universe (Isa. 60:1-2; Rom. 8:18-19; Eph. 3:16-21; Phil. 1:11).

Far from promoting “another gospel” (Gal. 1:6-9), as the former pastor claims, the gospel as taught by classic Seventh-day Adventism reflects the collective witness of Scripture as to what the message of the gospel in fact is.

 The Law and the New Covenant

The ex-pastor in question seems not to realize that the new covenant described in the Bible doesn’t originate in the New Testament.  Most are likely familiar with the passage in Jeremiah where the new covenant is first identified by name—a passage quoted verbatim in the New Testament book of Hebrews (Heb. 8:8-10):

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which My covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord.

But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel: After those days, saith the Lord, I will put My law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be My people (Jer. 31:31-33).

In fact, God’s promise to write His law in the hearts of His people goes all the way back to Moses, who declared in Deuteronomy: “But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it” (Deut. 30:14)—a passage which, like the one in Jeremiah, is repeated in the New Testament (Rom. 10:8).  David describes this promise in the 119th Psalm, where he writes, “Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against Thee” (verse 11).

The former pastor cites verses from Paul’s writings which speak of the law being the minister of death (II Cor. 3:5-11), where it is stated that the new covenant is “not of the letter, but of the Spirit.  For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life” (verse 6) [7].  But why, according to the same author, does the letter of the law kill?  Because “by the law is the knowledge of sin” (Rom. 3:20); because “the law is our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith” (Gal. 3:24).  Elsewhere he writes: “For I was alive without the law once, but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died” (Rom. 7:9).

The law, by convicting us of sin, slays our pride, and exposes our need for a Savior.  But this doesn’t release the Christian from the law’s authority, for indeed, the apostle states that those “free from the law of sin and death” (Rom. 8:2) are placed in the position where “the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit” (verse 4).  Such persons are no longer under the law’s condemnation (Rom. 6:14; 7:6; Gal. 5:18), but they remain under its authority (Rom. 3:31; 6:15; 8:4).  This is why, immediately after Paul declares that the Christian is “not under the law, but under grace” (Rom. 6:14), he asks:

 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace?  God forbid (verse 15).

When Paul states elsewhere that “if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law” (Gal. 5:18), and goes on to say, after listing the fruits of the Spirit (verses 22-23), “against such there is no law” (verse 23), he is simply saying that those led by the Spirit will be obedient to the law, which is why he states elsewhere that “the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit” (Rom. 8:4).  Such persons, while still under the law’s authority (Rom. 3:31; 6:15), have been released from its condemnation, because the law no longer condemns their course of action.

Put simply, the new covenant makes obedience to the law possible, not unnecessary.  This is why Moses declared to the Israelites on the eve of their entrance into Canaan, that “the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it” (Deut. 30:14; see also Rom. 10:8).

The former pastor, after citing Revelation 12:17 and 14:12, regarding the faithful remnant and their adherence to “the commandments of God” [8], offers the following definition of these commandments:

We must allow John, the author of the book of Revelation, to define “commandments of God” within the New Covenant context.  In another letter he authored he writes: “And whatever we ask we receive from Him, because we keep His commandments and do what pleases Him.  And this is His commandment, that we believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ and love one another, just as He has commanded us.  Whoever keeps His commandments abides in God, and God in him.  And by this we know that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us” (I John 3:22-24).  The two commandments explicitly stated by John are:

            1.  Believe in the name of Jesus.

            2.  Love one another [9].

But again, it is imperative that we allow the full witness of Scripture to define the content of God’s commandments.  The Bible doesn’t simply command us to believe in Jesus and to love one another; indeed, the apostle James warns us that “the devils also believe, and tremble” (James 2:19).  And Jesus explains as follows what it means to love God as well as one another:

Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

            This is the first and great commandment.

            And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

            On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets (Matt. 22:37-40).

 Notice that Jesus doesn’t say these two commandments replace the law and the prophets.  Rather, they are the embodiment thereof.  The first four of the Ten Commandments (including the Fourth) depict the essence of love to God, while the last six depict our love for one another.  And when we include Jesus’ description of the conditions for gaining salvation (Matt. 19:16-17) and the apostle James’ statement that if we break one of the Ten Commandments we have broken them all (James 2:10-12)—in particular his exhortation that these commandments will be God’s standard of judgment in the final day of reckoning (verse 12)—it becomes clear that other New Testament exhortations to commandment-keeping (e.g. Rev. 12:17; 14:12) include the entire Decalogue (Ex. 20:3-17).

The Sabbath

The ex-pastor in question, speaking of the fruits of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22-23), writes:

These fruit fulfill the commandments explicitly expressed in the New Testament which are binding for New Covenant believers in Christ [10].

The implication of the above statement is that not all Ten Commandments are in fact binding on new covenant believers.  But as we noted above, it is always best to consult the totality of Scripture relative to commandment-keeping or any other issue.  The epistle of James, very much a New Testament writing, explicitly identifies the Ten Commandments as the standard by which believers will eventually be judged:

            For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

For He that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill.  Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.

So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty (James 2:10-12).

When the rich young ruler asked Jesus, “What good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?” (Matt. 19:16), Jesus replied, “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments” (verse 17).  When the young man asked, “Which?” (verse 18), Jesus answered:

Thou shalt do no murder.  Thou shalt not commit adultery.  Thou shalt not steal.  Thou shalt not bear false witness.

Honor thy father and thy mother, and thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself (verses 18-19).

While the Sabbath commandment is not explicitly named in either the above statement by Jesus or the previous passage from James, the statement by the latter that “whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all” (James 2:10) makes it clear that all Ten Commandments are still binding on the Christian, and that these commandments will function as the measure of character in God’s final judgment (verse 12). 

It is truly sad to read the testimony of a now-former Adventist pastor, trained at our SDA Theological Seminary and perhaps elsewhere, repeating supposedly Biblical but long-disproved allegations against the binding claims of the Sabbath.  The ex-pastor in question writes as follows:

In Paul’s epistles, he continually addressed controversies within the church caused by those who come from a Jewish/Old Covenant background:

“Therefore let no one pass judgment on you on questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a sabbath” (Col. 2:16).

“One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike.  Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind” (Rom. 14:5) [11].

The raising of issues like these illustrates the importance of constantly reinforcing the faith of God’s people—including pastors—in our distinctive teachings, answering common objections repetitively, and never permitting established truths (what in the legal profession are called “settled law”) to be taken for granted.

Colossians 2:16 is best understood both in its immediate context and in light of the use of similar language in other verses, both in the Old and New Testaments.  Let’s begin with verse 14 and continue through verse 17:

Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to His cross.

And having spoiled principalities and powers, He made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

Which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ.

The last verse is the key relative to the Sabbath issue: “Which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ” (verse 17).  This verse is a clear reference to the seven yearly holy days in Old Testament Israel, also called sabbaths (Lev. 23:24), which were in addition to or “beside the sabbaths of the Lord” (verse 38).  These annual sabbaths, which involved the offering of blood sacrifices and other rituals, pointed forward to the first advent of Jesus, which is why Paul describes them as “a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ” (Col. 2:17).

In two other passages Paul uses the same language as in Colossians to describe the law of sacrifices and ordinances which ended at the cross:

For the law being a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect (Heb. 10:1).

Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands,

That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenant of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ,

For He is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

Having abolished in His flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances, for to make in Himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

And that He might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby (Eph. 2:11-16).

These “commandments contained in ordinances” all foreshadowed the cross and ended at the cross.  But God’s seventh-day Sabbath was made before sin entered (Gen. 2:1-3; Ex. 20:11; 31:17), and therefore could foreshadow nothing about deliverance from sin, as no sin existed on earth at the time the Sabbath was made. 

Back in 1981, when ex-Adventist Robert Brinsmead launched his own attack on the Sabbath, he tried to refute the Biblical evidence that the seventh-day Sabbath could not be among the sabbaths declared by Paul to be obsolete in Colossians 2:16.  In Brinsmead’s words:

It has been argued that since Paul calls the Sabbath of Colossians 2:16 “a shadow of the things that were to come,” he could not be referring to the Sabbath of the Decalogue.  But Colossians 1:16 has already declared that all things were made by Christ and exist for His sake.  Adam himself was “a pattern of the One to come” (Rom. 5:14) [##12|Robert D. Brinsmead, “Colossians 2:16,” Verdict, June 1981, p. 29.##].

But what the above statement fails to consider is that Adam pre-figured Christ only because Adam sinned.  Had Adam not sinned, Christ wouldn’t have needed to come as humanity’s Savior.  The Sabbath, by contrast, was established before the entrance of sin; thus it can’t be included among those observances which foreshadowed the coming of Christ and the deliverance from sin thus offered.

The seventh-day Sabbath is a memorial, not a shadow, calling our focus back to a sinless world (Gen. 2:1-3; Ex. 20:11; 31:17).  This marker in time will in fact forever memorialize God’s original and perfect creation of this world (Isa. 66:23), in the “new heavens and the new earth, which [God] will make” (verse 22).

The context of Colossians 2:16 makes it clear that the Jewish ceremonial law, not the law of Ten Commandments, is being referred to.  In verses 11-13 Paul states that the circumcision God requires of Christians is not the physical circumcision required by Judaism, but “a circumcision made without hands” (verse 11)—that is, the new birth experience (see Gal. 6:15).  Then Paul speaks of “the handwriting of ordinances” which was nailed to the cross (verse 14).

The reference in Colossians 2:14 to “the handwriting of ordinances that was against us” hearkens back to an Old Testament verse which specifically describes the ceremonial law.  In this verse God commands Moses:

Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee (Deut. 31:26).

Elsewhere we read of how the “testimony”—that is, the Ten Commandments written on tables of stone—were placed within the ark of the covenant (Ex. 40:20), in contrast with the book of the law containing the ceremonial rituals pointing forward to the Messiah, which was placed “in the side of the ark” for a witness against Israel (Deut. 31:26).  Thus, when Paul in Colossians 2 speaks of “the handwriting of ordinances that was against us” (verse 140, he is using the language of Deuteronomy to describe that portion of the divine law which ended with Jesus’ death.

Moreover, the sabbaths described in Colossians 2 are associated with food and drink (verse 16).  The weekly Sabbath had no special requirements regarding food and drink, but the annual sabbaths did.  These requirements were also a shadow of things to come, pointing forward to the broken body and spilt blood of the Savior (John 6:50-56).  Leviticus 23 clearly indicates the connection between the annual sabbaths and offerings of food and drink (Lev. 23:13,17,18,37).

The former pastor cites Romans 14:5—which speaks of how “one man esteemeth one day above another, another esteemeth every day alike”—as likewise placing in doubt the Biblical requirement for Sabbath observance [13].  The language in this verse is very similar to that in Colossians 2, with the references in context to holy days, food, and drink (Rom. 14:2,36,14,15,17,23).  But as in Colossians, the seventh-day Sabbath is not the focus of this discussion.  The issue here is the yearly Jewish holy days, foods proper or improper to eat on those days, and the obsolescence of these rules after Calvary.  Again, the passage in question is focused on the Jewish ceremonial law, not the moral law of Ten Commandments.

The ex-pastor in question claims the message of Hebrews 4 proves that the seventh-day Sabbath is no longer binding, that the rest into which believers can enter now has nothing to do with the weekly Sabbath, but refers instead to the peace experienced by being justified by faith (Rom. 5:1) [14].  But the message of Hebrews 4 neither annuls nor transcends the weekly Sabbath rest.  It simply uses the Sabbath as a symbol of the rest provided by ceasing from our own works in the saving process as God ceased from His on the original Sabbath (Heb. 4:9-10).  In no way does this illustrative use of the Sabbath abrogate the universal Biblical summons to observe all Ten Commandments, including the Fourth.

Alleged Evidence of Sunday Sacredness

As with the demonstrative error of using the above passages from Colossians and Romans to disprove the imperative of Sabbath-keeping, it is appalling to find a now-former pastor, educated in our schools, finding support in Scripture for the observance of Sunday as a holy day.  Like Sunday advocates for many years, the ex-pastor cites Acts 20:7—which speaks of how “upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them”—as proof of Sunday-keeping by the early church [15].  The only problem is, the book of Acts states elsewhere that the disciples were breaking bread every day (Acts 2:46).  The only reason reference is made to breaking bread on the first day of the week in Acts 20:7 is because the believers were gathered then to hear Paul speak, as he was passing through on his way to Jerusalem. 

The same fact applies to First Corinthians 16:2, also referenced by the former pastor [16], which simply asks the local believers in Corinth to put aside funds for their famine-stricken brethren in Judea (Acts 11:26-30; Rom. 15:26), just as Paul had asked the Galatian believers to do (I Cor. 16:1).  The former pastor claims that “some scholars conclude this [verse] could be pointing to the collecting of offerings while the believers were gathered together” [17].  But this is pure speculation on the ex-pastor’s part, as well as that of the scholars he cites who have alleged this.  In fact, there is no reference in this passage to any gathering of believers on the first day of the week, only to the setting aside of funds on that day so it would be ready when the apostles came to collect it.

To his credit, the ex-pastor acknowledges at one point, regarding the verses in question (Acts 20:7; I Cor. 16:2):

These texts alone do not necessarily support Sunday “observance,” but they do demonstrate that the early church was open to gathering with the believers to worship God, preach the Word and break bread (possibly the Lord’s Supper) together on Sundays [18].

But we’ve already noted from Scripture that the early Christian believers were breaking bread from house to house on a daily basis (Acts 2:46).  There would therefore be nothing special about doing this on the first day of the week.  The unassailable fact from the Biblical record is that while the Bible mentions the first day of the week by name a total of nine times (Gen. 1:5; Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:2,9; Luke 24:1; John 20:1,19; Acts 20:7; I Cor. 16:2), not once is sacred veneration or a command to keep holy ever attached to this day in the inspired Word.  The only memorial of Jesus’ resurrection enjoined for observance in the New Testament is the ordinance of baptism (Rom. 6:3-5).

The former pastor goes on to cite evidence for Sunday veneration from uninspired early Christian sources, stating as follows:

From a strictly historical standpoint, there are countless historical documents and early church fathers (i.e. The Didache 14:1 (70 A.D.); Letter to the Magnesians by Ignatius of Antioch (110 A.D.); First Apology 67 by Justin Martyr (155 A.D.); The Didascalia (225 A.D.), Commentary on John 2:28 by Origen (229 A.D.); Church History 1:4,8; Proof of the Gospel 4:16,186 by Eusebius of Caesarea (312, 319 A.D.), who have documented the early church coming together to worship God on Sundays before Emperor Constantine of Rome made it the official day of worship for the empire in 321 A.D.  Any informed Bible reader must acknowledge history, context and culture to properly interpret Scripture [19].

But aside from the Didache, which was written while many of the apostles were still alive, all the other early Christian documents noted above were written after the Bible, and thus can hardly be cited as representing the “context” of Scripture.  Moreover, none of the authors and documents referenced above are inspired, which means their teachings represent the “commandments of men” forbidden by Jesus as a basis for doctrine (Matt. 15:9).  Paul was clear that in his day “the mystery of iniquity doth already work” (II Thess. 2:7), which means we can’t be surprised that in the decades and centuries that followed, unscriptural compromise was already corrupting the faith and practice of the church. 

Thus, when Ellen White declares—as quoted by the former pastor [20]—that “there is not a word in the Bible showing Sunday to be other than a common working day” [##21|Ellen G. White, Evangelism, p. 235.##], she is standing in full accord with the Biblical witness. 

The ex-pastor claims elsewhere: “The New Testament authors consistently rebuke sin, but nowhere in the New Testament will you find a rebuke or reproof against Sabbath-breaking or Sunday-keeping” [22].  This may be true, but then, despite the frequent lists of sins in both Psalms and Proverbs, together with frequent descriptions of apostasy between Israel’s wilderness wanderings and the Babylonian captivity, no reference can be found to Sabbath-breaking during those centuries either.  Indeed, we find no reference to Sabbath violation during the centuries that elapsed between the man caught gathering sticks on the Sabbath in the wilderness (Num. 15:32-36) till the time and ministry of the late pre-Exilic and post-Exilic prophets (Isa. 56:2; 58:13-14; Jer. 17:11-27; Eze. 22:8; Neh. 13:15-22).  But this silence hardly proves the Sabbath commandment to have been less than authoritative during that time. 

In contrast to the centuries of silence on this issue noted above, we encounter a mere few decades of silence from the New Testament apostles relative to the Sabbath and its obligations.  (Let’s not forget, of course, Jesus’ declaration that “the Sabbath was made for man” (Mark 2:27), a description not found anywhere regarding any of the other Old Testament holy days.)  When an issue is not controversial, it often goes without a mention in the instructive writings of the church, but this hardly means the issue in question is unimportant.  For example, early editions of the Seventh-day Adventist Church Manual say nothing about drug trafficking or homosexual practice as reasons for church discipline, simply because these issues were neither disputed nor noteworthy in Adventist circles until relatively recent times.  But this hardly proves these behaviors to have been acceptable to the church in those earlier days.  They simply weren’t notable issues then.

The Seal and the Mark

The former pastor claims that the seal of God is the Holy Spirit, not the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath [23], and that the mark of the beast represents the works of the flesh identified by the apostle Paul in Galatians 5:19-21 [24].  At one point he cites the description of the angel ascending from the east with the seal of the living God, and the attendant command to the angels holding the winds of strife to continue restraining those winds till the servants of God are sealed in their foreheads (Rev. 7:2-3) [25].

But while it is true that the Holy Spirit is identified in Scripture as the One who seals the believer (Eph. 1:13; 4:30), the Spirit is never identified with the seal itself.  The Holy Spirit is certainly the Sealer, but He is not the seal.  Sadly, the former pastor seems unaware of the Old Testament passages which explicitly identify the seventh-day Sabbath as a sign between God and His people.  The first of these passages is in the book of Exodus:

Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.

It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel for ever; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day He rested, and was refreshed (Ex. 31:16-17).

Some may use the language of these verses as evidence that the Sabbath was meant only for the people of Israel.  But the fact that the basis of Sabbath observance is here declared to be God’s creation of the heavens and the earth and His subsequent rest on the Sabbath, makes plain that physical Israelites aren’t the only ones in focus, as the Israelite nation didn’t even exist till 2,500 years after the Sabbath was instituted as a memorial of creation (Gen. 2:1-3; Ex. 20:11). 

Moreover, even the Old Testament is clear that God’s saving covenant includes the whole world (Gen. 12:3; 22:18; 28:14; II Chron. 16:9; Isa. 56:7), a truth reaffirmed by Jesus when He said that “many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 8:11).  The apostle Paul restates this truth of a spiritual (as opposed to ethnic) covenant when he declares:

But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God (Rom. 2:29).

And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise (Gal. 3:29).

Moreover, the statement in Exodus about the Sabbath being “a perpetual covenant” (Ex. 31:16), calls our attention to the Bible’s description of the new covenant, which in both the Old and New Testaments is declared to be made with “the house of Israel” (Jer. 31:33; Heb. 8:10).  In this covenant, God’s law (which includes the Sabbath commandment) is to be written in the hearts of believers (Jer. 31:33; Heb. 8:10), not as a substitute for obedience to that law, but as the means of obedience (Deut. 30:14; Psalm 119:11).

Hence we read two other passages in Scripture identifying the Sabbath as a sign between God and His people:

Moreover also I gave them My Sabbaths, to be a sign between Me and them, that they may know that I am the Lord that sanctify them. . . .

And hallow My sabbaths, and they shall be a sign between Me and you, that ye may know that I am the Lord your God (Exe. 20:12,20).

When we turn to Revelation 14—in context, God’s last message to the human family—we learn what God expects from men and women in the final moments of sacred history:

And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people.

Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment is come: and worship Him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters (Rev. 14:6-7).

When we continue reading, we find the following declaration by the third angel at the close of his message:

Here is the patience of the saints.  Here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus (verse 12).

The everlasting gospel, in other words, summons the ethnicities and nations of the world to fear God and give Him glory in preparation for the hour of His final judgment (Rev. 14:6-7).  They are likewise admonished to “worship Him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea and the foundations of waters” (verse 7).  Then those who emerge victorious through heaven’s power in the face of this divine scrutiny are depicted as “they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus” (verse 12).

Only one of God’s Ten Commandments acknowledges God as the Creator of heaven and earth, and that is the Fourth (Ex. 20:11).  Much more could be presented on this point from the collective Biblical witness, but it should be clear that any alternative rest day, carrying no higher authority than that of the beast power identified in Revelation 13:1-10,18 (see also Dan. 7:9,25; 8:9-12,23-25), easily qualifies as the mark of the beast.  Ellen White’s eschatology relative to the final choice between the seal of God and the mark of the beast is thus firmly grounded in the Biblical consensus.

The ex-pastor in question, after citing the works of the flesh as listed in Galatians 5:19-21, states:

If resting and worshiping God on Sunday were to become the “Mark of the Beast,” or the “sin of all sins” in the end-time context, I would think it vital to include on this list [26].

But as obedience to all of God’s Ten Commandments is consistently enjoined in both Old and New Testaments, by the Lord Jesus as well as His apostles (Matt. 19:16-17; James 2:10-12), perhaps God didn’t deem it necessary to be more explicit in Revelation as to the nature of the great final test.  The underlying imperative in all religious and moral controversies is found in Isaiah 8:20: “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.”  When the written counsel of God is forever kept in view as the Christian’s transcendent, unerring guide in all things spiritual, there isn’t a pitfall anywhere that won’t be successfully avoided, nor an issue of right and wrong that won’t successfully be identified.

Adventist Eschatology Two Centuries Earlier

On a side note, one contemporary Adventist historian, Nicholas Miller, has documented the deep roots of classic Adventist eschatology relative to the seal of God and the mark of the beast.  After describing the work of Adventist pioneer Joseph Bates on this subject, Miller writes:

In fact, the evidence goes much further back.  In my doctoral research, I found a document much older than Bates’s.  Two hundred years before Bates and Ellen White took up the topic, a Seventh-day Baptist named Thomas Tillam wrote a treatise on the Saturday Sabbath that identified it as having a special role in the issues surrounding the mark of the beast and the seal of God [##27|Nicholas P. Miller, The Reformation and the Remnant: The Reformers Speak to Today’s Church (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press Publishing Assn, 2016), p. 110.##].

Miller goes on to cite Tillam’s tract on this subject, with its very long title [##28|——The Reformation and the Remnant, p. 110.##].  Miller then writes:

Here not only does Tillam indicate that the dispute regarding the Bible Sabbath is of great importance but also that it involves the efforts of the little horn (Daniel 7,8) and is connected with the mark of the beast.  It only gets more interesting as one delves into the book.

            Tillam titled Chapter 1 “The Seventh Day Sabbath Sought Out, and Celebrated, by Saints Obtaining Victory Over the Mark of the Beast.”  He began that chapter with these words: “The first Royal Law that ever Jehovah instituted, and for our Example celebrated, (namely His blessed Seventh-day Sabbath) is in these very last days become the last great controversy between the Saints and the Man of Sin, the Changer of Times and Laws.  Awake ye sleeping Virgins, the fig tree is apparently budded; the signs of His second coming who is The Lord of the Sabbath, are so fairly visible, that although the day and hour be not known, yet doubtless this generation shall crown obedient Saints with everlasting rest [##29|——The Reformation and the Remnant, p. 110.##].

Perhaps most intriguing of all is the following observation by Miller:

Remarkably, [Tillam’s] language prefigures and even parallels in part Adventist eschatology more than two hundred years before it was written.  I know of no evidence that either Joseph Bates or Ellen White had access to Tillam’s works.  Rather, it seems they merely made similar observations at differing times and places based on shared convictions about the Sabbath [##30|——The Reformation and the Remnant, p. 110.##].

Simply put, Thomas Tillam, Joseph Bates, and Ellen White all wrote with the same Biblical evidence in view, at different times and in different places. 

Conclusion: The Basic Problem

The former pastor claims he still keeps the seventh-day Sabbath [31], but insists that its observance is non-salvational [32].  But when we consider the Bible’s clear affirmation of the Ten Commandments as the standard of God’s final judgment (James 2:10-12), that “whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all” (verse 10), one finds it hard to understand how any serious Bible student could label any one of these commandments as unessential to salvation.  Moreover, when one considers the track record of disaffected Adventists who decide that the Sabbath is no longer obligatory, it is probably a fair assumption that this former pastor won’t remain a Sabbath-keeper very long.

We noted earlier this ex-pastor’s claim that Adventism teaches “another gospel” (Gal. 1:6-8) because of its insistence on Sabbath-keeping and its connection to the end-time seal of God [33]. But the message of Revelation 14 in particular should be persuasive as to the content of the “everlasting gospel” (verse 6), the summons of this gospel to “worship Him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea and the fountains of waters” (verse 7), the third angel’s subsequent identification of God’s eschatological saints as “they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus” (verse 12), and the fact that only one of God’s commandments—the Fourth—identifies God as the Creator of heaven and earth (Ex. 20:11; 31:16-17).

But again we return to what we called earlier the “basic problem” with this ex-pastor’s argument: the partial, even scanty use of the relevant Biblical evidence.  Without exception, this is the fundamental problem with nearly every attack against the core doctrines of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.  Adventist theology is rooted in the Biblical consensus; every tenet of our faith draws its arguments from the collective testimony of Holy Writ.  The apostle Paul is clear that “all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (II Tim. 3:16).  This verse, along with others (e.g. Isa. 28:9-10; Matt. 4:4; I Cor. 2:12-14; II Peter 1:20-21), forms the cornerstone of Seventh-day Adventist Bible study.  When, for whatever reason, the spiritual journey of Seventh-day Adventists diverts them from this cornerstone, their faith is compromised, and their fidelity to the Sacred Word soon collapses.

REFERENCES

1.  Stanton Witherspoon, “Sabbath Theology Discussion Leads to New Jersey Conference Pastor Departure,” Spectrum, Oct. 3, 2024 https://spectrummagazine.org/news/adventist-pastor-resigns-over-seal-of-god-mark-of-beast-interpretations/

2.  “New Jersey Pastor Ousted For Denying Our Understanding of The Seal of God and The Mark of the Beast,” Fulcrum7, October 4, 2024 https://www.fulcrum7.com/news/2024/10/4/new-jersey-pastor-ousted-for-denying-egws-interpretation-of-the-seal-of-god-and-the-mark-of-the-beast

3.  The Bible verses quoted by the former pastor in his statement of belief are all from the English Standard Version (ESV).  By contrast, the Bible verses quoted by the present writer are from the King James Version (KJV).

4.  “Christopher Mindanao’s Theological Stance on Seventh-day Adventist Eschatology,” p. 1, quoted in “New Jersey Pastor Ousted For Denying Our Understanding of The Seal of God and The Mark of the Beast,” Fulcrum7, October 4, 2024 https://www.fulcrum7.com/news/2024/10/4/new-jersey-pastor-ousted-for-denying-egws-interpretation-of-the-seal-of-god-and-the-mark-of-the-beast    

5.  Ibid, p. 5.

6.  Ibid, pp. 3,5.

7.  Ibid, p. 1.

8.  Ibid, p. 2.

9.  Ibid.

10.  Ibid.

11.  Ibid, p. 4.

12.  Robert D. Brinsmead, “Colossians 2:16,” Verdict, June 1981, p. 29.

13.  “Christopher Mindanao’s Theological Stance on Seventh-day Adventist Eschatology,” p. 4, quoted in “New Jersey Pastor Ousted For Denying Our Understanding of The Seal of God and The Mark of the Beast,” Fulcrum7, October 4, 2024 https://www.fulcrum7.com/news/2024/10/4/new-jersey-pastor-ousted-for-denying-egws-interpretation-of-the-seal-of-god-and-the-mark-of-the-beast

14.  Ibid, p. 3.

15.  Ibid.

16.  Ibid, pp. 3-4.

17.  Ibid.

18.  Ibid, p. 4.

19.  Ibid.

20.  Ibid, p. 3.

21.  Ellen G. White, Evangelism, p. 235.

22.  “Christopher Mindanao’s Theological Stance on Seventh-day Adventist Eschatology,” p. 4, quoted in “New Jersey Pastor Ousted For Denying Our Understanding of The Seal of God and The Mark of the Beast,” Fulcrum7, October 4, 2024     https://www.fulcrum7.com/news/2024/10/4/new-jersey-pastor-ousted-for-denying-egws-interpretation-of-the-seal-of-god-and-the-mark-of-the-beast

23.  Ibid, p. 1.

24.  Ibid, p. 4.

25.  Ibid, p. 1.

26. Ibid, p. 4.

27.  Nicholas P. Miller, The Reformation and the Remnant: The Reformers Speak to Today’s Church (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press Publishing Assn, 2016), p. 110.

28.  Ibid.

29.  Ibid.

30.  Ibid.

31.  “Christopher Mindanao’s Theological Stance on Seventh-day Adventist Eschatology,” p. 3, quoted in “New Jersey Pastor Ousted For Denying Our Understanding of The Seal of God and The Mark of the Beast,” Fulcrum7, October 4, 2024 https://www.fulcrum7.com/news/2024/10/4/new-jersey-pastor-ousted-for-denying-egws-interpretation-of-the-seal-of-god-and-the-mark-of-the-beast

32.  Ibid.

33.  Ibid, pp. 4-5.

Pastor Kevin Paulson holds a Bachelor’s degree in theology from Pacific Union College, a Master of Arts in systematic theology from Loma Linda University, and a Master of Divinity from the SDA Theological Seminary at Andrews University. He served the Greater New York Conference of Seventh-day Adventists for ten years as a Bible instructor, evangelist, and local pastor. He writes regularly for Liberty magazine and does script writing for various evangelistic ministries within the denomination. He continues to hold evangelistic and revival meetings throughout the North American Division and beyond, and is a sought-after seminar speaker relative to current issues in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. He presently resides in Berrien Springs, Michigan