搜寻结果

All trinity studies Previous Download Next General Info on 1 John 5 7 This is general info on 1 John 5:7. Does 1 John 5:7-8 Have Added Text? Some person or persons in centuries past were so zealous to find support for their belief in the Trinity that they literally added it. There are numerous Scholars in fact that inform us that this passage has a spurious comment which has been added. The textual Scholar Bart Ehrman described this forgery as follows: “…this represents the most obvious instance of a theologically motivated corruption in the entire manuscript tradition of the New Testament.” Thus the scholarly consensus is that this passage is a Latin corruption that found its way into a Greek manuscript at an early date while being absent from the THOUSANDS of other manuscripts. This addition is so famous and hence so well known that it has even been given its own name and is called the “Comma Johanneum.” Comma means a short clause. Modern Bible translations come from two manuscripts called the Codex Sinaiticus, which has more edits than any other manuscript in Biblical history (14800 edits), and the Codex Vaticanus which comes from the Vatican. These two manuscripts do NOT contain the Comma Johanneum and why this added text is not found in modern Bible translations other than the NKJV where it was added only to match the KJV. The King James New Testament on the other hand was compiled from over 5000 copies of copies of the original manuscripts which have long since perished. Now please take careful note that this added text was found in only ONE of the 5000 plus manuscripts. THAT MEANS ADDED! And so there is not one major theologian that does not acknowledge this fact. And yet considering all the irrefutable facts, it is amazing that there are still some who go into denial rather than acknowledge this well-known corruption that is so famous that it has even been given its own name! The English King James Bible translated in 1611 AD retains this Trinitarian forgery, but none of our modern translations have it except the NKJV where it was added to match the KJV. The King James Version reads as follows, “For there are three that bear record IN HEAVEN, THE FATHER, THE WORD, AND THE HOLY GHOST: AND THESE THREE ARE ONE. 8 AND THERE ARE THREE THAT BEAR WITNESS IN EARTH, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” 1 John 5:7-8 Thus the words in CAPS are found in the KJV, NKJV but are missing from almost every other translation. Thomas Nelson and Sons Catholic Commentary, 1951, page 1186 states, “It is now generally held that this passage, called the Gomma Johanneum, is a gloss that crept into the text of the Old Latin and Vulgate at an early date, but found its way into the Greek text only in the 15th and 16th centuries.” Here is how 1 John 5:7-8 reads from the NIV and most other Bible translations. “For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.” Erasmus did not include the infamous Comma Johanneum of 1 John 5:7-8 in either his 1516 or 1519 editions of his Greek New Testament but made its way into his third edition in 1522 because of pressure from the Catholic Church. After his first edition appeared in 1516, there arose such a furor over the absence of the Comma that Erasmus needed to defend himself. He argued that he did not put in the Comma Trinitarian formula because he found no Greek manuscripts that included it. Once one was produced called the Codex 61, that was written by one Roy or Froy at Oxford in c. 1520, he reluctantly agreed to include it in his subsequent editions. Erasmus probably altered the text because of politico-theologico-economic concerns. He did not want his reputation ruined, nor his Novum Instrumentum to go unsold. Thus it passed into the Stephanus Greek New Testament in 1551 (first New Testament in verses), which came to be called the Textus Receptus, and became the basis for the Geneva Bible New Testament in 1557 and the Authorized King James Version in 1611. Note the image of the Codex 61 with the added words underlined in red. “The passage as given in the KJV is in no Greek MS earlier than the 15th and 16th centuries. The disputed words found their way into the KJV by way of the Greek text of Erasmus (see Vol. V, p. 141). It is said that Erasmus offered to include the disputed words in his Greek Testament if he were shown even one Greek MS that contained them. A library in Dublin produced such a MS (known as 34), and Erasmus included the passage in his text. It is now believed that the later editions of the Vulgate acquired the passage by the mistake of a scribe who included an exegetical marginal comment in the Bible text that he was copying. The disputed words have been widely used in support of the doctrine of the Trinity, but, in view of such overwhelming evidence against their authenticity, their support is valueless and should not be used. In spite of their appearance in the Vulgate A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture freely admits regarding these words: “It is now generally held that this passage, called the Comma Johanneum, is a gloss that crept into the text of the Old Latin and Vulgate at an early date, but found its way into the Greek text only in the 15th and 16th centuries” (Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1951, p. 1186).” — (The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 7, p. 675) The Seventh day Adventist Biblical Research Institute also admits this text in 1 John 5:7 is added. So their final conclusion and advice to Seventh day Adventists was “...you should NOT use this text.” So the SDA BRI and the SDA Bible Commentary both acknowledge this text is added and say it should not be used, and yet you constantly see Adventists and their key organizations using this verse anyway. So Seventh day Adventists are not following their own advice. “I saw that God had especially guarded the Bible; yet when copies of it were few, learned men had in some instances changed the words, thinking that they were making it more plain, when in reality they were mystifying that which was plain, by causing it to lean to their established views, which were governed by tradition.” — (E.G. White, EW, 220.2) Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

All trinity studies Previous Download Next Christ Appeared to the Patriachs and Prophets I’m citing a few passage below where the “Almighty” appeared or spoke directly to the patriarchs and the prophets: Gen 35:11 And God said unto him[Jacob], I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins; Gen 48:3 “3 And Jacob said unto Joseph, God Almighty appeared unto me at Luz in the land of Canaan, and blessed me, Exodus 6:1-3 “Then the Lord said unto Moses, Now shalt thou see what I will do to Pharaoh: for with a strong hand shall he let them go, and with a strong hand shall he drive them out of his land. 2 And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the Lord: 3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name Jehovah was I not known to them. Exodus 33:11 “And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.” Exodus 33: 19-23 "And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy. And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live……And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen. The Almighty appearing to the patriarchs are generally understood to mean that the Father appeared to them... And yet, we are told that no one has seen God: John 1:18 “No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. John 5:37 “And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, NOR SEEN HIS SHAPE.” 1 Tim. 6:13-16. “I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things...who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of Kings, and Lord of lords; who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom NO MAN HATH SEEN, NOR CAN SEE; to whom be honor and power everlasting." The way I reconcile these seemingly contradictory statement is that Christ acted in Father's stead as the God of the Old Testament. both Scripture and SOP (if you believe in the writings of Ellen White) make it pretty clear. One thing most people overlook is that the “Almighty” that spoke to Moses on the Mount Sinai actually appeared to him as the “Angel of the Lord.” "Behold, I send an ANGEL before thee, to keep thee in the way, and TO BRING THEE INTO THE PLACE WHICH I HAVE PREPARED. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for HE WILL NOT PARDON YOUR TRANSGRESSIONS: FOR MY NAME IS IN HIM." (Ex. 23:20,21) "And when forty years were expired, there appeared to him in the wilderness of mount Sina an ANGEL OF THE LORD in a flame of fire in a bush. When Moses saw it, he wondered at the sight: and as he drew near to behold it, THE VOICE OF THE LORD came unto him, Saying, I am the God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. Then Moses trembled, and durst not behold." (Acts 7:30-32) "This is he [Moses], that was in the church in the wilderness with the ANGEL which SPAKE TO HIM in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us." (v. 38) [mine] “Christ is the One THROUGH WHOM God has AT ALL TIMES revealed Himself to man. “BUT TO US THERE IS BUT ONE GOD, THE FATHER, of whom are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him.” 1 Corinthians 8:6. “This is he [Moses], that was in the church in the wilderness with the Angel which spake to him in the Mount Sinai, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us.” Acts 7:38. This Angel was the Angel of God’s presence (Isaiah 63:9), THE ANGEL IN WHOM WAS THE NAME OF THE GREAT JEVOHAH (Exodus 23:20-23). THE EXPRESSION CAN REFER TO NO OTHER THAN THE SON OF GOD.” {PP 761.4} “The priest went through the ceremony of his official work. He took the child in his arms, and held it up before the altar. After handing it back to its mother, he inscribed the name “Jesus” on the roll of the first-born. Little did he think, as the babe lay in his arms, that it was the Majesty of heaven, the King of glory. The priest did not think that this babe was the One of whom Moses had written, “A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; Him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever He shall say unto you.” Acts 3:22. HE DID NOT THINK THAT THIS BABE WAS HE WHOSE GLORY MOSES HAD ASKED TO SEE. But One greater than Moses lay in the priest’s arms; and when he enrolled the child’s name, he was enrolling the name of One who was the foundation of the whole Jewish economy. {DA 52.2} Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

Back to Contents Previous Download 看中文 Next Denominational Statements on the Sabbath AMERICAN CONGREGATIONALIST QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH The current notion that Christ and His apostles authoritatively substituted the first day for the seventh, is absolutely without any authority in the New Testament. —Dr. Layman Abbot, in the Christian Union, June 26, 1890. ANGLICAN QUOTES ABOUTTHE SABBATH And where are we told in the Scriptures that we are to keep the first day at all? We are commanded to keep the seventh; but we are nowhere commanded to keep the first day... The reason why we keep the first day of the week holy instead of the seventh is for the same reason that we observe many other things, not because the Bible, but because the Church, has enjoined it. —Isaac Williams, Plain Sermons on the Catechism, pages 334, 336. BAPTIST QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH There was and is a command to keep holy the Sabbath day, but that Sabbath day was not Sunday. It will however be readily said, and with some show of triumph, that the Sabbath was transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week, with all its duties, privileges and sanctions. Earnestly desiring information on this subject, which I have studied for many years, I ask, where can the record of such a transaction be found: Not in the New Testament – absolutely not. There is no scriptural evidence of the change of the Sabbath institution from the seventh to the first day of the week. —Dr. E. T. Hiscox, author of the ‘Baptist Manual’. To me it seems unaccountable that Jesus, during three years' discussion with His disciples, often conversing with them upon the Sabbath question, discussing it in some of its various aspects, freeing it from its false [Jewish traditional] glosses, never alluded to any transference of the day; also, that during the forty days of His resurrection life, no such thing was intimated. Nor, so far as we know, did the Spirit, which was given to bring to their remembrance all things whatsoever that He had said unto them, deal with this question. Nor yet did the inspired apostles, in preaching the gospel, founding churches, counseling and instructing those founded, discuss or approach the subject. Of course I quite well know that Sunday did come into use in early Christian history as a religious day as we learn from the Christian Fathers and other sources. But what a pity that it comes branded with the mark of Paganism, and christened with the name of the sun-god, then adopted and sanctified by the Papal apostasy, and bequeathed as a sacred legacy to Protestantism. —Dr. E. T. Hiscox, report of his sermon at the Baptist Minister's Convention, in 'New York Examiner,' November 16, 1893 The Scriptures nowhere call the first day of the week the Sabbath. . .There is no Scriptural authority for so doing, nor of course, any Scriptural obligation. —The Watchman. We believe that the law of God is the eternal and unchangeable rule of His moral government. —Baptist Church Manual, Art. 12. There was never any formal or authoritative change from the Jewish seventh-day Sabbath to the Christian first-day observance. —WILLIAM OWEN CARVER, The Lord's Day in Our Day, page 49. There is nothing in Scripture that requires us to keep Sunday rather than Saturday as a holy day. —Harold Lindsell (editor), Christianity Today, Nov. 5, 1976 BRETHREN QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH With the views of the law and the Sabbath we once held ... and which are still held by perhaps the great majority of the most earnest Christians, we confess that we could not answer Adventists. What is more, neither before or since have I heard or read what would conclusively answer an Adventist in his Scriptural contention that the Seventh day is the Sabbath (Ex. 20:10). It is not 'one day in seven' as some put it, but 'the seventh day according to the commandment.' —Words of Truth and Grace, p. 281. CATHOLIC QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who observe the day observe a commandment of the Catholic Church. —Priest Brady, in an address, reported in the Elizabeth, NJ ‘News’ on March 18, 1903. Protestants ... accept Sunday rather than Saturday as the day for public worship after the Catholic Church made the change... But the Protestant mind does not seem to realize that ... in observing Sunday, they are accepting the authority of the spokesman for the Church, the pope. —Our Sunday Visitor, February 5th, 1950. Of course these two old quotations are exactly correct. The Catholic Church designated Sunday as the day for corporate worship and gets full credit – or blame – for the change. —This Rock, The Magazine of Catholic Apologetics and Evangelization, p.8, June 1997 Q. Have you any other proofs that they(Protestants) are not guided by the Scripture? A. Yes; so many, that we cannot admit more than a mere specimen into this small work. They reject much that is clearly contained in Scripture, and profess more that is nowhere discoverable in that Divine Book. Q. Give some examples of both? A. They should, if the Scripture were their only rule, wash the feet of one another, according to the command of Christ, in the 13th chap. of St. John; —they should keep, not the Sunday, but the Saturday, according to the commandment, "Remember thou keep holy the SABBATH-day;" for this commandment has not, in Scripture, been changed or abrogated;... —Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 101 Imprimatuer Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept? A. Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; —she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority. —Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174 Q. In what manner can we show a Protestant, that he speaks unreasonably against fasts and abstinences? A. Ask him why he keeps Sunday, and not Saturday, as his day of rest, since he is unwilling either to fast or to abstain. If he reply, that the Scripture orders him to keep the Sunday, but says nothing as to fasting and abstinence, tell him the Scripture speaks of Saturday or the Sabbath, but gives no command anywhere regarding Sunday or the first day of the week. If, then he neglects Saturday as a day of rest and holiness, and substitutes Sunday in its place, and this merely because such was the usage of the ancient Church, should he not, if he wishes to act consistently, observe fasting and abstinence, because the ancient Church so ordained? —Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 181 Question: Which is the Sabbath day? Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day. Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday? Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday. —Rev. Peter Geiermann C.SS .R., The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 50 Q. Must not a sensible Protestant doubt seriously, when he finds that even the Bible is not followed as a rule by his co-religionists? A. Surely, when he sees them baptize infants, abrogate the Jewish Sabbath, and observe Sunday for which [pg. 7] there is no Scriptural authority; when he finds them neglect to wash one another's feet, which is expressly commanded, and eat blood and things strangled, which are expressly prohibited in Scripture. He must doubt, if he think at all. … Q. Should not the Protestant doubt when he finds that he himself holds tradition as a guide? A. Yes, if he would but reflect that he has nothing but Catholic Tradition for keeping the Sunday holy; ... —Controversial Catechism by Stephen Keenan, New Edition, revised by Rev. George Cormack, published in London by Burns & Oates, Limited - New York, Cincinnati, Chicago: Benzinger Brothers, 1896, pages 6, 7. The Church, on the other hand, after changing the day of rest from the Jewish Sabbath, or seventh day of the week, to the first, made the Third Commandment refer to Sunday as the day to be kept holy as the Lord's Day. The Council of Trent (Sess. VI, can. xix) condemns those who deny that the Ten Commandments are binding on Christians. —The Catholic Encyclopedia, Commandments of God, Volume IV, © 1908 by Robert Appleton Company, Online Edition © 1999 by Kevin Knight, Nihil Obstat - Remy Lafort, Censor Imprimatur - +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York, page 153. The [Roman Catholic] Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by right of the divine, infallible authority given to her by her founder, Jesus Christ. The Protestant claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh-day Adventist is the only consistent Protestant. —The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942, p. 4. All of us believe many things in regard to religion that we do not find in the Bible. For example, nowhere in the Bible do we find that Christ or the Apostles ordered that the Sabbath be changed from Saturday to Sunday. We have the commandment of God given to Moses to keep holy the Sabbath Day, that is the 7th day of the week, Saturday. Today most Christians keep Sunday because it has been revealed to us by the Church outside the Bible. —The Catholic Virginian, To Tell You The Truth,” Vol. 22, No. 49 (Oct. 3, 1947). ... you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify. —The Faith of Our Fathers, by James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, 88th edition, page 89. Originally published in 1876, republished and Copyright 1980 by TAN Books and Publishers, Inc., pages 72-73. Deny the authority of the Church and you have no adequate or reasonable explanation or justification for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday in the Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God... The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.' —Catholic Record, September 1, 1923. But since Saturday, not Sunday, is specified in the Bible, isn't it curious that non-Catholics who profess to take their religion directly from the Bible and not the Church, observe Sunday instead of Saturday? Yes, of course, it is inconsistent; but this change was made about fifteen centuries before Protestantism was born, and by that time the custom was universally observed. They have continued the custom, even though it rests upon the authority of the Catholic Church and not upon an explicit text in the Bible. That observance remains as a reminder of the Mother Church from which the non-Catholic sects broke away - like a boy running away from home but still carrying in his pocket a picture of his mother or a lock of her hair. —The Faith of Millions Perhaps the boldest thing, the most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday. "The Day of the Lord" (dies Dominica) was chosen, not from any directions noted in the Scriptures, but from the Church's sense of its own power. The day of resurrection, the day of Pentecost, fifty days later, came on the first day of the week. So this would be the new Sabbath. People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become 7th Day Adventists, and keep Saturday holy. —Sentinel, Pastor's page, Saint Catherine Catholic Church, Algonac, Michigan, May 21, 1995 If Protestants would follow the Bible, they would worship God on the Sabbath Day. In keeping the Sunday they are following a law of the Catholic Church. —Albert Smith, Chancellor of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, replying for the Cardinal, in a letter dated February 10, 1920. The observance of Sunday by the Protestants is homage they pay, in spite of themselves, to the authority of the [Catholic] Church. —Monsignor Louis Segur, ‘Plain Talk about the Protestantism of Today’, p. 213. What Important Question Does the Papacy Ask Protestants? Protestants have repeatedly asked the papacy, "How could you dare to change God's law?" But the question posed to Protestants by the Catholic church is even more penetrating. Here it is officially: You will tell me that Saturday was the Jewish Sabbath, but that the Christian Sabbath has been changed to Sunday. Changed! but by whom? Who has authority to change an express commandment of Almighty God? When God has spoken and said, Thou shalt keep holy the seventh day, who shall dare to say, Nay, thou mayest work and do all manner of worldly business on the seventh day; but thou shalt keep holy the first day in its stead? This is a most important question, which I know not how you can answer. You are a Protestant, and you profess to go by the Bible and the Bible only; and yet in so important a matter as the observance of one day in seven as a holy day, you go against the plain letter of the Bible, and put another day in the place of that day which the Bible has commanded. The command to keep holy the seventh day is one of the ten commandments; you believe that the other nine are still binding; who gave you authority to tamper with the fourth? If you are consistent with your own principles, if you really follow the Bible and the Bible only, you ought to be able to produce some portion of the New Testament in which this fourth commandment is expressly altered. —Library of Christian Doctrine: Why Don't You Keep Holy the Sabbath-Day? (London: Burns and Oates, Ltd.), pp. 3, 4. There is but one church on the face of the earth which has the power, or claims power, to make laws binding on the conscience, binding before God, binding under penalty of hell-fire. For instance, the institution of Sunday. What right has any other church to keep this day? You answer by virtue of the third commandment (the papacy did away with the 2nd regarding the worship of graven images, and called the 4th the 3rd), which says 'Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day.' But Sunday is not the Sabbath. Any schoolboy knows that Sunday is the first day of the week. I have repeatedly offered one thousand dollars to anyone who will prove by the Bible alone that Sunday is the day we are bound to keep, and no one has called for the money. It was the holy Catholic Church that changed the day of rest from Saturday, the seventh day, to Sunday, the first day of the week. —T. Enright, C.S.S.R., in a lecture delivered in 1893. Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act. And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters. —C. F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons, in answer to a letter regarding the change of the Sabbath, November 11, 1895. Tradition, not Scripture, is the rock on which the church of Jesus Christ is built. —Adrien Nampon, Catholic Doctrine as Defined by the Council of Trent, p. 157 The Pope is of so great authority and power that he can modify, explain, or interpret even divine law". The pope can modify divine law, since his power is not of man, but of God, and he acts a vicegerent of God upon earth —Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca, art. Papa, II, Vol. VI, p. 29. The leader of the Catholic church is defined by the faith as the Vicar of Jesus Christ (and is accepted as such by believers). The Pope is considered the man on earth who "takes the place" of the Second Person of the omnipotent God of the Trinity. —John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, p. 3, 1994 ...pastoral intuition suggested to the Church the christianization of the notion of Sunday as "the day of the sun", which was the Roman name for the day and which is retained in some modern languages.(29) This was in order to draw the faithful away from the seduction of cults which worshipped the sun, and to direct the celebration of the day to Christ, humanity's true 'sun'. —John Paul II, Dies Domini, 27. The day of Christ-Light, 1998 (Prominent protestant leaders agree with this statement - See here for a statement by Dr. E. T. Hiscox, author of the ‘Baptist Manual’) The Sun was a foremost god with heathen-dom…The sun has worshippers at this hour in Persia and other lands…. There is, in truth, something royal, kingly about the sun, making it a fit emblem of Jesus, the Sun of Justice. Hence the church in these countries would seem to have said, to 'Keep that old pagan name [Sunday]. It shall remain consecrated, sanctified.' And thus the pagan Sunday, dedicated to Balder, became the Christian Sunday, sacred to Jesus. —William Gildea, Doctor of Divinity, The Catholic World, March, 1894, p. 809 The retention of the old pagan name of Dies Solis, for Sunday is, in a great measure, owing to the union of pagan and Christian sentiment with which the first day of the week was recommended by Constantine to his subjects - pagan and Christian alike - as the 'venerable' day of the sun. —Arthur P. Stanley, History of the Eastern Church, p. 184 When St. Paul repudiated the works of the law, he was not thinking of the Ten Commandments, which are as unchangeable as God Himself is, which God could not change and still remain the infinitely holy God. —Our Sunday Visitor, Oct. 7, I951. Question: How prove you that the Church hath power to command feasts and holydays? Answer: By the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of; and therefore they fondly contradict themselves, by keeping Sunday strictly, and breaking most other feasts commanded by the same Church. —Henry Tuberville, An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine (1833 approbation), p.58 (Same statement in Manual of Christian Doctrine, ed. by Daniel Ferris [1916 ed.], p.67) Some theologians have held that God likewise directly determined the Sunday as the day of worship in the NEW LAW, that he himself has explicitly substituted Sunday for the Sabbath. But this theory is entirely abandoned. It is now commonly held that God simply gave His church the power to set aside whatever day or days she would deem suitable as holy days. The church chose Sunday, the first day of the week, and in the course of time added other days as holy days. —Vincent J. Kelly, Forbidden Sunday and Feast-Day Occupations, Washington, DC, Catholic University of America Press, Studies in Sacred Theology, No. 70.,1943, p. 2. If we consulted the Bible only, we should still have to keep holy the Sabbath Day, that is, Saturday, with the Jews, instead of Sunday; ... —A Course in Religion for Catholic High Schools and Academies, by Rev. John Laux M.A., Benzinger Brothers, 1936 edition, Part 1. Sunday is a Catholic institution, and... can be defended only on Catholic principles.... From beginning to end of Scripture there is not a single passage that warrants the transfer of weekly public worship from the last day of the week to the first. —Catholic Press, Aug. 25, 1900 The Sabbath was Saturday, not Sunday. The Church altered the observance of the Sabbath to the observance of Sunday. Protestants must be rather puzzled by the keeping of Sunday when God distinctly said, 'Keep holy the Sabbath Day.' The word Sunday does not come anywhere in the Bible, so, without knowing it they are obeying the authority of the Catholic Church. —Canon Cafferata, The Catechism Explained, p. 89. Reason and sense demand the acceptance of one or the other of these alternatives: either Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday, or Catholicity and the keeping holy of Sunday. Compromise is impossible. —John Cardinal Gibbons, The Catholic Mirror, December 23, 1893. CHRISTIAN CHURCH QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH I do not believe that the Lord's day came in the room of the Jewish Sabbath, or that the Sabbath was changed from the seventh to the first day, for this plain reason, where there is no testimony, there can be no faith. Now there is no testimony in all the oracles of heaven that the Sabbath is changed, or that the Lord’s Day came in the room of it. —Alexander Campbell, in The Reporter, October 8, 1921 It has reversed the fourth commandment by doing away with the Sabbath of God's Word, and instituting Sunday as a holiday. —Dr. N. Summerbell, History of the Christian Church, Third Edition, p. 415 There is no direct scriptural authority for designating the first day the Lord's day. —Dr. D. H. Lucas, Christian Oracle, Jan. 23, 1890. The first day of the week is commonly called the Sabbath. This is a mistake. The Sabbath of the Bible was the day just preceding the first day of the week. The first day of the week is never called the Sabbath anywhere in the entire Scriptures. It is also an error to talk about the change of the Sabbath. There never was any change of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. There is not in any place in the Bible any intimation of such a change. —First-Day Observance, pp. 17, 19. CHURCH OF CHRIST QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH But we do not find any direct command from God, or instruction from the risen Christ, or admonition from the early apostles, that the first day is to be substituted for the seventh day Sabbath." "Let us be clear on this point. Though to the Christian 'that day, the first day of the week' is the most memorable of all days ... there is no command or warrant in the New Testament for observing it as a holy day. The Roman Church selected the first day of the week in honour of the resurrection of Christ. ... —Bible Standard, May, 1916, Auckland, New Zealand. ... If the fourth command is binding upon us Gentiles by all means keep it. But let those who demand a strict observance of the Sabbath remember that the seventh day is the ONLY sabbath day commanded, and God never repealed that command. If you would keep the Sabbath, keep it; but Sunday is not the Sabbath. The argument of the 'Seventh-day Adventists' is on one point unassailable. It is the Seventh day not the first day that the command refers to. —G. Alridge, Editor, The Bible Standard, April, 1916. There is no direct Scriptural authority for designating the first day the Lord's day. —DR. D. H. LUCAS, Christian Oracle, Jan. 23, 1890. The first day of the week is commonly called the Sabbath. This is a mistake. The Sabbath of the Bible was the day just preceding the first day of the week. The first day of the week is never called the Sabbath anywhere in the entire Scriptures. It is also an error to talk about the change of the Sabbath. There never was any change of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. There is not in any place in the Bible any intimation of such a change. —First-Day Observance, pages 17, 19. It has reversed the fourth commandment by doing away with the Sabbath of God's Word, and instituting Sunday as a holiday. —DR. N. SUMMERBELL, History of the Christian Church, Third Edition, page 4I5. It is clearly proved that the pastors of the churches have struck out one of God's ten words, which, not only in the Old Testament, but in all revelation, are the most emphatically regarded as the synopsis of all religion and morality. —ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, Debate With Purcell, page 214. I do not believe that the Lord's day came in the room of the Jewish Sabbath, or that the Sabbath was changed from the seventh to the first day, for this plain reason, where there is no testimony, there can be no faith. Now there is no testimony in all the oracles of heaven that the Sabbath was changed, or that the Lord's day came in the room of it. —ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, Washington Reporter, Oct. 8, 1821. CHURCH OF ENGLAND QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH Many people think that Sunday is the Sabbath. But neither in the New Testament nor in the early church is there anything to suggest that we have any right to transfer the observance of the seventh day of the week to the first. The Sabbath was and is Saturday and not Sunday, and if it were binding on us then we should observe it on that day, and on no other. —Rev. Lionel Beere, All-Saints Church, Ponsonby, N.Z. in Church and People, Sept. 1, 1947. Nowhere in the Bible is it laid down that worship should be done on Sunday. Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. ...! That is Saturday. —P. Carrington, Archbishop of Quebec, Oct. 27, 1949; cited in Prophetic Signs, p 12. The observance of the first instead of the seventh day rests on the testimony of the church, and the church alone. —Hobart Church News, July 2, 1894; cited in Prophetic Signs, p 14. Where are we told in Scripture that we are to keep the first day at all? We are commanded to keep the Seventh; but we are nowhere commanded to keep the first day. The reason why we keep the first day holy instead of the seventh is for the same reason that we observe many things, not because the Bible, but because the Church, has enjoined them. —Rev. Isaac Williams, Ser. on Catechism, p. 334. The seventh day, the commandment says, is the Sabbath of The Lord thy God. No kind of arithmetic, no kind of almanac, can make seven equal one, nor the seventh mean the first, nor Saturday mean Sunday. ... The fact is that we are all Sabbath breakers, every one of us. —Rev. Geo. Hodges. Not any ecclesiastical writer of the first three centuries attributed the origin of Sunday observance either to Christ or to His apostles. —SIR WILLIAM DOMVILLE, Examination of the Six Texts, pages 6, 7. (Supplement). There is no word, no hint, in the New Testament about abstaining from work on Sunday. . . . Into the rest of Sunday no divine law enters…, The observance of Ash Wednesday or Lent stands exactly on the same footing as the observance of Sunday. —CANON EYTON, 'The Ten Commandments, pages 52, 63, 65. Is there any command in the New Testament to change the day of weekly rest from Saturday to Sunday? None. —Manual of Christian Doctrine, page 127. The Lord's day did not succeed in the place of the Sabbath....The Lord's day was merely an ecclesiastical institution. It was not introduced by virtue of the fourth commandment, because for almost three hundred years together they kept that day which was in that commandment...The primitive Christians did all manner of works upon the Lord's day, even in times of persecution, when they are the strictest observers of all the divine commandments; but in this they knew there was none. —BISHOP JEREMY TAYLOR, Ductor Dubitantium, Part I, Book II, Chap. 2, Rule 6. Sec. 51, 59. Sunday being the day on which the Gentiles solemnly adore that planet and called it Sunday, partly from its influence on that day especially, and partly in respect to its divine body (as they conceived it), the Christians thought fit to keep the same day and the same name of it, that they might not appear causelessly peevish, and by that means hinder the conversion of the Gentiles, and bring a greater prejudice than might be otherwise taken against the gospel. —T. M. MORER, Dialogues on the Lord's Day, pages 22, 23. The Puritan idea was historically unhappy. It made Sunday into the Sabbath day. Even educated people call Sunday the Sabbath. Even clergymen do. But, unless my reckoning is all wrong, the Sabbath day lasts twenty-four hours from six o'clock on Friday evening. It gives over, therefore, before we come to Sunday. If you suggest to a Sabbatarian that he ought to observe the Sabbath on the proper day, you arouse no enthusiasm. He at once replies that the day, not the principle, has been changed. But changed by whom? There is no injunction in the whole of the New Testament to Christians to change the Sabbath into Sunday. —D. MORSE-BOYCOTT, Daily Herald, London, Feb. 26, 1931. The Christian church made no formal, but a gradual and almost unconscious transference of the one day to the other. —F.W. FARRAR, D.D., The Voice From Sinai, page 167. Take which you will, either of the Fathers or the moderns, and we shall find no Lord's day instituted by any apostolical mandate; no Sabbath set on foot by them upon the first day of the week. —PETER HEYLYN, History of the Sabbath, page 410. Merely to denounce the tendency to secularise Sunday is as futile as it is easy. What we want is to find some principle, to which as Christians we can appeal, and on which we can base both our conduct and our advice. We turn to the New Testament, and we look in vain for any authoritative rule. There is no recorded word of Christ, there is no word of any of the apostles, which tells how we should keep Sunday, or indeed that we should keep it at all. It is disappointing, for it would make our task much easier if we could point to a definite rule, which left us no option but simple obedience or disobedience. . . . There is no rule for Sunday observance, either in Scripture or history. —DR. STEPHEN, Bishop of Newcastle, N.S.W., in an address reported in the Newcastle Morning Herald, May 14, 1924. CONGREGATIONAL QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH The Christian Sabbath [Sunday] is not in the Scripture, and was not by the primitive [early Christian] church called the Sabbath. —Timothy Dwight, Theology, sermon 107, 1818 ed., Vol. IV, p. 49 Note: Timothy Dwight (1752-1817) was president of Yale University from 1795-1817. It is quite clear that, however rigidly or devoutly we may spend Sunday, we are not keeping the Sabbath ... The Sabbath was founded on a specific divine command. We can plead no such command for the obligation to observe Sunday ... There is not a single sentence in the New Testament to suggest that we incur any penalty by violating the supposed sanctity of Sunday. —Dr. Dale, The Ten Commandments, pp. 106, 107. It must be confessed that there is no law in the New Testament concerning the first day. —Buck's Theological Dictionary page 403. There is no command in the Bible requiring us to observe the first day of the week as the Christian Sabbath. —ORIN FOWLER, A.M., Mode and Subjects of Baptism. The current notion that Christ and His apostles authoritatively substituted the first day for the seventh, is absolutely without any authority in the New Testament. —DR. LYMAN ABBOTT, Christian Union, Jan. 18, 1882. DISCIPLES OF CHRIST QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH There is no direct Scriptural authority for designating the first day ‘the Lord’s Day.’ —Dr D.H. Lucas, Christian Oracle, January, 1890 EPISCOPALIAN QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH We have made the change from the seventh day to the first day, from Saturday to Sunday, on the authority of the one holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church of Christ. —Bishop Symour, Why We keep Sunday. The Bible commandment says on the seventh-day thou shalt rest. That is Saturday. Nowhere in the Bible is it laid down that worship should be done on Sunday. —Phillip Carrington, quoted in Toronto Daily Star, Oct 26, 1949 [Carrington (1892-), Anglican archbishop of Quebec, spoke the above in a message on this subject delivered to a packed assembly of clergymen. It was widely reported at the time in the news media]. INFIDEL QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH Probably very few Christians are aware of the fact that what they call the 'Christian Sabbath' (Sunday) is of pagan origin. The first observance of Sunday- that history records is in the fourth century', when Constantine issued an edict (not requiring its religious observance, but simply abstinence from work) reading, 'let all the judges and people of the town rest and all the various trades be suspended on the venerable day of the sun.' At the time of the issue of this edict, Constantine was a sun-worshipper; therefore it could have had no relation whatever to Christianity. —HENRY M. TABER. Faith or Fact (preface by Robert G. Ingersoll), page 112. I challenge any priest or minister of the Christian religion to show me the slightest authority for the religious observance of Sunday. And, if such cannot be shown by them, why is it that they are constantly preaching about Sunday as a holy day? … The claim that Sunday takes the place of Saturday, and that because the Jews were supposed to be commanded to keep the seventh day of the week holy, therefore the first day of the week should be so kept by Christians, is so utterly absurd as to be hardly worth considering....That Paul habitually observed and preached on the seventh day of the week, is shown in Acts 18:4-'And be reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath' (Saturday). —Id., pages ,114, 116. LUTHERAN QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH The observance of the Lord's Day (Sunday) is founded not on any command of God, but on the authority of the Church." Augsburg Confession of Faith. They [the Catholics] allege the Sabbath changed into Sunday, the Lord's day, contrary to the Decalogue, as it appears, neither is there any example more boasted of than the changing of the Sabbath day. Great, say they, is the power and authority of the church, since it dispensed with one of the Ten Commandments. —Augsburg Confession of Faith, Art. 28, par. 9. They [Roman Catholics] allege the change of the Sabbath into the Lord's day, as it seemeth, to the Decalogue [the ten commandments]; and they have no example more in their mouths than they change of the Sabbath. They will needs have the Church's power to be very great, because it hath dispensed with the precept of the Decalogue. —The Augsburg Confession, 1530 A.D. (Lutheran), part 2, art 7, in Philip Schaff, the Creeds of Christiandom, 4th Edition, vol 3, p64 [this important statement was made by the Lutherans and written by Melanchthon, only thirteen years after Luther nailed his theses to the door and began the Reformation]. For up to this day mankind has absolutely trifled with the original and most special revelation of the Holy God, the ten words written upon the tables of the Law from Sinai. —Crown Theological Library, page I78. The Christians in the ancient church very soon distinguished the first day of the week, Sunday; however, not as a Sabbath, but as an assembly day of the church, to study the Word of God together, and to celebrate the ordinances one with another: without a shadow of doubt, this took place as early as the first part of the second century. —Bishop GRIMELUND, History of the Sabbath, page 60. The festival of Sunday, like all other festivals, was always only a human ordinance. —AUGUSTUS NEANDER, History of the Christian Religion and Church, Vol. 1, page 186. I wonder exceedingly how it came to be imputed to me that I should reject the law of Ten Commandments...Whosoever abrogates the law must of necessity abrogate sin also. —MARTIN LUTHER, Spiritual Antichrist, pages 71, 72. We have seen how gradually the impression of the Jewish Sabbath faded from the mind of the Christian church, and how completely the newer thought underlying the observance of the first day took possession of the church. We have seen that the Christian of the first three centuries never confused one with the other, but for a time celebrated both. —The Sunday Problem, a study book by the Lutheran Church (1923) p.36 But they err in teaching that Sunday has taken the place of the Old Testament Sabbath and therefore must be kept as the seventh day had to be kept by the children of Israel .... These churches err in their teaching, for scripture has in no way ordained the first day of the week in place of the Sabbath. There is simply no law in the New Testament to that effect —John Theodore Mueller, Sabbath or Sunday, pp.15, 16 LUTHERAN FREE CHURCH QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH For when there could not be produced one solitary place in the Holy Scriptures which testified that either the Lord Himself or the apostles had ordered such a transfer of the Sabbath to Sunday, then it was not easy to answer the question: Who has transferred the Sabbath, and who has the right to do it? —George Sverdrup, ‘A New Day.’ METHODIST QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH This 'handwriting of ordinances' our Lord did blot out, take away, and nail to His cross. (Colossians 2: 14.) But the moral law contained in the Ten Commandments, and enforced by the prophets, He did not take away.... The moral law stands on an entirely different foundation from the ceremonial or ritual law. ...Every part of this law must remain in force upon all mankind and in all ages. —JOHN WESLEY, Sermons on Several Occasions, 2-Vol. Edition, Vol. I, pages 221, 222. No Christian whatsoever is free from the obedience of the commandments which are called moral. —Methodist Church Discipline, (I904), page 23. The Sabbath was made for MAN; not for the Hebrews, but for all men. —E.O. HAVEN, Pillars of Truth, page 88. The reason we observe the first day instead of the seventh is based on no positive command. One will search the Scriptures in vain for authority for changing from the seventh day to the first. The early Christians began to worship on the first day of the week because Jesus rose from the dead on that day. By and by, this day of worship was made also a day of rest, a legal holiday. This took place in the year 321. The reason we observe the first day instead of the seventh is based on no positive command. One will search the Scriptures in vain for authority for changing from the seventh day to the first... Our Christian Sabbath, therefore, is not a matter of positive command. It is a gift of the church... —CLOVIS G. CHAPPELL, Ten Rules for Living, page 61. Sabbath in the Hebrew language signifies rest, and is the seventh day of the week... and it must be confessed that there is no law in the New Testament concerning the first day. —Charles Buck, A Theological Dictionary, Sabbath In the days of very long ago the people of the world began to give names to everything, and they turned the sounds of the lips into words, so that the lips could speak a thought. In those days the people worshiped the sun because many words were made to tell of many thoughts about many things. The people became Christians and were ruled by an emperor whose name was Constantine. This emperor made Sunday the Christian Sabbath, because of the blessing of light and heat which came from the sun. So our Sunday is a sun-day, isn't it? —Sunday School Advocate, Dec. 31, 1921. The moral law contained in the Ten Commandments, and enforced by the prophets, He [Christ] did not take away. It was not the design of His coming to revoke any part of this. This is a law which never can be broken... Every part of this law must remain in force upon all mankind and in all ages; as not depending either on time or place, or any other circumstances liable to change, but on the nature of God and the nature of man, and their unchangeable relation to each other. —JOHN WESLEY, Sermons on Several Occasions, Vol. I, Sermon XXV. The Sabbath instituted in the beginning, and confirmed again and again by Moses and the prophets, has never been abrogated. A part of the moral law, not a jot or a tittle of its sanctity has been taken away. —New York Herald 1874, on the Methodist Episcopal Bishops Pastoral 1874 MISCELLANEOUS QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH You will tell me that Saturday was the Jewish Sabbath, but that the Christian Sabbath has been changed to Sunday. Changed! But by whom? Who has authority to change an express commandment of Almighty God? When God has spoken and said, 'Thou shalt keep holy the seventh day,' who shall dare to say, 'Nay, thou mayest work and do all manner of business on the seventh day; but thou shalt keep holy the first day in its stead'? This is a most important question, which I know not how you can answer. You are a Protestant, and you profess to go by the Bible and the Bible only; and yet in so important a matter as the observance of one day in seven as a holy day, you go against the plain letter of the Bible, and put another day in the place of that day which the Bible has commanded. The command to keep holy the seventh day is one of the Ten Commandments; you believe that the other nine are still binding; who gave you authority to tamper with the fourth? If you are consistent with your own principles, if you really follow the Bible and the Bible only, you ought to be able to produce some portion of the New Testament in which this fourth commandment is expressly altered. —The Library of Christian Doctrine, pages 3, 4. The first precept in the Bible is that of sanctifying the seventh day: 'God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it.' Genesis 2:3. This precept was confirmed by God in the Ten Commandments: 'Remember the Sabbath day to keep It holy. ...The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.' Exodus 20: 8, 10. On the other hand, Christ declares that He is not come to destroy the law, but to fulfil it. (Matthew 5: 17.) He Himself observed the Sabbath: 'And, as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day.' Luke 4: r6. His disciples likewise observed it after His death: 'They . . . rested the Sabbath day, according to the commandment.' Luke 23: 56. Yet with all this weight of Scripture authority for keeping the Sabbath or seventh day holy, Protestants of all denominations make this a profane day and transfer the obligation of it to the first day of the week, or the Sunday. Now what authority have they for doing this? None at all but the unwritten word, or tradition of the Catholic Church, which declares that the apostle made the change in honour of Christ's resurrection, and the descent of the Holy Ghost on that day of the week. —JOHN MILNER, The End of Religious Controversy, page 71. Sabbath means, of course, Saturday, the seventh day of the week, but the early Christians changed the observance to Sunday, to honour the day on which Christ arose from the dead. —FULTON OURSLER. Cosmopolitan, Sept. 1951, pages 34, 35. I do not pretend to be even an amateur scholar of the Scriptures. I read the Decalogue merely as an average man searching for guidance, and in the immortal 'Ten Words' I find a blueprint for the good life. —Id., page 33. Most certainly the Commandments are needed today, perhaps more than ever before. Their divine message confronts us with a profound moral challenge in an epidemic of evil; a unifying message acceptable alike to Jew, Moslem, and Christian. Who, reading the Ten in the light of history and of current events, can doubt their identity with the eternal law of nature? —Id., page 124. The Sabbath is commanded to be kept on the seventh day. It could not be kept on any other day. To observe the first day of the week or the fourth is not to observe the Sabbath. . . . It was the last day of the week, after six days of work, that was to be kept holy. The observance of no other day would fulfil the law. —H. J. FLOWERS, B.A., B.D., The Permanent Value of the Ten Commandments, page 13. The evaluation of Sunday, the traditionally accepted day of the resurrection of Christ, has varied greatly throughout the centuries of the Christian Era. From time to time it has been confused with the seventh day of the week, the Sabbath. English speaking peoples have been the most consistent in perpetuating the erroneous assumption that the obligation of the fourth commandment has passed over to Sunday. In popular speech, Sunday is frequently, but erroneously, spoken of as the Sabbath. —F. M. SETZLER, Head Curator, Department of Anthropology, Smithsonian Institute, from a letter dated Sept. 1, 1949. He that observes the Sabbath aright holds the history of that which it celebrates to be authentic, and therefore believes in the creation of the first man; in the creation of a fair abode for man in the space of six days; in the primeval and absolute creation of the heavens and the earth, and, as a necessary antecedent to all this, in the Creator, who at the close of His latest creative effort, rested on the seventh day. The Sabbath thus becomes a sign by which the believers in a historical revelation are distinguished from those who have allowed these great facts to fade from their remembrance. —JAMES G. MURPHY, Commentary on the Book of Exodus, comments on Exodus 20: 8-11. MOODY BIBLE INSTITUTE QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH The Sabbath was binding in Eden, and it has been in force ever since. This fourth commandment begins with the word 'remember,' showing that the Sabbath already existed when God wrote the law on the tables of stone at Sinai. How can men claim that this one commandment has been done away with when they will admit that the other nine are still binding? —D.L. MOODY, Weighed and Wanting, page 47. I honestly believe that this commandment [the fourth, or Sabbath commandment] is just as binding today as it ever was. I have talked with men who have said that it has been abrogated, but they have never been able to point to any place in the Bible where God repealed it. When Christ was on earth, He did nothing to set it aside; He freed it from the traces under which the scribes and Pharisees had put it, and gave it its true place. 'The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.' It is just as practicable and as necessary for men today as it ever was-in fact, more than ever, because we live in such an intense age. —Id., page 46. This Fourth is not a commandment for one place, or one time, but for all places and times. —D.L. Moody, at San Francisco, Jan. 1st, 1881. PRESBYTERIAN QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH The Christian Sabbath (Sunday) is not in the Scriptures, and was not by the primitive church called the Sabbath. —Dwight's Theology, Vol. 14, p. 401. A further argument for the perpetuity of the Sabbath we have in Matthew 24:20, Pray ye that your flight be not in the winter neither on the Sabbath day. But the final destruction of Jerusalem was after the Christian dispensation was fully set up (AD 70). Yet it is plainly implied in these words of the Lord that even then Christians were bound to strict observation of the Sabbath. —Works of Jonathon Edwards, (Presby.) Vol. 4, p. 621. We must not imagine that the coming of Christ has freed us from the authority of the law; for it is the eternal rule of a devout and holy life, and must therefore be as unchangeable as the justice of God, which it embraced, is constant and uniform. —JOHN CALVIN, Commentary on a Harmony of the Gospels, Vol. 1, page 277. God instituted the Sabbath at the creation of man, setting apart the seventh day for the purpose, and imposed its observance as a universal and perpetual moral obligation upon the race. —American Presbyterian Board of Publication, Tract No. 175. The observance of the seventh-day Sabbath did not cease till it was abolished after the [Roman] empire became Christian, ... —American Presbyterian Board of Publication, Tract No. 118. The moral law doth for ever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof; and that not only in regard to the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator who gave it. Neither doth Christ in the gospel in any way dissolve, but much strengthen this obligation. —Westminster Confession of Faith, Chap. 19, Art. 5. The Sabbath is a part of the Decalogue-the Ten Commandments. This alone for ever settles the question as to the perpetuity of the institution ... Until, therefore, it can be shown that the whole moral law has been repealed, the Sabbath will stand...The teaching of Christ confirms the perpetuity of the Sabbath. —T.C. BLAKE, D.D., Theology Condensed, pages 474, 475. Sunday being the first day of which the Gentiles solemnly adored that planet and called it Sunday, partly from its influence on that day especially, and partly in respect to its divine body (as they conceived it) the Christians thought fit to keep the same day and the same name of it, that they might not appear carelessly peevish, and by that means hinder the conversion of the Gentiles, and bring a greater prejudice that might be otherwise taken against the gospel —T.M. Morer, Dialogues on the Lord's Day There is no word, no hint in the New Testament about abstaining from work on Sunday. The observance of Ash Wednesday, or Lent, stands exactly on the same footing as the observance of Sunday. Into the rest of Sunday no Divine Law enters. —Canon Eyton, in The Ten Commandments. Some have tried to build the observance of Sunday upon Apostolic command, whereas the Apostles gave no command on the matter at all.... The truth is, so soon as we appeal to the litera scripta [literal writing] of the Bible, the Sabbatarians have the best of the argument. —The Christian at Work, April 19, 1883, and Jan. 1884 PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH The day is now changed from the seventh to the first day ... but as we meet with no Scriptural direction for the change, we may conclude it was done by the authority of the church. —‘Explanation of Catechism’ SOUTHERN BAPTIST QUOTES ABOUT THE SABBATH The sacred name of the Seventh day is Sabbath. This fact is too clear to require argument [Exodus 20:10 quoted]… on this point the plain teaching of the Word has been admitted in all ages… Not once did the disciples apply the Sabbath law to the first day of the week, -- that folly was left for a later age, nor did they pretend that the first day supplanted the seventh. —Joseph Hudson Taylor, ‘The Sabbatic Question’, p. 14-17, 41. The first four commandments set forth man's obligations directly toward God.... But when we keep the first four commandments, we are likely to keep the other six. . . . The fourth commandment sets forth God's claim on man's time and thought.... The six days of labour and the rest on the Sabbath are to be maintained as a witness to God's toil and rest in the creation. . . . No one of the ten words is of merely racial significance.... The Sabbath was established originally (long before Moses) in no special connection with the Hebrews, but as an institution for all mankind, in commemoration of God's rest after the six days of creation. It was designed for all the descendants of Adam. —Adult Quarterly, Southern Baptist Convention series, Aug. 15, 1937. Previous Back to Contents Next Top

All trinity studies Previous Download 看中文 Next Who is the God of the Bible Who is the God of the Bible? Does the following match with our current understanding of the God of the Bible?? If yes then we're in the harmony with the scriptures and if No then it's high time to review things all over again as who the TRUE God of the Bible ?? Never forget the end time major issue will be over the issue of WORSHIP. Who do you worship? God of the Bible or some mysterious 3 in 1 and 1 in 3 entity ?? Let's see who is the God of the Bible !! 1- What important question does the Bible ask about God? Job 11:7 Canst thou by searching find out God? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection? - We cannot of ourselves find out God. God Himself must tell us about Himself. 2- What does God say about Himself? Isaiah 40:26 Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them all by names by the greatness of his might, for that he is strong in power; not one faileth. – He is a creator of infinite power. Not only is He creator but He also upholds and maintains all His creation. Isaiah 46:9, 10 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure – *God is all knowing or omniscient. 3- How many true gods does the Bible reveal? Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD – God told the Israelites that He is ONE, as opposed to the heathen nations around them which worshiped multiple gods. Deuteronomy 4:35 Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the LORD he is God; there is none else beside him.– There is none other besides Him. It is on this basis that God gave the first commandment which prohibits multiple gods. Jeremiah 10:10 But the LORD is the true God, he is the living God, and an everlasting king: at his wrath the earth shall tremble, and the nations shall not be able to abide his indignation. 4- Who is the most qualified person to tell us about the true God? John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. – Jesus, the Son of God is the highest authority on this topic. John 3:11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. – In speaking of God Jesus tells us what He knows and has seen. That was His mission in coming down from heaven; to tell us of heavenly things. 5- According to Jesus, who is “the only true God”? John 17:1, 3 Father… And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. – The only true God, according to Jesus, is the Father. Knowing the only true God and Jesus is the key to eternal life. A correct understanding of God is an issue that affects our eternal life. 6- Who is the Lord of heaven and earth, according to Jesus? Matthew 11:25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. – The Father is the Lord of both heaven and earth (see also Luke 10:21). 7- Who will the true worshippers worship? John 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. –True worshippers worship the Father, the only true God, in spirit and in truth. 8- Who did Jesus say we should pray to? Matthew 6:9-13 Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven … For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. – The Father’s will is done in heaven. The kingdom, power and glory belong to the Father. 9- Which is the first commandment of all? Mark 12:28-32 And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all? And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. And the second is like, namely this,Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he. – Knowing God is required before we can love Him. A correct knowledge of God is vital for our relationship with Him. The scribe agreed that there is only one God, and none other but He. 10- Did Jesus correct the scribe? Mark 12:34 And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him,Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. – The belief of the scribe reflects the faith of the entire Jewish nation. The Jews believed in one God only. John 8:41 Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God. 11- Did Jesus identify who is the one God of the Jewish nation? John 8:54 Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God. 12- Is He the God of the Jews only? Romans 3:29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also. 13- Did the apostles of Christ teach the Gentiles the same truth about God? James 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. – *James taught that there is only one God. Even the devils know that! 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. – Paul taught that there is only one God. Jesus is the only link between us and God. We can only know God through Jesus. 14- Who is this one true God? 1 Corinthians 8:4-6 We know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many,and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. – The one God is the Father. James 3:9 Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God. Romans 15:6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Ephesians 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. 2 Corinthians 1:3 Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort. – *The Apostles of Christ taught that the one God is only the Father. We do not read about different persons making up one God. It is simply the Father. 15- Who is the living and true God? 1 Thessalonians 1:9,10 For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God; And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come. – The “living and true God” is the Father. 16- Did the early Christian church maintain this belief of the Apostles? Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. 17- Who is the creator of all things? Revelation 4:9-11 And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever, The four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat on the throne, and worship him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying, Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. Acts 17:24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands. –We saw earlier that the Lord of heaven and earth is God the Father. It is God the Father who created all things. 18- How did God the Father create all things? Ephesians 3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ. Colossians 1:16 For by him [Christ] were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth,visible and invisible,whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him. Hebrews 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds. John 1:3 All things were made by him [the Word]; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 19- Who is the head of all things? 1 Corinthians 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. – The head of Christ is God, who is His Father. 20- Does Christ have a God? Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. Ephesians 1:17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him. Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name. Hebrews 1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness,and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. Note: This teaching was clearly revealed in the Old Testament, not just the New (see Psalm 45:7). The Father has always been, and will always be, the God of Jesus Christ our Lord. 21- Who does Christ belong to? 1 Corinthians 3:23 And ye are Christ’s; and Christ is God‘s. 22- When we get to heaven, who are we going to serve? Revelation 21:22, 23 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. Revelation 22:3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him. – We shall serve and worship God and the Lamb, for this is eternal life. To know them both throughout eternity will be our theme. 23- Do we wait till we get to heaven or can this fellowship begin sooner? 1 John 1:3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ. This fellowship can begin now as we read and learn about the Father and the Son. Conclusion: We have seen that the word of God clearly tells us there is only one God. That one God is none other than the Father, not a mysterious trinity god. This one God is the source of ALL life and power. Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

All trinity studies Previous Download Next How was the SDA Church Changed to Think the Holy Spirit is a Person How was the SDA Church Changed to Think the Holy Spirit is a Person? It is claimed that Ellen White became a Trinitarian 20 years before her passing. This erroneous claim is based on a handful of quotes that LeRoy Froom set out to search for that he rightly figured would be misunderstood. He searched over 100,000 pages of her writings (25,000,000 words) and found a few quotes that on the surface appeared to fit the Trinitarian concept on the Holy Spirit. But only if you choose to read them as such, and at the expense of the “tens of thousands” of non-Trinitarian statements she wrote. Note that Froom was labelled as being the most dangerous man in the SDA Church and is now suspected of being a Jesuit. On the 14 December 1955, Leroy Froom in a letter to Reuben Figuhr wrote, “I was publicly denounced in the chapel at the Washington Missionary College by Dr. B. G. Wilkinson as the most dangerous man in this denomination.” The claim that Ellen White was given light which resulted in her becoming a Trinitarian means God would have been lying to her for many decades. This claim is obviously false! New light CANNOT contradict old light or the old light was a LIE from God. A change from non-Trinitarian to Trinitarian is a total backflip and can NEVER be called progressive truth. Sadly, Froom eventually managed to convince the SDA Church with these misunderstood quotes that Ellen White had become a Trinitarian. But he had to wait until the death of Ellen White and all the pioneers as he could never have achieved this change while they were still alive. The deception of Froom was so successful that many believe that the quotes called “EV” or “Evangelism” are from a book written by Ellen White. But it was written and compiled by Froom in 1946 which was 30 years after the death of Ellen White. Note that the headings, subheadings and bolded texts before the quotes in this book are NOT her words, and some included the word “Trinity” which she never wrote! These quotes are typically called EV 615-EV 617 or Evangelism 615-617. Ellen White actually taught that the “Holy Spirit” is the “Spirit of God” coming to us through His Son, and hence she frequently wrote the Holy Spirit is the “SPIRIT OF CHRIST.” For example, “We want the HOLY SPIRIT, which is JESUS CHRIST.” — (EGW, Lt66, April 10, 1894) But many today are so indoctrinated with a Trinitarian mindset, that they mistakenly believe that the quotes Froom compiled and put in one place imply the Holy Spirit is a third being. But Ellen White was referring to the “SPIRIT OF CHRIST,” not a third being. She was 100% consistent in all that she wrote. And since she wrote, “The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ,” she also wrote: The Comforter is the SPIRIT OF CHRIST, the Spirit of truth is the SPIRIT OF CHRIST, the third person is the SPIRIT OF CHRIST, the third great power is the SPIRIT OF CHRIST, the Holy Spirit given at Pentecost was the SPIRIT OF CHRIST, the Holy Spirit Jesus breathed on His disciples was HIS own SPIRIT, the Holy Spirit Christ sent to represent Himself was HIS own SPIRIT, the heavenly dignitaries are the Father, Son and SPIRIT OF CHRIST, the Heavenly trio is the Father, Son and SPIRIT OF CHRIST, and she reveals over and over again that there are only two beings. There are literally thousands of quotes from Ellen White that confirm the above facts. But since size is an issue, just one quote will be provided that confirm all of the above. The first covers almost all of the above points. For instance: “THIRD PERSON,” “THIRD GREAT POWER,” “HEAVENLY DIGNITARIES” and “HEAVENLY TRIO.” —<>— “They have ONE God and ONE Saviour; and ONE Spirit--the Spirit of Christ--” — (EGW, 9T 189.3, 1909) ONE + ONE + ONE = “the SPIRIT OF CHRIST” THIRD GREAT POWER —<>— “CHRIST has given HIS SPIRIT as a divine POWER.” — (EGW, RH, Nov 19, 1908) COMFORTER —<>— “This refers to the omnipresence of the SPIRIT OF CHRIST, called the COMFORTER.” (EGW, 14MR 179.2) SPIRIT OF TRUTH —<>— “JESUS comes to you as the SPIRIT of TRUTH;” (EGW, 2MR 337.1) SPIRIT JESUS BREATHED ON HIS DISCIPLES —<>— “And when He had said this, He [Christ] breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: ... Before the disciples could fulfill their official duties in connection with the church, CHRIST breathed HIS Spirit upon them.” (EGW, DA, p. 805) SPIRIT GIVEN AT PENTECOST —<>— “The promise of the HOLY SPIRIT is not limited to any age or to any race. CHRIST declared that the divine influence of HIS SPIRIT was to be with His followers unto the end. From the Day of PENTECOST to the present time, the COMFORTER has been sent to all who have yielded themselves fully to the Lord and to His service.” (EGW, AA, 49.2) SPIRIT THAT REPRESENTS CHRIST —<>— “CHRIST came to our world, but the world could not endure His purity. He has gone to His Father, but HE has sent HIS Holy Spirit to represent HIM in the world till he shall come again.” — (EGW, Ms1, Jan 11, 1897) TWO BEINGS ALONE —<>— “The Father and the Son ALONE are to be exalted.” — (EGW, YI, July 7, 1898) And since Ellen White wrote that the Holy Spirit is the SPIRIT OF CHRIST, for any quote Froom used regarding the Holy Spirit that has been misunderstood, replace the words “HOLY SPIRIT” with “SPIRIT OF CHRIST” or “CHRIST BY HIS SPIRIT” and read it again. I quite assure you that it can no longer be mistaken as a Trinitarian quote! For example: “We need to realize that the holy spirit [CHRIST BY HIS SPIRIT], who is as much a person as God is a person, is WALKING through these grounds, UNSEEN by human eyes.” — (EGW, 2SAT 136.6, [Evangelism p. 616.5], 1899) And for further clarity on this quote, “How few realize that JESUS, UNSEEN, is WALKING by their side!” — (EGW, 14MR 125.3) And, “He [CHRIST] is an UNSEEN presence in the PERSON of the HOLY SPIRIT,” — (EGW, DG 185.2, 1897) Who is UNSEEN? Christ! And why is Christ UNSEEN? Because it is by HIS HOLY SPIRIT. The early pioneers had no problem with the few quotes that Froom searched for because they knew who the Holy Spirit is and would never read them the wrong way. But if your belief is that the Holy Spirit is another being, then that is what you will see when you read them. Picking out statements from Ellen White’s writings that would fit into a Trinitarian concept of God while ignoring her statements that do not fit the Trinitarian concept of God is a dishonest way to use her writings. To understand correctly what God has revealed through Ellen White, and find out what her beliefs were on this topic, it is necessary to quote all that she wrote on this subject, not just be selective in what we quote to suit our own agenda. That would be tantamount to deception. Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

返回研究目录 上一篇 下载中文 下一篇 我们是否尊崇耶稣如同尊崇祂父一样 我们是否尊崇耶稣如同尊崇祂父一样？ 腓立比书 2:6 “他本有上帝的行像，不以自己与上帝同等为强夺的， 约翰福音 5:21-23 父怎样叫死人起来，使他们活着，子也照样随自己的意思使人活着。22 父不审判什么人，乃将审判的事全交与子，23 叫人都尊敬子如同尊敬父一样。不尊敬子的，就是不尊敬差子来的父。 马太福音 11:27 一切所有的，都是我父交付我的。除了父，没有人知道子；除了子和子所愿意指示的，没有人知道父。 马太福音 28:18 “耶稣进前来，对他们说：“天上地下所有的权柄都赐给我了。” 路加福音 10:22 “一切所有的都是我父交付我的。除了父，没有人知道子是谁；除了子和子愿意指示的，没有人知道父是谁。” 约翰福音 3:35 父爱子，已将万有交在他手里。 约翰福音 16:15 “凡父所有的，都是我的，所以我说，他要将受于我的告诉你们。” 约翰福音 17:10 凡是我的都是你的，你的也是我的，并且我因他们得了荣耀。 约翰福音 13:3 耶稣知道父已将万有交在他手里，且知道自己是从上帝出来的，又要归到上帝那里去， 以弗所书1:20-23 20 就是照他在基督身上所运行的大能大力，使他从死里复活，叫他在天上坐在自己的右边， 21 远超过一切执政的、掌权的、有能的、主治的和一切有名的，不但是今世的，连来世的也都超过了。 22 又将万有服在他的脚下，使他为教会作万有之首。 23 教会是他的身体，是那充满万有者所充满的。 上一篇 返回研究目录 下一篇 到最頂

All trinity studies Previous Download Next What did the People Who Created the Trinity Doctrine Believe What did the People Who Created the Trinity Doctrine Believe? Starting with who created the Trinity doctrine… ATHANASIUS brought in the 3 in 1 idea in 325 AD long after the Bible was written. And what is now known as the THREE CAPPADOCIANS brought in the idea of the Holy Spirit as a third being in 381 AD also long after the Bible was written. ATHANASIUS and the THREE CAPPADOCIANS came from the Alexandria catechetical school, which revered ORIGEN who applied the ALLEGORICAL method of explaining Scripture, which was influenced by Plato and its strong point was PAGAN. “The Alexandria catechetical school, which revered Clement of Alexandria and ORIGEN, the greatest theologian of the Greek Church, as its heads, applied the ALLEGORICAL METHOD to the explanation of Scripture. Its thought was influenced by Plato: its strong point was [PAGAN] theological SPECULATIONS. ATHANASIUS and the THREE CAPPADOCIANS [the men whose Trinitarian views were adopted by the Catholic Church at the Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople] had been included among its members.” — (Hubert Jedin, Ecumenical Councils of the Catholic Church: an Historical Outline, 1960, p. 28) The pagan idea of the 3 in 1 god from ATHANASIUS resulted from studying the works of ORIGEN. “That being said, Athanasius is applying these standard arguments to a more highly developed NEO-PLATONIST PHILOSOPHY and a more cultural diverse society than any previous theologian had faced. Still, the INFLUENCE OF ORIGEN is felt throughout the work, particularly in Athanasius' opening statements about the existence (or rather, non-existence) of evil and the refutation of various dualistic cosmologies.” — (Jonathan Shelley, Critique of Athanasius Two Books against the Heathens) So what did ORIGEN teach and believe whose teachings educated ATHANASIUS? Origen wrote, “Could any man of sound judgment suppose that the first, second, and third days (of creation) had an evening and a morning, when there were as yet no sun or moon or stars? Could anyone be so unintelligent as to think that God made a paradise somewhere in the east and planted it with trees, like a farmer, or that in that paradise he put a tree of life, a tree you could see and know with your senses, a tree you could derive life from by eating its fruit with the teeth in your head? When the Bible says that God used to walk in paradise in the evening or that Adam hid behind a tree, no one, I think, will question that these are ONLY FICTITIOUS STORIES of things that NEVER ACTUALLY HAPPENED, and that figuratively they refer to certain mysteries.” — (Tadros Y. Malaty, Before Origen, p. 134) Origen also “believed the Holy Spirit was a feminine force, that Jesus was only a created being and Gnosticism taught that Jesus became Christ at his baptism but that he was never God. He was a just a good man with very high morals. He believed in the doctrine of Purgatory, transubstantiation, transmigration of the soul and reincarnation of the soul. He doubted the temptations of Jesus in Scripture and claimed they could have never happened. The Scriptures were not literal. Genesis 1-3 was a myth, not historical or literal, as there was no actual person named “Adam.” Based upon Matthew 19, a TRUE MAN OF GOD SHOULD BE CASTRATED, WHICH HE DID TO HIMSELF. He taught eternal life was not a gift, instead one must grab hold of it and retain it. Christ enters no man until they mentally grasp the understanding of the consummation of the ages. He taught there would be no physical resurrection of the believers.” — (See Dr. Ken Matto, Origen's Gnostic Belief System) Origen's beliefs clearly indicate that he was a Gnostic Greek Philosopher and not a true child of God. It is these insane beliefs that brought about the Trinity doctrine! The above is very brief information to prove a point. There is an abundance of history and evidence that reveals the Doctrine of the Trinity emanates straight from the dunghill of Roman decretals. Its origin is pagan and from Satan so he could achieve worship and have us deny Jesus is the literal Son of God, thus preventing entrance into the kingdom. It is philosophy, vain deceit and man's tradition. It denies Jesus, preaches another Jesus, another spirit and another Gospel. Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

All trinity studies Previous Download Next Uriah Smith on the Trinity Uriah Smith on the Trinity More words from one of the founding members of the Seventh day Adventist Church and the truth the Adventist Church was founded on. “In 1 Cor. 15, I find that it is not the natural man that hath immortality; yet Paul assures the Romans that by patient continuance in well doing all could obtain immortality and eternal life. The doctrine called the trinity, claiming that God is without form or parts; that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, the three are one person, is another. Could God be without form or parts when he “spoke unto Moses face to face as a man speaketh unto a friend?” [Ex. 33:11] or when the Lord said unto him, Thou canst not see my face; for there shall no man see me and live? And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a cleft of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by; and I will take away my hand and thou shalt see my back parts; but my face shall not be seen. Ex. 33:20, 22, 23. Christ is the express image of his Father's person. Heb. 1:3.” — (Uriah Smith, Review and Herald, July 10, p. 87, 1856) “To the Lamb, equally with the Father who sits upon the throne, praise is ascribed in this song of adoration. Commentators, with great unanimity, have seized upon this as proof that Christ must be coeval with the Father; for otherwise, say they, here would be worship paid to the creature which belongs only to the Creator. But this does not seem to be a necessary conclusion. The Scriptures nowhere speak of Christ as a created being, but on the contrary plainly state that he was begotten of the Father. (See remarks on Rev. 3:14, where it is shown that Christ is not a created being.) But while as the Son he does not possess a co-eternity of past existence with the Father, the beginning of his existence, as the begotten of the Father, antedates the entire work of creation, in relation to which he stands as joint creator with God. John 1:3; Heb. 1:2. Could not the Father ordain that to such a being worship should be rendered equally with himself, without its being idolatry on the part of the worshiper? He has raised him to positions which make it proper that he should be worshipped, and has even commanded that worship should be rendered him, which would not have been necessary had he been equal with the Father in eternity of existence. Christ himself declares that “as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself.” John 5:26. The Father has “highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name.” Phil. 2:9. And the Father himself says, “Let all the angels of God worship him.” Heb. 1:6. These testimonies show that Christ is now an object of worship equally with the Father; but they do not prove that with him he holds an eternity of past existence.” — (Uriah Smith, Daniel And The Revelation, p. 430, 1882) “God alone is without beginning. At the earliest epoch when a beginning could be,—a period so remote that to finite minds it is essentially eternity,—appeared the Word. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” John 1:1. This uncreated Word was the Being, who, in the fulness of time, was made flesh, and dwelt among us. His beginning was not like that of any other being in the universe. It is set forth in the mysterious expressions, “his [God's] only begotten Son” (John 3:16; 1 John 4:9), “the only begotten of the Father” (John 1:14), and, “I proceeded forth and came from God.” John 8:42. Thus it appears that by some divine impulse or process, not creation, known only to Omniscience, and possible only to Omnipotence, the Son of God appeared. And then the Holy Spirit (by an infirmity of translation called “the Holy Ghost”), the Spirit of God, the Spirit of Christ, the divine afflatus and medium of their power, representative of them both (Ps. 139:7), was in existence also.” — (Uriah Smith, Looking Unto Jesus, p. 10, 1898) “When Christ left heaven to die for a lost world, he left behind, for the time being, his immortality also. but how could that be laid aside? That it was laid aside is sure, or he could not have died; but he did die, as a whole, as a divine being, as the Son of God, not in body only, while the spirit, the divinity, lived right on; for then the world would have only a human Saviour, a human sacrifice for its sins; but the prophet says that “his soul” was made “an offering for sin.” Isa. 53:10.” — (Uriah Smith, Looking Unto Jesus, pp. 23, 24, 1898) “God The Father, And His Son Jesus Christ Titles of the Father The following titles of supremacy belong alone to Him who is from everlasting to everlasting, the only wise God: “The Eternal God.” Deut. 33:27. “Whose Name alone is Jehovah.” Ps. 83:18. “Most High God.” Mark 5:7. “The Ancient of Days.” Dan. 7:13. “God Alone.” Ps. 86:10. “Lord Alone.” Neh. 9:6. “God of Heaven.” Dan. 2:44. “The Only True God.” John 17:8. “Who Only hath Immortality.” 1 Tim. 6:16. “The King Eternal, Immortal, Invisible.” 1 Tim. 1:17. “The Only Wise God.” 1 Tim. 1:17. “Lord God Omnipotent.” Rev. 19:6. “The Blessed and only Potentate.” 1 Tim. 6:15. “Besides Me there is no God.” Isa. 44:6. “God the Father.” 1 Cor. 8:6. “The God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of Glory.” Eph. 1:17. “God and Father of all, who is above all.” Eph. 4:6. “The Almighty God.” Gen. 17:1. “I Am that I Am.” Ex. 3:14. “Lord God Almighty.” Rev. 4:8. Declarations Concerning the Son He is the beginning of the creation of God. Rev. 3:14. The first born of every creature. Col. 1:15. The only begotten of the Father. John 1:18; 3:18. The Son of the Living God. Matt. 16:16. Existed before he came into the world. John 8:58; Micah 5:2; John 17:5, 24. Was made higher than the angels. Heb. 1:14. He made the world and all things. John 1:1-3; Eph. 3:3, 9. Was sent into the world by God. John 3:34. In Him dwells all the fullness of the God-head bodily. Col. 2:9. He is the resurrection and the life. John 11:25. All power is given to him in heaven and earth. Matt. 28:18. He is the appointed heir of all things. Heb. 1:2. Anointed with the oil of gladness above his fellows. Heb. 1:9. God has ordained him to be judge of quick and dead. Acts 17:31. Reveals his purposes through him. Rev. 1:1. The head of Christ is God. 1 Cor. 11:3. Jesus had power to lay down his life and take it again. John 10:18. He received this commandment from the Father. John 10:19. God raised him from the dead. Acts 2:24, 34; 3:15; 4:10; 10:40; 13:30, 34; 17:31; Rom. 4:24: 8:11; 1 Cor. 8:14; 15:15; 2 Cor. 4:14; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:20; Col. 2:12; 1 Thess. 1:10; Heb. 13:20; 1 Pet. 1:21; Jesus says he could do nothing of himself. John 5:19. That the Father which dwelt in him did the works. John 14:10. That the Father which sent him, gave him a commandment what he should say and what he should speak. John 12:49. That he came not to do his own will, but the will of him that sent him. John 6:38. And that his doctrine was not his, but the Father's which sent him. John 7:16; 8:28; 12:49; 14:10, 24. With such inspired declarations before us, ought we to say that Jesus Christ is the Self-existent, Independent, Omniscient and Only True God; or the Son of God, begotten, upheld, exalted and glorified BY THE FATHER?” — (Uriah Smith, The Bible Students Assistant, pp. 42-45, 1858. Also found in Review and Herald, June 12, p. 27, 1860) “J. W. W. Asks: “Are we to understand that the Holy Ghost is a person, the same as the Father and the Son? Some claim that it is, others that it is not.” Ans.—The terms “Holy Ghost”, are a harsh and repulsive translation. It should be “Holy Spirit” (hagion pneuma) in every instance. This Spirit is the Spirit of God, and the Spirit of Christ; the Spirit being the same whether it is spoken of as pertaining to God or Christ. But respecting this Spirit, the Bible uses expressions which cannot be harmonized with the idea that it is a person like the Father and the Son. Rather it is shown to be a divine influence from them both, the medium which represents their presence and by which they have knowledge and power through all the universe, when not personally present. Christ is a person, now officiating as priest in the sanctuary in heaven; and yet he says that wherever two or three are gathered in his name, he is there in the midst. Mt. 18:20. How? Not personally, but by his Spirit. In one of Christ's discoursed (John 14-16) this Spirit is personified as “the Comforter,” and as such has the personal and relative pronouns, “he,” “him,” and “whom,” applied to it. But usually it is spoken of in a way to show that it cannot be a person, like the Father and the Son. For instance, it is often said to be “poured out” and “shed abroad.” But we never read about God or Christ being poured out or shed abroad. If it was a person, it would be nothing strange for it to appear in bodily shape; and yet when it has so appeared, that fact has been noted as peculiar. Thus Luke 3:22 says: “And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him.” But the shape is not always the same; for on the day of Pentecost it assumed the form of “cloven tongues like as of fire.” Acts 2:3, 4. Again we read of “the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.” Rev. 1:4; 3:1; 4:5; 5:6. This is unquestionably simply a designation of the Holy Spirit, put in this form to signify its perfection and completeness. But it could hardly be so described if it was a person. We never read of the seven Gods or the seven Christs.” — (Uriah Smith, Review and Herald, October 28, 1890) “It may not then be out of place for us to consider for a moment what this Spirit is, what its office is, what its relation to the world and to the church, and what the Lord through this proposes to do for his people. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God; it is also the Spirit of Christ. It is that divine, mysterious emanation through which they carry forward their great and infinite work. It is called the Eternal Spirit; it is a spirit that is omniscient and omnipresent; it is the spirit that moved, or brooded, upon the face of the waters in the early days when chaos reigned, and out of chaos was brought the beauty and the glory of this world. It is the agency through which life is imparted; it is the medium through which all God's blessings and graces come to his people. It is the Comforter; it is the Spirit of Truth; it is the Spirit of Hope; it is the Spirit of Glory; it is the vital connection between us and our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ; for the apostle tells us that if we “have not the Spirit of Christ,” we are “none of his.” It is a spirit which is tender; which can be insulted, can be grieved, can be quenched. It is the agency through which we are to be introduced, if ever we are introduced, to immortality; for Paul says that if the spirit of Him that raised up Christ from the dead dwell in you, he shall quicken also your mortal bodies by that Spirit which dwelleth in you; that is, the Spirit of Christ. Rom. 8:11. ... You will notice in these few verses the apostle brings to view the three great agencies which are concerned in this work: God, the Father; Christ, his Son; and the Holy Spirit.” — (Uriah Smith, General Conference Daily Bulletin, March 14, 1891, pp. 146, 147) Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

All trinity studies Previous Download Next The argument with Genesis 1 The argument with Genesis 1 The argument with Genesis 1:26 is that the Hebrew word “Elohim” for God is plural and so this must mean that God is 3 beings. It is further argued that since the pronoun “us” is used in Genesis 1:26 that this also confirms that God must be 3 and that 3 beings did the creating. Did anyone ever stop to think that “us” could be just the Father and Son? The Greek word for God is “Theos” while the Hebrew word is “Elohim.” Note that the Greek word “Theos” is singular and “only” the Hebrew word for God is plural. This is because the Hebrew people pluralized nouns to denote greatness and this is called a “Plural of majesty.” They did this to express that God is great, not that God is more than one. Below is one dictionary that not only explains the truth but also informs us that no intelligent scholar uses this false argument anymore because the truth is so easily seen and the deception exposed. Hence no one uses this argument anymore unless they are ignorant and deceived. “Elohim is the plural of Eloah ... The fanciful idea that it referred to the trinity of persons in the Godhead hardly finds now a supporter among scholars. It is either what grammarians call the plural of majesty, or it denotes the fullness of divine strength, the sum of the powers displayed by God. Jehovah denotes specifically the one true God, whose people the Jews were, and who made them the guardians of his truth.” — (Smith's Bible Dictionary) How many beings does the Bible say were involved in creation? Ephesians 3:9 says, “God, ... created all things by Jesus Christ:” God in this verse is obviously someone other than Jesus Christ, and Hebrews 1:2 and John 1:3 also say God created all things by His Son. So who is speaking in Genesis 1:26 and who is He speaking to according to these verses? God said to His Son, “let us make man in our image.” Christ is “the express image” of the Father, so anyone created in the Father's image is also created in His Son's image. How many beings does SOP say were involved in creation? “The Father and the Son engaged in the mighty, wondrous work they had contemplated, of creating the world. ... After the earth was created, and the beasts upon it, the Father and Son carried out their purpose, which was designed before the fall of Satan, to make man in their own image. They had wrought together in the creation of the earth and every living thing upon it. And now GOD said to His SON, “Let us make man in our image. [GENESIS 1:26 QUOTED]” — (E.G. White, 1SP, 24.1,2) Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

返回研究目录 上一篇 下载中文 Read in English 下一篇 安息日的真理 今天的基督教界有一个极具争议性的话题，那就是上帝的安息日在哪一天。无数基督徒甚至不知道圣经中的第七日安息日是星期六（准确来说是从星期五日落至星期六日落为止，但为了简便论述，我将用星期六来概括之）。 许多教会教导说，安息日已经修改了。还有一些教会则教导说，每一天都可以是安息日。其余的则教导说，耶稣已经废除律法十诫，所以我们不需要守安息日了。 那位最憎恨上帝、祂儿子并祂们所设立的安息日的撒但，在这个课题上捏造了各式各样的谎言，来迷惑人以撇弃上帝的安息日。 末时所要临到的最大、最严峻的兽印记逼迫，也与安息日的议题相关，这是美国教会联合政府所要推出的星期日法令。所以作为上帝的子民，我们若想对上帝忠心到底，并且胜过兽的制度，最后在天国里有份的话，就必须清楚明白这项真理，并听从上帝的话语而行。 除此之外，我们还必须把安息日的真理传开，向无知的世人发出警告。因此我們必须以圣经的话语和教导来装备自己。我们今天也要揭穿撒但在这个课题上启发人们去炮制的谬论，并要解开基督教界对安息日所持有的种种误解和迷思。 圣经在但以理书中告诉我们，一个逼迫信徒的势力将企图改变上帝的律法： 但以理书 7：25 他必向至高者说夸大的话，必折磨至高者的圣民，必想改变节期和律法。圣民必交付他手一载、二载、半载。 圣经所提到的敌基督势力、那大淫妇、或巴比伦、或小角，就是罗马天主教。她确实擅自改变了上帝的律法，把原来的第七日安息日改为第一日。这种做法当然是未经上帝批准的，而且是上帝所厌恶的。 她践踏了上帝的律法，破坏了祂的圣日，违背了祂的旨意。她在过去曾经杀害了成千上万选择服从上帝的基督徒。历史上曾经有多少人因为守安息日而被杀？待会儿我们会深入探讨这一点。 为什么很少有人教导安息日的真理？ 我们先来谈一谈，为什么那么少人教导安息日的真理呢？如果上面所说的是正确的话，那么为什么我们鲜少会听到讲道人谈论或教导这些事呢？ 如果安息日落在星期六，那么为什么大多数人不遵守真正的安息日呢？正如一些基督徒所说的，大多数人怎么可能会错呢？更重要的是，我们现在还有必要遵守安息日吗？ 启示录第13章告诉我们，撒但必将地位，能力和权柄赋予但以理书所描述的改变律法之小角势力。你认为撒但为什么要这样做呢？ 在黑暗时期迫害基督徒长达 1260 年的小角势力杀害了多少按照上帝的诫命遵守第七日安息日的人。 任何对撒但的小角势力有不同看法的人都被视为异端份子。他们深信异端份子必须被活活烧死。结果，安息日的真理几乎被扼杀得不复存在，但是上帝保守了祂的真理，使它不至被消灭。 遗憾的是，由于大多数教会起源于那迫害基督徒的小角势力，而且改革运动并没有完全改革和摒弃所有的谬论，特别是星期日主日论和三位一体论。于是大多数教会至今仍然无知地保留住小角势力所设立的伪安息日。 安息日的最后一次修改是在第四世纪，星期日的敬拜被君士坦丁一世引入了基督教界。请注意，这项谬道早在公元前 2000 年就风行于异教之中，这就是太阳神的崇拜。太阳神即三位一体神，太阳神的日子即星期日。 请大家记住，撒但对这一切都负有责任，而且他不可能无缘无故地付出这些努力。他肯定有邪恶的目的和阴谋。 大多数人在成长过程中习惯于星期日做礼拜，这在很大程度上造就了一种思维定势，导致人们非常不愿意改变他们的生活习惯。即使他们听到了真理，也不会做出任何改变，或离开自己的舒适圈子。 在星期六聚会对大多数基督徒来说也很不方便，因为许多人在星期六还要上学、上班。因此可悲的是，大多数人宁可活在无知当中，也不愿意学习真理。由于这些因素，即使有人向星期日教会牧师或信徒介绍安息日的真理，他们也很难明白和接受真光。 这就让仇敌占了上风，因为他现在就在你的思想里低声说，“日子并不重要，每一日都是一样的。如果日子真的那么重要的话，每一位基督徒都会知道这件事，都会坚守第七日的安息日。” 可悲的是，太多的人听了却从来不查考真理，而撒但继续成功使基督徒无知地违反上帝的诫命。据说美国著名布道家比利·格雷厄姆承认了安息日的真理，但他却说，“如果我传授这个真理，恐怕会失去我大多数的听众和追随者。” 耶稣说，我们既当遵守又当教导上帝的律法，一个人不管得付出什么代价都绝对不能牺牲真理。仇敌竭尽全力地去阻止人们教导或相信安息日的真理，并继续竭尽所能地去迷惑人，使人们对这项重要的真理一无所知。 基督徒既知道撒但这样做了，就应该意识到这是与他们息息相关和极其重要的真理。否则的话，魔鬼就不会费尽心思地特意攻击安息日的真理了。 许多人说，安息日修改为星期日是为了纪念耶稣复活。也有人说，包括安息日在内的十条诫命已被耶稣钉在了十字架上，都废除了。有人则会告诉你说，只要你坚守一天，任何一天都可以作为安息日。 还有人说，只要你尽力去荣耀上帝，就等于你已经遵守了安息日一样。然而还有些人会说，提倡人遵守安息日是律法主义，是靠行为得救的。 最糟糕的是，有人说，十诫已经消失或变得无效了。这可是最大的谎言之一，而且近几十年来居然变得越来越流行。我们永远不能低估仇敌缓慢而巧妙地将异端带入教会的能力，并使那些最符合圣经的教导被错误地贴上邪教或律法主义的标签。 很明显，撒但总是以最具迷惑性的谎言来攻击真理。可悲的是，他毫不费力就能找到可以欺骗的对象了，他能轻而易举地完成他的任务。实际上，流行的理论肯定不是真理。反之，真理从来都不是流行于世人中间的。 十条诫命给我们定义了何为罪，而遵守安息日是十诫之一条。难道撒但不想全力攻击这一条最容易攻击的诫命，并尽其所能地去阻止人们承认或教导它吗？他一旦得逞，就可以让许多人生活在无法无天，无道德准绳约束的状态之中了。 如果一个人真心研究这项真理，并用公正的历史记载来查证的话，实际上他会发现撒但已经达到了这个目标，而且他的谎言还在继续扩张。由于大多数基督徒鲜少研究圣经，而倾向于依赖他们牧师来告诉他们什么是真理，因此谎言只会继续蔓延开来。 安息日的意义何在？ 安息日有其重大的意义。创造主以“当纪念”这三个词来开始第四条诫命。这是因为上帝知道它会被人遗忘。上帝把第七日安息日分别为圣，并且赐福于这一日，这样我们就可以在这一天亲近祂，领受祂满满的福分。 出埃及记 20： 8-11 8 “当记念安息日，守为圣日。9 六日要劳碌作你一切的工，10 但第七日是向耶和华你上帝当守的安息日。这一日你和你的儿女、仆婢、牲畜，并你城里寄居的客旅，无论何工都不可作，11 因为六日之内，耶和华造天、地、海和其中的万物，第七日便安息，所以耶和华赐福与安息日，定为圣日。 记住，第四条诫命是十诫中最重要的一部分，它给我们阐明了人与上帝之间的关系，以及我们应当如何去爱、纪念和敬拜我们的创造主，并与祂建立个人关系。 它也解释了为什么和在什么时候我们需要花费特殊的时间来亲近我们的造物主。这也是我们与上帝之间的一个永远的、特殊的标志或印记，证明祂是我们的上帝，是祂创造了我们，也是祂使我们成圣；我们是属于祂的子民，祂是我们崇拜的对象。 安息日，一周的第七日，即现今世界的星期六，曾被上帝分别为肉体休息和灵性精神复苏的日子。那这条诫命为什么如此频繁地被人忽视，还被这么多基督徒攻击和曲解呢？ 可见撒但多么仇恨上帝和祂神圣的律法。他揭尽所能地去影响我们对安息日的重视，导致我们轻视、逃避安息日，并给自己找借口来忘记安息日。圣经的安息日是从星期五日落开始，直到星期六日落为止。 对那些心甘情愿遵守上帝安息日的信徒而言，这一日是一个祝福的日子，也是他们一周中最喜爱、最期待的日子。我们在这一日可与家人、教友并天父和祂儿子相交和团契，享受美好时光。 耶稣说，我们不仅要遵守安息日，还要教导人遵守安息日的真理。可惜有些人却在做相反的事。他们从真心顺从上帝的人手中夺取耶稣要给他们的祝福，阻止他们蒙恩，还把安息日说成律法主义和靠行为得救之说。 这种做法与上帝的旨意完全相反。上帝说，这是充满福气和喜乐的一天，而不是律法主义或负担。 以赛亚书 58：13-14 13 “你若在安息日掉转（或作“谨慎”）你的脚步，在我圣日不以操作为喜乐，称安息日为可喜乐的，称耶和华的圣日为可尊重的，而且尊敬这日，不办自己的私事，不随自己的私意，不说自己的私话，14 你就以耶和华为乐。耶和华要使你乘驾地的高处，又以你祖雅各的产业养育你。”这是耶和华亲口说的。 守安息日的诫命与其他九条诫命一样，都是建立在爱的基础上的。它和前面三条诫命相似，都是指示人如何爱上帝的，其余六条则是指示我们如何爱我们的同胞。 我们知道，遵守十条诫命相等于爱上帝，因为圣经在申命记第5章讲完了十诫之后，接下来的第6章就提醒我们说： 申命记 6：5 你要尽心、尽性、尽力爱耶和华你的上帝。 我们当如何爱上帝呢？就是顺服祂，遵守刚刚在上一章所提到的十条诫命。因此，全部十条诫命都是永恒不变的。我们的上帝不是混乱的上帝，也不是随意改变主意的上帝。 不管我们给出什么理由都好，只要我们企图证明上帝的安息日已经更改或废除，我们就是与上帝敌对的，就好像我们为了干犯其他的诫命而找借口一样，比如拜偶像、杀人等。 讽刺的是，那些宣称上帝的律法已经废除或不必再遵守的人，当你问他说，我们是否不可杀人，是否应当孝敬父母，是否不能拜偶像等等，他们就都完全同意。 但是当我们问到第四条守安息日的诫命的时候，他们就会搬出所有的借口，千方百计地否认安息日的有效性。这岂不是自相矛盾的最高境界吗？安息日也是十条诫命的其中一条啊。 雅各书说，若犯了一条，就等于犯了众条。所以我们不能只取自己喜欢守的而撇弃我们不喜欢遵守的。 他们就说，安息日和摩西律法一并在十字架上终止了，所以我们现在可以不守。这是极其错谬的想法。摩西的仪文律法和上帝的道德律法根本就是两回事。 仪文律法是暂时性的，指向那将来的救主；道德律法则是刻在石版上的，代表的是永恒不变的法则。安息日是在道德律法的十条诫命之中，而不是在摩西的仪文律法中。所以我们千万不要把它们俩混为一谈。 再说，摩西的仪文律法是给犹太人的，而十条诫命则是给天下所有信徒的。所以明显的是，十诫里的安息日不仅仅是给犹太人遵守的，而是给所有愿意相信上帝的人遵守的。 其实安息日就是上帝的日子，是耶和华的圣日，所以没有人能说安息日只是为犹太人设立的。正如出埃及记 20：10和申命记 5：14所说的一样： 出埃及记 20：10 “但第七日是向耶和华你上帝当守的安息日。” 申命记 5：14 “但第七日是向耶和华你上帝当守的安息日。” 如果你看英皇钦定本的话，这一节直接说：“但第七日是耶和华你上帝的安息日。” 上帝更在出埃及记 31：13和以西结书 20：20 特别提到，安息日是“我的安息日”。 出埃及记 31：13 “你要吩咐以色列人说：‘你们务要守我的安息日...’ ” 以西结书 20：20 且以我的安息日为圣。 对比之下，当提到摩西律法中的年度安息日时，上帝采用一个不同的字眼，说这是她（女字旁的她）的“安息日”，即以色列民的安息日。 何西阿书 2：11 我也必使她的...安息日，并她的一切大会，都止息了。 试想想，如果上帝差派天使来告诉你说，祂爱你，祂甚至差遣了自己的独生儿子来为你而死，祂想在祂所特别赐福和分别为圣的日子与你共度好时光，那么你会不会打发天使回去告诉上帝说：“对不起，上帝。那一日对我来说实在很不方便”，或说， “不，上帝，我不能在你的圣日与你共度好时光，因为那是律法主义”，抑或说，“你回去告诉上帝，我不要祂所选的那日子作为圣安息日，我自己选择的是星期日，外邦人用以敬拜太阳神的日子，就是上帝最憎恶的日子。” 希望大家认真思考一下，我们要顺服上帝，还是要方便自己。我们要随从上帝完美的旨意，还是随从自己自私的意念？换句话说，我们敬拜的是创造主真神上帝，抑或是我们自己？ 安息日对上帝为什么如此重要？ 现在我们来谈一谈，安息日对上帝为什么如此重要？我们已经晓得，上帝要叫安息日成为一个祝福的日子，叫我们在这一日得到休息、恢复、和喜乐。那么安息日对上帝而言还有什么其他关键的重要性呢？ 我刚才提到，很多人明白作假见证、偷盗、杀人、奸淫，拜偶像等在道德上都是错误的。但撒但之所以如此成功地叫这么多人远离安息日的真理，是因为他很容易说服群众，使他们认为安息日并不是那么重要的。他们违犯安息日时不会觉得在道德上有什么不对。 他们完全受迷惑了，以至没有意识到其实第四条诫命的安息日与其他九条同样重要，都有同样的分量，甚至更高。 所以我们不能根据自己的想法和感觉而行，而必须随从上帝的话语，看看祂是否认为安息日重要。如果对上帝重要的话，那么对我们来说就肯定是重要的。 圣经说，违背律法就是罪。不管你所违背的是哪一条诫命都好，都是犯罪。说白一点，拜假神、杀人、和干犯安息日都是一样严重的。而且人类犯罪是耶稣为我们死在十字架上的原因，相信没有比这个更严重的了。 下面我们来看几段经文，以明白安息日对上帝的重要性。 出埃及记 31：13-17 13 “你要吩咐以色列人说：‘你们务要守我的安息日，因为这是你我之间世世代代的证据，使你们知道我耶和华是叫你们成为圣的。... 15 六日要作工，但第七日是安息圣日，是向耶和华守为圣的；凡在安息日作工的，必要把他治死。’16 故此，以色列人要世世代代守安息日为永远的约。17 这是我和以色列人永远的证据，因为六日之内耶和华造天地，第七日便安息舒畅。” 以西结书 20：12 又将我的安息日赐给他们，好在我与他们中间为证据，使他们知道我耶和华是叫他们成为圣的。 以西结书 20：20 且以我的安息日为圣。这日在我与你们中间为证据，使你们知道我是耶和华你们的上帝。 安息日是一个证据，一个特别的记号，显明我们是上帝的子民，而祂是我们的上帝，并且祂也是使我们成圣的上帝。安息日特别指出我们所爱的，所敬拜的和所效忠的，就是那位赐安息日的真神上帝。 所以随意选择另一日来代替安息日的人就没有这个印记在他们身上。更糟糕的是，当星期日法令来到时，所有服从和接受美国教会联合政府所推出的星期日敬拜的人，都会领受启示录所警告的兽印记，因为星期日是效忠兽制度和他们的三位一体神的证据，就如安息日是效忠独一真神上帝的证据一样。 这就是为什么不守安息日的人总会掉进撒但一个又一个的圈套之中，而走在背道和灭亡之路上。问题是，有谁会选择拒绝上帝的印记而接受撒但的印记呢？这是我们每个人都必须做出的重大决择。 有些人就狡辩说，没错，安息日是个证据，但是这是给以色列民族的证据，与我们毫无相干。这种说法在某种意义上是正确的，安息日的确是给上帝的以色列民的记号。但是我们必须搞清楚，谁才是上帝的以色列民？ 我们必须分清楚圣经所论到的两组以色列民，第一组是属肉体的以色列民。 哥林多前书 10：18 你们看属肉体的以色列人，那吃祭物的岂不是在祭坛上有份吗？ 第二组是属灵的以色列民。 加拉太书 6：16 凡照此理而行的，愿平安、怜悯加给他们和上帝的以色列民。 属肉体的以色列民就是那些天生有犹太血统的人。属灵的以色列民则是任何接受基督，属于基督并活在新约之下的人。绝大多数的基督徒不明白这个道理。他们一口咬定以色列民只能是犹太人，这样他们就错过了这美好的福分，也就不能活在新约之下了。 上帝给犹太人定了490年的宽容时期，让他们悔改归回上帝，但他们一再拒绝祂，从公元前457年一直到公元34年，当年司提反被犹太人拿石头打死而成为第一位福音的殉道者，而犹太人从此就不再是上帝的选民了。他们失去了成为上帝子民的福分，于是福音便开始传给外邦人。论到现今属灵的以色列民，我们再来看几段相关的经文。 罗马书 2：28-29 28 因为外面作犹太人的，不是真犹太人；外面肉身的割礼，也不是真割礼。29 惟有里面作的，才是真犹太人；真割礼也是心里的，在乎灵，不在乎仪文。这人的称赞不是从人来的，乃是从上帝来的。 罗马书 9：6-8 这不是说上帝的话落了空，因为从以色列生的，不都是以色列人；7 也不因为是亚伯拉罕的后裔，就都作他的儿女；惟独“从以撒生的，才要称为你的后裔。”8 这就是说，肉身所生的儿女不是上帝的儿女；惟独那应许的儿女才算是后裔。 加拉太书 3：28-29 28并不分犹太人、希腊人、自主的、为奴的，或男或女，因为你们在基督耶稣里都成为一了。29 你们既属乎基督，就是亚伯拉罕的后裔，是照着应许承受产业的了。 希伯来书 8:10 主又说：“那些日子以后，我与以色列家所立的约乃是这样：我要将我的律法放在他们里面，写在他们心上；我要作他们的上帝，他们要作我的子民。 既然安息日标志着我们是上帝的儿女，那如果我们拒绝祂的安息日，不就等于拒绝上帝为我们的父吗？既然安息日是上帝使我们成圣的标志，那如果我们拒绝他的安息日，不也就等于拒绝让祂使我们成圣吗？ 其实上帝对我们的要求一点都不过分，仅仅是一个星期的七分之一，单单一日而已。我们还有其他六个世俗的日子可以从事我们属世的事务。 造物主要求我们献上一周之中的一日难道不合理吗？许多基督徒声称自己全心全意地爱上帝，但大多数人如何表现出爱来呢？他们嘴上说着只要爱上帝就够了，不需要守安息日，但是上帝吩咐我们当如何爱祂呢？就是服从祂的命令，遵守祂的诫命。 七字代表完美，这是我们一周有七天的原因。上帝的旨意和计划都是完美的，都是对我们最有益的。问题是，我们愿不愿意服从祂，还是选择随从人类的传统，给出许多借口来拒绝上帝的安息日呢？ 每当有人选择找出 1001 个借口中的一个时，可想上帝会是多么伤心呢！难道上帝不知道我们的心吗？如果我们找这些借口之一，上帝会不会知道？上帝知不知道我们因为不想给自己造成不便而不想学习祂圣日的真理呢？ 如果我们找出 1001 个借口之其中一个来违背上帝的话语，那么我们还可以说我们全心全意地爱上帝吗？如果我们不全心爱上帝，那么上帝会接纳我们进入祂的国度吗？ 不守安息日有哪些后果？ 下面我们来说说一个非常严肃的课题，就是不守安息日将给我们带来什么后果？ 雅各书 2：10 因为凡遵守全律法的，只在一条上跌倒，他就是犯了众条。 雅各书说得很清楚，我们若犯了安息日就等于犯了全部诫命，因为第四条诫命和其余九条是一整套的，我们不能把他们逐一分开来，另当别论。 如果我们必须遵守第七日安息日才算守全律法的话，那么绝大多数的基督徒岂不是都违背了上帝的律法吗？ 没错，事实就是如此。这也许让人难以接受，但是他们确实公然拒绝了上帝的诫命。难怪圣经告诉我们说： 马太福音 7：13-14 13 “你们要进窄门。因为引到灭亡，那门是宽的，路是大的，进去的人也多；14 引到永生，那门是窄的，路是小的，找着的人也少。” 大家回顾一下挪亚方舟的故事。挪亚传了120年，警告人说，毁灭世界的洪水即将到来，人类必须进入上帝所预备的方舟里去才能逃过浩劫。 结果最后得救的只有挪亚一家八口。耶稣说，人子降临的日子也是如此。每一个时代都是这样，愿意悔改接受真理而得救的人，总是少之又少。 先知何西阿也预言了上帝的子民会因无知而灭亡，他接着解释说，他们摒弃了与上帝律法相关的知识。 何西阿书 4：6 我的民因无知识而灭亡。你弃掉知识，我也必弃掉你，使你不再给我作祭司。你既忘了你上帝的律法，我也必忘记你的儿女。 这些人既然离弃上帝，拒绝祂的律法，那么他们的后果会是如何呢？上帝也必拒绝他们。大家想想看，今时今日世上有多少人拒绝了上帝的律法，特别是第四条安息日诫命呢？ 希伯来书 10：26-29 26 因为我们得知真道以后，若故意犯罪，赎罪的祭就再没有了，27 惟有战惧等候审判和那烧灭众敌人的烈火。28 人干犯摩西的律法，凭两三个见证人尚且不得怜恤而死；29 何况人践踏上帝的儿子，将那使他成圣之约的血当作平常，又亵慢施恩的圣灵，你们想，他要受的刑罚该怎样加重呢？ 希伯来书告诉我们说，没有任何牲祭能掩盖有意的犯罪，故意犯罪的人就好比把上帝的儿子踩在脚下似的。他们践踏了上帝的恩典和耶稣的牺牲。将来耶稣会对这等人说，“你们这些作恶的人，离开我去吧，我不认识你们。” 因此，拒绝遵守安息日和公然违背上帝的律法而又不肯悔改的后果是相当严重的。我们可能会失去天国和永生的盼望。再说，美好和谐的天国也容不下一个叛逆的人，否则新天新地又会出现另一个撒但了。 【钦定本】启示录 22：14-15 14 那些遵行他诫命的有福了，他们有权去到生命树那里，也能从门进城。15 外面有那些犬类、行邪术的、淫乱的、杀人的、拜偶像的，并一切喜好说谎、编造谎言的。 相信这里说得够清楚了，唯有遵行上帝诫命的人才能进入圣城。反之，杀人的、淫乱的、拜偶像的、作假见证的，都是违背上帝十条诫命的人。这些人将在城外等候火刑把他们烧灭。 十诫今天仍然适用吗？ 其实上帝的律法是否适用于今天这个问题，只要稍微运用一丁点逻辑就可想而知了。我们只要问自己，现在杀人是否无罪，我们是不是可以敬拜其他神了？如果依然是犯法的话，那么为什么每当论到安息日时，我们就会说上帝的律法已经失效了呢？只要我们一天还必须敬拜上帝，孝敬父母等等，我们也依然必须遵守安息日。 如果像十诫这么重要的律法发生了哪怕是最微小的修改的话，上帝就会以清晰的经文来告诉我们。所以我说，大多数基督徒不会争论十诫中的九诫需不需要遵守，但很多人特别将其中一条扫到地毯下，这种精神是从何而来的呢？答案可想而知。 就上帝而言，否认十诫中任何一条真理只能带来一种结果，而这种结果相信我们没有人会想承受的。 除非有人能找出清晰的经文说明第七日安息日已经修改或废除，否则第四条诫命的安息日与其他九条诫命一样有效。故意违反其中任何一条的后果都是一样的。有没有人相信他们可以随心所欲地杀人，而仍然可以进入上帝的国度呢？大家必须认真思考。 十诫的全部是否仍然有效？难道圣经表明我们可以继续违犯律法、故意犯罪吗？另一点是，我们虽然是因信基督而蒙上帝的恩典得救，但这是继续犯罪的许可证吗？ 耶稣死在十字架上，是为我们的罪付出代价，还是让我们继续活在罪中？同样的，我们必须从圣经中找出答案。圣经如何定义罪？ 约翰一书 3：4 凡犯罪的，就是违背律法；违背律法，就是罪。 罗马书 4：15 因为律法是惹动忿怒的（或作“叫人受刑的”），哪里没有律法，那里就没有过犯。 律法给我们指出罪来，而罪把我们指向救主。如果没有律法，我们就不需要救主了。使徒保罗是不是说我们现在可以随意犯罪了，因为我们活在恩典之下，所以律法已经结束了呢？ 罗马书 6：1-2 1 这样，怎么说呢？我们可以仍在罪中，叫恩典显多吗？2 断乎不可！我们在罪上死了的人岂可仍在罪中活着呢？ 罗马书 6：14-15 14 罪必不能作你们的主，因你们不在律法之下，乃在恩典之下。 15 这却怎么样呢？我们在恩典之下，不在律法之下，就可以犯罪吗？断乎不可！ 活在恩典之下并不代表可以活在罪恶之中。耶稣的牺牲并没有给我们犯罪的自由，这些说法都是为了合理化犯罪而曲解圣经所得出的结论。我们再来看保罗所写的几节经文。 罗马书 3：31 这样，我们因信废了律法吗？断乎不是！更是坚固律法。 罗马书 2：13 原来在上帝面前，不是听律法的为义，乃是行律法的称义。 那么耶稣自己又怎么想呢？祂是不是为了废除律法而来的？ 马太福音 5：17 “莫想我来要废掉律法和先知；我来不是要废掉，乃是要成全。 马太福音 5：18 我实在告诉你们，就是到天地都废去了，律法的一点一画也不能废去，都要成全。 路加福音 16：17 天地废去较比律法的一点一画落空还容易。 圣经说得非常清楚，律法的一点一画都不能废去。所以不要再说耶稣来废除律法，因为这与圣经的教导是完全对立的。 有人可能会说，既然耶稣已成全了律法，我们就不需要再遵守律法了。这是极其错误的解经法。请注意，耶稣在这里把成全一词与废掉一词做个对比。 废掉表示不需要再遵守了，那么成全的意思肯定是相反的。成全的意思实际上是落实或实践，使律法成为完全，让耶稣成为我们遵守律法的榜样。所以这些拒绝律法的理论都是不符合圣经的，都是撒但所启发的。 我们来看看，耶稣是不是说那些违犯十诫的人能进入天国。 马太福音 7：21-23 21 “凡称呼我‘主啊，主啊’的人，不能都进天国；惟独遵行我天父旨意的人，才能进去。22 当那日，必有许多人对我说：‘主啊，主啊，我们不是奉你的名传道，奉你的名赶鬼，奉你的名行许多异能吗？’23 我就明明地告诉他们说：‘我从来不认识你们，你们这些作恶的人，离开我去吧！’” 耶稣在这段经文中严厉地声明，那些故意违背律法之人的结局，是失去天国的福分。他们自称爱耶稣，奉祂的名行许多伟大的神迹。但是他们没有遵行耶稣吩咐他们遵行的最基本的事，就是遵行祂父的旨意。 结果耶稣向他们说：‘我从来不认识你们，你们这些作恶的人，离开我去吧！’。相信没有人愿意落到这样悲惨的下场吧。虽然我们不是因遵守律法而得救，但是不遵守律法的人肯定是不能得救的。天国容不下这些作恶和假冒伪善的人。 约翰一书 2：4 人若说“我认识他”，却不遵守他的诫命，便是说谎话的，真理也不在他心里了。 我们再来看一小段故事，说明遵守律法是通往天国的道路。 马太福音 19：16-19 有一个人来见耶稣说：“夫子（有古卷作“良善的夫子”），我该作什么善事，才能得永生？”17耶稣对他说：“你为什么以善事问我呢？只有一位是善的（有古卷作“你为什么称我是良善的？除了上帝以外，没有一个良善的”）。你若要进入永生，就当遵守诫命。”18 他说：“什么诫命？”耶稣说：“就是不可杀人，不可奸淫，不可偷盗，不可作假见证，19 当孝敬父母，又当爱人如己。” 我们再来看保罗怎么说，违背律法的人怎么在上帝和基督的国里无份。 以弗所书 5：3、5 至于淫乱并一切污秽，或是贪婪，在你们中间连提都不可，方合圣徒的体统。5 因为你们确实地知道，无论是淫乱的，是污秽的，是有贪心的，在基督和上帝的国里都是无份的。有贪心的，就与拜偶像的一样。 可悲的是，作恶犯罪的人是在天国里无份的，这就是残酷的真相。反之，上帝应许我们遵行祂诫命的人就必获得特别的福分，就是有权利进入上帝的国。 【钦定本】启示录 22：14 那些遵行他诫命的有福了，他们有权去到生命树那里，也能从门进城。 那么我们今日是否还需要遵守诫命呢？上面看过了那么多位见证人，答案已经非常清楚地揭晓了，特别是耶稣在马太福音第5章中的谈话。这些真理都是无可争辩的，其他任何的论点都是与基督敌对的。我认为所罗门在传道书 12:13-14中所作出的最后结论很好地总结了这一点。 传道书 12：13-14 13 这些事都已听见了，总意就是敬畏上帝，谨守他的诫命，这是人所当尽的本分（或作“这是众人的本分”）。14 因为人所作的事，连一切隐藏的事，无论是善是恶，上帝都必审问。 敬畏上帝和遵守诫命就是人所当尽的本分。我们还有什么借口说我们不需要遵守安息日呢？ 耶稣和早期教会是否遵守安息日？ 我们需要探讨和厘清的下一个论点，就是耶稣和早期教会是否遵守了安息日？如果安息日是一条永不变更的诫命，那么我们就应该可以找到保罗和早期教会遵守第七日安息日的证据了。 如果可以证明这一点，这将证明安息日从来没有改变或废除。那么我们可以证明这一点吗？当然可以，而且我们确实发现了保罗从小就在犹太会堂里遵守了安息日。 素常的规矩就是一个人素来或一直以来所做的事，而且是没有中断，没有停止的。保罗在建立早期基督教会时有什么素常的规矩或习俗呢？请注意下面的经文，这是论到一个犹太会堂里所发生的事。我们晓得犹太人在整个历史中都没有改变，都在星期六的安息日敬拜，就像他们今天仍然在星期六敬拜一样。 使徒行传 17：1-2 1 保罗和西拉经过暗妃波里、亚波罗尼亚，来到帖撒罗尼迦，在那里有犹太人的会堂。2 保罗照他素常的规矩进去，一连三个安息日，本着圣经与他们辩论， 保罗从小就和犹太人和法利赛人一起长大，他们一直都遵守第七日的安息日，从未改变过。 使徒行传 26：4-5 4 我从起初在本国的民中，并在耶路撒冷，自幼为人如何，犹太人都知道。5 他们若肯作见证，就晓得我从起初是按着我们教中最严紧的教门作了法利赛人。 使徒行传 13：42-44 42 他们出会堂的时候，众人请他们到下安息日再讲这话给他们听。43 散会以后，犹太人和敬虔进犹太教的人多有跟从保罗、巴拿巴的。二人对他们讲道，劝他们务要恒久在上帝的恩中。44 到下安息日，合城的人几乎都来聚集，要听上帝的道。 这是在耶稣被钉死、复活、升天以后，信徒依然遵守第七日安息日的铁证。我们还有一节经文为证。 使徒行传 18：4 每逢安息日，保罗在会堂里辩论，劝化犹太人和希腊人。 其实这不仅是使徒保罗的习俗和榜样，更是耶稣基督的习俗和素常的规矩。而耶稣就是我们完美的榜样。 路加福音 4：16 耶稣来到拿撒勒，就是他长大的地方。在安息日，照他平常的规矩进了会堂，站起来要念圣经。 耶稣不仅亲自为我们树立了榜样，在世时遵守了安息日，祂还说祂遵守了祂父的诫命说了很多遍，而且祂从未发表过任何声明，宣称安息日已经在十字架上废除了，祂甚至强调了律法永远不会被废除的永恒事实。 另外，耶稣在提到公元 70 年耶路撒冷遭毁灭时，说了以下这段话。 马太福音 24：20 你们应当祈求，叫你们逃走的时候，不遇见冬天或是安息日。 显然，耶稣的死并不能把安息日毁掉，祂依然非常注重和强调安息日的有效性和重要性。 根据圣经记载，安息日是哪一天？ 我们之前稍微谈到，圣经里的安息日无疑就是每周的第七日，即从星期五日落至星期六日落为止。相信大家都同意这一点。 先前我发过了一辑视频，列出了好几个证明安息日是哪一天的有力证据，题名为《圣经里的安息日是哪一天？》。要看清楚这课题的朋友们必须认真看看。 现在我们就从敌基督制度，罗马天主教的角度来探讨一下，看看他们怎么论到真正的安息日是哪一天。 以下这些天主教的声明回答了为什么大多数教会现今仍然将星期日定为安息日。大多数基督徒不知道这项事实，更不知道安息日的改变是如何发生的。 启示录 13 章告诉我们，撒但将他的地位和权柄交给了天主教。为什么呢？为了让这个堕落的巴比伦教会将安息日改为星期日，这是撒但最大的阴谋诡计。 撒但为什么要这么做呢？安息日是关乎我们效忠谁的问题。如果我们顺服上帝并遵守祂的安息日为圣，那就表示我们效忠上帝。 如果我们遵守天主教的诫命或遵守他们所制定的日子为圣，那么我们效忠的会是谁呢？下面我引述了天主教的两段言论来回答这个问题。 圣经是否支持安息日改为星期日的说法？ “大多数基督徒认为星期日是圣经认可的敬拜日。 天主教抗议说，是她将基督教崇拜从圣经中的安息日（星期六）转移到了星期日，而且若试图争辩说圣经记录了这种改变，这是不诚实的，也是对天主教权威的否定。 如果改革教想把它的教义建立在唯独圣经上，它就应该在星期六敬拜。” ——《罗马的挑战》2003年12月 “例如，我们在圣经中没有任何地方发现基督或使徒下令将安息日从星期六改为星期日。 我们有上帝给摩西的诫命，要守安息日为圣，也就是一周的第七日，星期六。 今天，大多数基督徒都遵守星期日，因为它是由［罗马天主］教会在圣经之外向我们揭示的。” ——《天主教弗吉尼亚人》，1947 年 10 月 3 日，第 9 页，文章“告诉你真相”。 他们非常大胆地承认说，把上帝的安息日从第七日改为第一日不是圣经所指示的，而是天主教因自己的权威而擅自做出的改变。她还给基督教发出挑战说，他们要是想遵照圣经的话语而行，那他们就应该遵守星期六的安息日为圣，而不是天主教的星期日了。 所以这很清楚，上帝从未认可安息日的更改。那是敌基督者所干的好事。这是无可争辩的事实。问题是，我们效忠的是哪一方？再来看几段引言，看看他们还有什么话想说的。 谁叫星期日成为圣日？ “也许教会所做过的最大胆的事情，最具革命性的改变，发生在第一世纪。 安息圣日从星期六改为星期日。 “主日”被拣选，不是因为圣经中的任何指示，而是因（天主）教会对其自身权威的感觉...... 认为圣经应该是唯一权威的人，在逻辑上应该成为基督复临安息日会信徒，并遵守星期六为圣。” ——《圣凯瑟琳教会哨兵报》，密歇根州阿尔戈纳克，1995 年 5 月 21 日。 再来看看这一段摘自天主教要理问答书中的引言。 “问：安息日是哪一天？ “答：星期六是安息日。 “问：为什么我们遵守星期日而不是星期六？ “答：我们遵守星期日而不是星期六，因为天主教会在老底嘉会议（公元 364 年）中将安息日的神圣庄严从星期六转移到了星期日。” ——彼得葛依尔曼（Peter Geiermann），《皈依者的天主教要理问答》，第 50 页，第 3 版，1957 年。 星期日是谁的礼拜日？ 所以我们越看越明，星期日不是敬拜上帝的日子，而是谁的礼拜日呢？天主教的，你守星期日就表示你承认天主教高于圣经的权威，并且效忠她的权威。这是个非常严重的罪状。难怪圣经说，在末时全地的人都要跟从那兽，并且要敬拜龙。再看一些引言。 “他们（新改革教徒）认为他们有责任遵守星期日为圣。 为什么？ 因为天主教吩咐他们这样做。 他们没有其他理由…… 因此，遵守星期日成为一项与遵守安息日的神圣律法完全不同的教会法规…… 星期日法规的制定者……是天主教。” ——《教会评论》，1914 年 2 月。 “我要好好提醒长老会、浸信会、卫理公会和所有其他基督徒，圣经在任何地方都不能支持他们遵守星期日。 星期日是罗马天主教的制度，遵守这一日的人是在遵守天主教的一条诫命。” ——布雷迪di2神父，1903 年 3 月 18 日在新泽西州伊丽莎白的新闻报道中发表的讲话。 我们通过遵守星期日为圣来崇敬谁？ 因此，我们通过遵守星期日为圣来崇敬谁？下面几段引言再次为我们确认了这一事实。 “是天主教……为了纪念我们主的复活，把这安息日的时间转移到了星期日。 因此，改革教徒遵守星期日是他们不由自主地向（天主）教会的权威所致的一种敬意。” ——路易·塞古尔主教，《关于今日改革教会的实话》，第 213 页。 “我曾多次向任何人悬赏 1,000 美元，只要他们能从圣经中向我证明我一定要守星期日为圣。 圣经中没有这样的律法。 这是圣天主教会独有的法规。 圣经说：‘当记念安息日，守为圣日。’ 天主教说：‘不。 以我的神圣权力，我废除了安息日，并命令你守一周的第一日为圣日。’ 结果你看！ 整个文明世界都虔诚地服从圣天主教的命令。” ——恩莱特神父（T. Enright）, 堪萨斯城救赎学院院长，1884 年 2 月 18 日在堪萨斯州哈特福德的一次演讲中，发表于《安息日历史》，第 802 页。 我们已经再三确认，遵守星期日实际上是对天主教表示至高的敬意和绝对的顺从。我们若要效忠上帝的话，就必须遵守祂的安息日。 谁真正修改了安息日？ 现在我们来谈一谈，真正修改安息日的是谁。我们都知道，从表面上看似是天主教修改了安息日，并且迷惑世人去遵守这个虚假的安息日。但是其幕后真正的势力或主谋其实是谁呢？ 可想而知，就是路锡甫，魔鬼本身。耶稣在世时，魔鬼阻止上帝儿子的企图以失败告终，于是他把注意力转向了教会。他最初试图通过逼迫杀害所有的基督徒来摧毁教会，但殉道只会让教会成长得更快，变得更强大。 撒但意识到自己可以从教会内部发起渗透攻击，因为由内攻击比由外攻击来得更有效。 因此，撒但赋予教皇他的权力和地位，也渗透了所有的基督教派，使他们重新接受天主教所有的谬论。这样他就能从每一个基督教派中获得敬拜了。 安息日标志着我们对真神的崇拜和效忠，是我们与上帝之间的印记。因此，撒但也想搞一个能证明世人效忠他自己的标志，于是就以他自己的敬拜之日来取代上帝的圣日。 撒但利用教皇作为他的代理人，将上帝的第七日安息日转移到纪念异教太阳神崇拜的一天，因此异教徒称之为星期日。撒但也知道太阳神崇拜是上帝所憎恶的，也是上帝让祂的子民落入巴比伦人手中的原因之一。 毫无疑问，撒但对这项成就感到兴奋不已，因为他成功让基督徒违犯上帝的律法、不履行安息日的遵守、并通过拒绝上帝的崇拜日来接受撒但的崇拜日并支持太阳神崇拜，而进一步激怒了上帝。 我们必须晓得古巴别塔最早的假敬拜，就是藉着在星期日敬拜三位一体太阳神来敬拜藏在幕后的撒但。所以三位一体太阳神和拜太阳神的日子星期日是分不开的。 我们不管是在星期日敬拜，或敬拜三位一体神，都等于参与了撒但的崇拜，而违犯了上帝的首四条诫命，也破坏了安息日的神圣意义。 话说回来，大多数人缺乏深入查考安息日的真理，就以为星期日是正确的圣日，这种概念造成了一种思维定势，由于他们从小到大的成长习惯，遇到任何不同的道理就会感觉不对，感觉很陌生。 这就是撒但从一开始施行的诡计。可悲的是，他非常成功，因为谬论总是流行世间的，是容易为世人所接受的，所以看似大多数人都明白真理，但事实却恰恰相反。 现在就是我们基督徒该睡醒，停止受迷惑催眠的时候了，我们必须意识到撒但的作为，并且从他的谬论中逃出来，从巴比伦和堕落的教会中间出来，回归独一真神上帝和祂的真安息日，承认上帝的创造和祂的权威，并遵行祂的律法。 安息日从创世到永恒 我们现在来谈一谈安息日的根源。安息日实际上自创世以来就存在了。上帝设立了一周七日循环的制度，并且命定了第七日为安息圣日。这就是为什么我们今天一周有七日的原因。 上帝除了在第七日安息之外，还赐福于这一日，并把它定为圣日，以作圣洁的用途使用。 创世纪 2：3 上帝赐福给第七日，定为圣日，因为在这日上帝歇了他一切创造的工，就安息了。 这是在罪还没进入世界之前就已经完善的制度，而且是上帝完美计划的一部分。可见安息日从世界的起头就存在了，并且到了新天新地也依然继续存在。先知以赛亚在以赛亚书 66:22-23 中预言说： 以赛亚书 66：22-23 22 耶和华说：“我所要造的新天新地，怎样在我面前长存，你们的后裔和你们的名字也必照样长存。 23 每逢月朔、安息日，凡有血气的必来在我面前下拜。这是耶和华说的。 经文讲得非常清楚，安息日从创世到万象更新都依然存在，并且一样是作为创造主与受造的人类之间立约的证据。以赛亚书的经文也证明了耶稣没有废掉安息日。我们在新天地里依然会遵守安息日。 说白了，不想遵守安息日的人就是不想进入新天新地。我们若想享受新天地的荣美生活，就必须在今生就开始守安息日了。朋友，你想在新天新地里有份吗？ 我再次强调，安息日与其他九条诫命一样都是永不变更的，从创世之初一直到永恒，皆是如此。 在进入新天新地之前，我们依然要经历最后兽印记的大逼迫，唯有靠着耶稣的力量忍耐到底，并且得胜，才能获得摆在我们前头的赏赐。请注意圣经怎么论到这些得胜的圣徒。 启示录 14：12 圣徒的忍耐就在此，他们是守上帝诫命和耶稣真道的。 圣徒是守上帝诫命，包括安息日的。试问不守安息日的人能成为圣徒吗？明显不能，他们都会在星期日法令的逼迫和考验中妥协，而归向敌基督的势力，成为逼迫上帝子民的一群人。 撒但将利用不守律法的人去除灭坚守上帝律法的人。正如历史上所发生过的一样，历史必定重演。 启示录 12：17 龙向妇人发怒，去与她其余的儿女争战，这儿女就是那守上帝诫命，为耶稣作见证的。那时龙就站在海边的沙上。 撒但在可怕的1260年的黑暗时期中逼迫上帝的子民，并且追杀那原始教会的余民，企图把他们赶尽杀绝。撒但为什么对他们恨之入骨，势必消灭他们呢？ 因为他们是上帝忠心的子民，他们谨守上帝的诫命。这里说得很清楚，撒但只与守上帝诫命的人争战，那些不守诫命的人都是属于撒但的，他自然不必去针对他们。大家难道还无法看清事实吗？我们难道还相信上帝的诫命不重要吗？ 我们应该渴望安息日的真理 如果您知道了耶稣从来没有提过一周的第一日，您会感到惊讶吗？祂没有说过安息日改变了，也没有说过祂复活的日子要变成新的安息日，或任何类似的话语。 作为基督徒，我们应该永远谦卑地追求真理，因为耶稣本身就是真理。如果我们全心全意地爱耶稣，我们自然会不惜一切代价地努力寻求真理。 然而，这么多人说着这么多不同的话，每一位传道人和教会领导各说纷纭，各自推广各自的真理。那么我们怎么能确切地辨认出真理呢？我们只有一个保障，一个可寻见真理的管道，那就是上帝所默示的话语——圣经。 以赛亚书 8：20 人当以训诲和法度为标准，他们所说的若不与此相符，必不得见晨光。 圣经永远是我们的最终权威，而不是任何牧师、长老、传道人或朋友。记住，我们要单单遵循上帝的话语，而不是人的传统和教导。 这篇文章不是要涵盖所有关于安息日的真理，因为可以研究和挖掘出来的真理实在太多了。我只想提出一些重要的论点和相关的经文，并且希望大家能看明安息日的重要性，然后有兴趣自行查考圣经，寻求真理。 愿上帝常与每一位同在，赐福大家。 上一篇 返回研究目录 下一篇 到最頂

All trinity studies Previous Download Next Why is the SDA organization Not Being Persecuted Today Here's the golden question-----Why is the SDA organization (supposed to be God's remnant church) not being persecuted today? Why is the church enjoying a golden age of peace and prosperity? Aren't these the last days? Is Satan sleeping or has the church become a synagogue of Satan? Ellen White gives us the answer, and there is only ONE reason, which wholly lies with the church: "There is another and more important question that should engage the attention of the churches of today. The apostle Paul declares that “all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.” [2 Timothy 3:12.] Why is it, then, that persecution seems in a great degree to slumber? - The only reason is, that the church has conformed to the world's standard, and therefore awakens no opposition. The religion which is current in our day is not of the pure and holy character that marked the Christian faith in the days of Christ and his apostles. It is only because of the spirit of compromise with sin, because the great truths of the Word of God are so indifferently regarded, because there is so little vital godliness in the church, that Christianity is apparently so popular with the world. Let there be a revival of the faith and power of the early church, and the spirit of persecution will be revived, and the fires of persecution will be rekindled." GC88 48.2 In summary, the GC SDA organization has-- (1) The organization has officially conformed to the world's standard, particularly the standard imposed by the World Council of Churches under the leadership of the MAN OF SIN. (2) The organization's faith (including the fundamental beliefs) is impure and unholy, in other words, adulterated with Babylonian doctrines. (3) The organization has compromised with SIN. (4) The great truths of the Bible are ignored. (5) The organization has become ungodly. (6) The organization values worldly popularity more than God's approval. Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top

All trinity studies Previous Download Next John N. Loughborough on the Trinity John N. Loughborough on the Trinity These are the words of one of the founding members of the Seventh day Adventist Church and the truth the Adventist Church was founded on. “BRO. WHITE: The following questions I would like to have you give, or send, to Bro. Loughborough for explanation. W. W. Giles. Toledo, Ohio. QUESTION 1. What serious objection is there to the doctrine of the Trinity? ANSWER. There are many objections which we might urge, but on account of our limited space we shall reduce them to the three following: 1. It is contrary to common sense. 2. It is contrary to scripture. 3. Its origin is Pagan and fabulous. These positions we will remark upon briefly in their order. 1. It is not very consonant with common sense to talk of three being one, and one being three. Or as some express it, calling God “the Triune God,” or “the three-one-God.” If Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are each God, it would be three Gods; for three times one is not one, but three. There is a sense in which they are one, but not one person, as claimed by Trinitarians. 2. It is contrary to Scripture. Almost any portion of the New Testament we may open which has occasion to speak of the Father and Son, represents them as two distinct persons. The seventeenth chapter of John is alone sufficient to refute the doctrine of the Trinity. Over forty times in that one chapter Christ speaks of his Father as a person distinct from himself. His Father was in heaven and he upon earth. The Father had sent him. Given to him those that believed. He was then to go to the Father. And in this very testimony he shows us in what consists the oneness of the Father and Son. It is the same as the oneness of the members of Christ's church. “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one.” Of one heart and one mind. Of one purpose in all the plan devised for man's salvation. Read the seventeenth chapter of John, and see if it does not completely upset the doctrine of the Trinity. To believe that doctrine, when reading the scripture we must believe that God sent himself into the world, died to reconcile the world to himself, raised himself from the dead, ascended to himself in heaven, pleads before himself in heaven to reconcile the world to himself, and is the only mediator between man and himself. It will not do to substitute the human nature of Christ (according to Trinitarians) as the Mediator; for Clarke says, “Human blood can no more appease God than swine's blood.” Com. on 2 Sam. 21:10. We must believe also that in the garden God prayed to himself, if it were possible, to let the cup pass from himself, and a thousand other such absurdities. Read carefully the following texts, comparing them with the idea that Christ is the Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Supreme, and only self-existent God: John 14:28; 17:3; 3:16; 5:19, 26; 11:15; 20:19; 8:50; 6:38; Mark 8:32; Luke 6:12; 22:69; 24:29; Matt. 3:17; 27:46; Gal. 3:20; 1 John 2:1; Rev. 5:7; Acts 17:31. Also see Matt. 11:25, 27; Luke 1:32; 22:42; John 3:35, 36; 5:19, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26; 6:40; 8:35, 36; 14:13; 1 Cor. 15:28, &c. The word Trinity nowhere occurs in the Scriptures. The principal text supposed to teach it is 1 John 5:7, which is an interpolation. Clarke says, “Out of one hundred and thirteen manuscripts, the text is wanting in one hundred and twelve. It occurs in no MS. before the tenth century. And the first place the text occurs in Greek, is in the Greek translation of the acts of the Council of Lateran, held A. D. 1215.”—Com. on 1 John 5, and remarks at close of chap. 3. Its origin is pagan and fabulous. Instead of pointing us to scripture for proof of the trinity, we are pointed to the trident of the Persians, with the assertion that “by this they designed to teach the idea of a trinity, and if they had the doctrine of the trinity, they must have received it by tradition from the people of God. But this is all assumed, for it is certain that the Jewish church held to no such doctrine. Says Mr. Summerbell, “A friend of mine who was present in a New York synagogue, asked the Rabbi for an explanation of the word 'Elohim'. A Trinitarian clergyman who stood by, replied, 'Why, that has reference to the three persons in the Trinity,' when a Jew stepped forward and said he must not mention that word again, or they would have to compel him to leave the house; for it was not permitted to mention the name of any strange god in the synagogue.”(Discussion between Summerbell and Flood on Trinity, p. 38) Milman says the idea of the Trident is fabulous. (Hist. Christianity, p. 34) This doctrine of the trinity was brought into the church about the same time with image worship, and keeping the day of the sun, and is but Persian doctrine remodeled. It occupied about three hundred years from its introduction to bring the doctrine to what it is now. It was commenced about 325 A. D., and was not completed till 681. See Milman's Gibbon's Rome, vol. 4, p. 422. It was adopted in Spain in 589, in England in 596, in Africa in 534.—Gib. vol. 4, pp. 114, 345; Milner, vol. 1, p. 519.” — (J.N. Loughborough, Review and Herald, November 5, 1861) Previous All trinity studies Next Back to top