RICK BARKER
In this blog I will address seven Adventist arguments used to justify their keeping the seventh day Sabbath.
- Jesus observed the Sabbath thereby obligating all of His followers to do the same
The conclusion that since Jesus is our example, we are under obligation to do all things that Jesus did, leads us to some interesting conclusions that are rejected by Seventh-day Adventists and by the New Testament. For instance, Jesus was physically circumcised, yet there is no longer any requirement for the followers of God to be physically circumcised.
Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek (Gal 2:1-3).
Was anyone at the time of his call already circumcised? Let him not seek to remove the marks of circumcision. Was anyone at the time of his call uncircumcised? Let him not seek circumcision (I Cor 7:18).
Similarly, Jesus was presented to God at the Temple and the required sacrifices were offered. This doesn’t mean that baby Christians are to be presented to God at the Temple with accompanying sacrifices. Jesus is not put forward as our example to follow in this Old Testament ritual.
Likewise, Jesus observed the Jewish feasts and festivals, yet these are no longer required of His followers, nor do Adventists suggest that we must follow Christ’s example in this. Furthermore, the observance of the feasts involved specific offerings and animal sacrifices, yet we don’t see Adventists arguing that these must continue as well.
In short, Scripture does not teach that we are to perform all of the same actions that Jesus performed, nor do Adventists contend that we are obligated to follow Jesus’ example in all things. Adventists do not believe or practice the actions that their argument would demand.
But there is far more to this question. Adventists argue that because it was Jesus’ custom, as a boy, to attend the synagogue on the Sabbath, that this practice proves Jesus observed the Sabbath. This proof of Sabbath observance relies on speculation rather than the actual testimony of Scripture on whether Jesus consistently rested on the Sabbath.
The evidence of Scripture is that Jesus did not rest on the Sabbath. Jesus was confronted multiple times about His actions, or those of His disciples, breaking the Sabbath. Adventists ignore the words of Scripture and claim that Jesus was only breaking man-made traditions about the Sabbath and not the Sabbath command. However, when one examines Jesus’ response in each of these cases, it is clear that breaking man-made traditions is not Jesus’ defense of His actions. For the sake of brevity, I will only address one of the cases.
The man went away and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had healed him. And this was why the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because he was doing these things on the Sabbath. But Jesus answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I am working.” This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God (Jn. 8:15–18).
The Jews accused Jesus of working on the Sabbath. Did Jesus deny working on the Sabbath? No. Did Jesus contend that healing wasn’t work? No. Jesus told the Jews that God works on the Sabbath and that, being the Son of God, He could work on the Sabbath as well.
Did Jesus call God His own Father? Yes. Does Jesus’ claim make Him equal with the Father? Yes. Does John say that the Jews sought to kill Jesus because they thought He was breaking the Sabbath? No. What the God-breathed words of Scripture say is that Jesus was “breaking the Sabbath” just like Jesus was “calling God his own Father” and “making himself equal with God.” If you believe the words of Scripture, rather than the traditions of man, you must conclude that Jesus was working on the Sabbath.
- The disciples observed the Sabbath following Jesus’ death (Luke 23:56) demonstrating that Jesus’ death didn’t change anything about the Sabbath.
Until Peter’s vision in Acts chapter 10, the disciples conducted themselves as Jews, following all of the Mosaic laws. Even Peter’s vision didn’t answer the question about how the Mosaic law applied to the church. That question was addressed for the first time at a church council meeting described in Acts chapter 15:
When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they declared all that God had done with them. But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses.” The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter (Acts 15:4-6).
As late as Acts 15, the disciples did not have a clear, unified understanding of whether circumcision was required for all followers. But, unlike the claims of many Adventists, the question in Acts 15 was more than circumcision; according to the passage it was also about keeping “the law of Moses”.
The Holy Spirit did not immediately dispense all truth to the disciples. The truth was given in accordance with the issues facing the church. The Gospel message was delivered first to the Jews. It wasn’t until the Gospel was being preached to the Gentiles and these Gentiles were converting, that questions regarding the observance of Old Testament laws would come to the forefront. One can’t conclude that behaviors of the disciples prior to Holy Spirit’s revelation in Acts 15 reflect the expectation for all followers of Christ. In addition, it is particularly disingenuous to point to behaviors that preceded the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost as being the norm for the New Testament church.
- There are repeated references to Paul observing the Sabbath throughout the book of Acts proving that New Testament followers of Christ continued observing the Sabbath.
Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. And Paul went in, as was his custom, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ” (Acts 17:1-3).
Acts 17 is far from the only example of Paul attending synagogue on the Sabbath, yet the message in each case is the same found here. When Paul arrived in a new town, the first place he visited to share the Gospel was at a gathering of Jews. Typically, such gatherings would be at a synagogue, although that wasn’t always the case (Acts 16:13). If one wanted to teach an assembled group of Jews, the synagogue on the Sabbath would be the ideal time. Paul teaching the Gospel at a synagogue on the Sabbath doesn’t demonstrate Paul’s continued observance of the Sabbath; it only demonstrates Paul’s preaching of the Gospel to the Jews in the most effective way possible. Although it is highly likely that Paul did observe the Sabbath, or at least not openly break the Sabbath, while presenting the Gospel as Paul states:
To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law (I Cor 9:20).
Paul had Timothy circumcised (Acts 16:1-5) in order to better reach the Jews on his upcoming missionary journey. Paul himself participated in a purification ceremony at the temple that included an animal sacrifice (Acts 21:17-26). Adventists do not claim that circumcision, purification ceremonies, or animal sacrifices are still required. Paul observed these laws among the Jews in order to win Jews, not because the laws were required of him as a believer.
Paul’s behavior among the Jews is not a demonstration that the Law remains binding.
- The Sabbath will be observed in heaven (Isa 66:22-23)
Let’s expand the cited passage one more verse in each direction before we conclude what exactly is happening in Isa 66:
And some of them also I will take for priests and for Levites, says the Lord. For as the new heavens and the new earth that I make shall remain before me, says the Lord, so shall your offspring and your name remain. From new moon to new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me, declares the Lord. And they shall go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against me. For their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh (Isa 66:21-24).
Isaiah 66:21 mentions God making people priests and Levites at this same time. I have never heard an Adventist use this passage to claim that the Jewish priesthood remains now and into eternity. Verse 23 mentions both the Sabbath and the new moon. If we conclude that this passage means that the seventh-day Sabbath is observed for eternity, wouldn’t it also indicate that the commanded activities associated with each new moon (Number 10:1-10) would also be observed? That the congregation will be gathered together each new moon and that trumpets will be blown over the offerings? It is interesting to consider that these commands regarding the new moon and trumpets are described as a “perpetual statute”. How is it possible that this passage proves the continuation of the Sabbath but not the continuation of the new moon observance and the Levitical priesthood?
Adventists also ignore the idea that, if this passage is describing heaven, it means that heaven will involve looking out on the dead bodies of the wicked for all eternity. Funny how Adventists pick one word out of a passage and conclude that it proves their point while ignoring everything else surrounding it.
The SDA interpretation of Isa 66 also ignores what the New Testament teaches us about eternity.
And I saw no temple in the city, for its temple is the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb. And the city has no need of sun or moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and its lamp is the Lamb. By its light will the nations walk, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it, and its gates will never be shut by day—and there will be no night there. They will bring into it the glory and the honor of the nations. But nothing unclean will ever enter it, nor anyone who does what is detestable or false, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life. Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, bright as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb through the middle of the street of the city; also, on either side of the river, the tree of life with its twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit each month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. No longer will there be anything accursed, but the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and his servants will worship him. They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. And night will be no more. They will need no light of lamp or sun, for the Lord God will be their light, and they will reign forever and ever (Rev 21:22-22:5).
The New Jerusalem has no night; the “night will be no more”. Without an evening and a morning there is nothing to set apart the Sabbath day; there is nothing to establish a new moon. Worship isn’t an occasional meeting; it is a perpetual state.
It is a solid principle of biblical interpretation that we use passages that are clearly teaching about a subject to understand the passages that are more vague. Revelation 21 and 22 present a clear and detailed description of the new earth. These should be our starting point in understanding and interpreting other passages.
- God doesn’t change (Mal 3:6); therefore the Sabbath command can’t be changed
The misapplication of the truth described in Mal 3:6 regarding God’s unchanging faithfulness and mercy in the light of man’s sin can be readily demonstrated by examining the ways in which God’s requirement for people have changed (even as His faithfulness and mercy remain constant). Let’s review some examples:
- God can’t change the requirement for animal sacrifices.
- God can’t change the requirement for circumcision.
- The priesthood can’t be moved from the Levites to Jesus. Jesus can’t be our High Priest. We can’t have a priesthood of all believers.
- God can’t do away with any of the feasts that He established.
- God can’t do away with, nor modify, any of the laws that He spoke to Moses.
- God can’t establish a New Covenant with new actions (baptism and the Lord’s supper).
It isn’t an honest presentation of Scripture to suggest that Mal 3:6 applies to one command but no others. Either the passage applies to every command God has made, or it isn’t about commands.
- Sabbath observance was commanded at Creation
This question ultimately comes down to whether our understanding of God’s teaching should be based on the specific content and words of Scripture or on the interpretation we add to Scripture. The simple truth is that no person is commanded to observe the Sabbath until after the exodus from Egypt. Furthermore, no person is described as observing the Sabbath until this same time. The claim that Sabbath observance was commanded at Creation can’t be demonstrated directly from Scripture; instead it requires considerable interpretation and assumption.
Adventists assert that because God ceased His work of creation after six days and blessed the seventh day that He was commanding Adam and Eve (and thereby all of their decedents) to rest on that day. While God did cease His work of creation, we know from Scripture (John 5:17) that God works on the Sabbath. We also know that God didn’t resume creating on the eighth day. Neither God’s ceasing His work of creation nor blessing the day is a command for Sabbath observance.
Adventists often try to claim that Mark 2:27 proves that the Sabbath was made for all of mankind, not just the Jews. This is a terrible abuse of literary context. The context of the passage is about what a Jewish person may do on the Sabbath, not a question as to whom the Sabbath law applied.
One Sabbath he was going through the grainfields, and as they made their way, his disciples began to pluck heads of grain. And the Pharisees were saying to him, “Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?”… And he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath” (Mark 2:23-24, 27).
This passage in Mark does not address anything about whether the Sabbath was given to the Jews or to all of mankind. Instead this claim by Adventists and comparison to Scripture is a demonstration of the common criticism that Adventists use “out of context proof-texts” for their teaching. The words of Scripture are very important, so citing a statement from Scripture that demonstrates a belief is a valid use of Scripture. However, in all language the surrounding words are an important part of understanding the meaning of any statement. The interpretation given to any passage of Scripture must be consistent with the information in the surrounding statements.
- Those who worship on Sunday do so because they believe that the Sabbath day has been shifted from the seventh day to the first day.
Adventists are correct when they state that there is no mention in the Bible of the Sabbath being changed from the seventh day of the week to the first day. Adventists are also partially correct in stating that those worshiping on Sunday believe that the Sabbath day has been shifted to Sunday. But Adventists are only partially correct in this claim. Plenty of Christians understand that the Sabbath day, like the other feast days, the sacrificial system, and the priesthood—in fact the entire Jewish system of worship—was fulfilled in Christ and no longer applies. This is not a new belief within Christianity that arose in response to Seventh-day Adventism. Nearly 500 years ago the Augsburg Confession spelled out that the Sabbath was fulfilled in Christ:
Of this kind is the observance of the Lord’s Day, Easter, Pentecost, and like holy-days and rites. For those who judge that by the authority of the Church the observance of the Lord’s Day instead of the Sabbath-day was ordained as a thing necessary, do greatly err. Scripture has abrogated the Sabbath-day; for it teaches that, since the Gospel has been revealed, all the ceremonies of Moses can be omitted. And yet, because it was necessary to appoint a certain day, that the people might know when they ought to come together, it appears that the Church designated the Lord’s Day for this purpose; and this day seems to have been chosen all the more for this additional reason, that men might have an example of Christian liberty, and might know that the keeping neither of the Sabbath nor of any other day is necessary. There are monstrous disputations concerning the changing of the law, the ceremonies of the new law, the changing of the Sabbath-day, which all have sprung from the false belief that there must needs be in the Church a service like to the Levitical, and that Christ had given commission to the Apostles and bishops to devise new ceremonies as necessary to salvation. These errors crept into the Church when the righteousness of faith was not taught clearly enough.
While this biblical view of the fulfillment of the Sabbath was largely obscured by the Puritan movement in North America in the 18th and 19th centuries, the understanding of this point of view has grown in the last century. When Adventists suggest that the only reason Christians worship on Sunday is the belief that the Sabbath day has been changed, they are ignoring church history and the contemporary voices of those who have left their movement. †
- Our Journey Out of Adventism - July 27, 2023
- 30. Adventism’s New Earth - July 27, 2023
- 29. The Adventist Millennium - July 20, 2023