The Sabbath Trumpet: An Uncertain Sound

VERLE STREIFLING | Retired Pastor and Theologian

A few days ago, as my friend was witnessing in the mall, she was given a tract distributed by The Voice of Prophecy from their offices at Manila, Cebu City and Cagayan de Oro, in the Philippines. It was titled “Puzzled? Why not talk to God about the True Day of Worship?” The tract uses witness leading, question framing and many scripture twisting means, to put words into the reader’s mouth, as he supposedly talks with God about keeping the Sabbath, or receiving the Mark of the Beast.

Yet it’s amazing how “Puzzled” the SDA teaching about the Sabbath is, with many conflicting statements in many areas.  Their Sabbath School Lesson Quarterly, 3rd qtr, 1972 has in bold print, “Why is it wrong to read into a text something different from what it says?” (p. 40), giving the answer from Prov 30:6 and 2 Pet 3:16, to which may be added Rev 22:18+19. Yet such a specter looms from their conflicting views in their Sabbath doctrine. We’ll review some of these below.

Did God sabbatize, or cease creating in Genesis 2?  

The SDA Commentary says at Heb 4:4 the Gk. word ‘katapauo’ means “to stop, to cease, to rest…denotes cessation from labor or other activity…equivalent for Hebrew word ‘shabath’…literally means ‘to cease from labor or activity’.” Thus as the Sabbath is not in the text, God’s rest was not sabbatizing, (Heb ‘shabbathohn’; Gk. ‘sabbata’) but simply ceasing from creating. Their commentary concurs at Gen 2:2+3, yet they’ll still say God kept that first Sabbath with Adam and Eve (as Signs, June ’83,p.6). Their Clear Word Bible, 1994, adds 35 words to Heb 4:4, making it say the same, and the above tract “Puzzled” says “The Sabbath was made and given to man 2500 years before the existence of the Jews. See Genesis 2:1-3.”

Did God really ‘cease’ work at creation, or not?  

In 1958 the SDA Commentary at Heb 4:4 said “He ceased creating, and then continued in a state of inactivity so far as further creating is concerned.” Yet in 1967 their book The Watchtower: is it God’s Channel of Truth? p74 says “God rested (Heb 4:4) is in the aorist tense showing a past and finished action or state therefore the rest was all over, long ago; and besides Jesus said “My Father continues working until now, and I work”.”   If God has continued working until now, we know He has never kept a Sabbath since His rest ended in Genesis 3.

Is the Sabbath a feast as other Jewish Sabbaths? 

Their Commentary, vol 7 p 422 says “It may be noted also that ‘sabbaton’…is used of the day of atonement…of the feast of trumpets…and the first and last days of the feasts of tabernacles, as well as the seventh-day Sabbath”. Yet at Col 2:16 they say “the Sabbath days Paul declares to be shadows pointing to Christ cannot refer to the weekly Sabbath…but must indicate the ceremonial rest days…(see Lev 23:6-8, 15, 16, 21, 24, 25, 28, 27 & 38).” Here they selectively omit vs 1-4 twice saying the Sabbath is one of God’s feasts, and Numb 28 concurs. The above SABBATH SCHOOL Quarterly, p.56 affirms Col 2:14-16 doesn’t include the Sabbath “because the Bible does not actually teach such a thing…” This is cavalier dismissal and an outright denial of Colossians as part of ‘all Scripture’. Colossians does speak of the Sabbath for many reasons as: there are no other Sabbaths which aren’t included here; SDA’s use Lev 23:32 of these feasts to keep the weekly from sunset; it’s included with these feasts many times ‘in the Law of Jehovah God’(2 Chr. 31:3); the SDA Commentary admits the plural spelling ‘sabbatwv’ takes the singular meaning; Thayer’s Greek Lexicon concurs it has this Greek idiom; and ‘sabbatwv’ comes from Ex 20:8 ‘Remember the Sabbaths day (sabbatwv).

How long were the ‘days’ of creation?  

The Bible counts the creation days as ‘and the evening (dusk) and the morning (dawn) were the first day’ etc. It doesn’t say ‘light and dark’ or ‘day and night’, but uses ‘dusk and dawn’—the two ends of a 12-hr period of  ‘light’ which God called ‘day’ (Gen 1:5,14,16 & 18).

SDA’s Dr. Raymond Cottrell confirms this “By etemology and contextual usage ‘ereb-boqer’ refer to the waning light of the evening, associated with sunset, and the rising light of dawn associated with sunrise, not the dark and light portions of a 24-hour day. Context in the nine Old Testament passages precludes reference to the dark and light portions of a day. In no instance does it permit reference to night and day.” (A Colloquium on Exegetical Anomalies, San Diego Forum, Sept, 1997). So days in Gen 1 aren’t 24-hrs. Yet their prophet Ellen White said “…He means a day of twenty-four hours, which He has marked off by the rising and setting of the sun.” (Testimonies to Ministers…, p.136) This contradicts itself, for sunrise to sunset is only half of a 24 hr. day, and the Bible uses ‘from even to even’ to mark off a 24 hr day, not ‘dusk to dawn’.  So Dr. Bacchiocchi says “Note…in the Bible whenever a ‘day-yom’ is accompanied by a number it always means a day of 24-hours” (Sabbath Under Crossfire, p.82). And the SABBATH SCHOOL Quarterly echoes him “…the days are designated by ordinal numbers (‘day one’, ‘day two’, etc.) This is done only when a 24-hr day is intended”. (July, 1999, p.31).

But Amos 4:4 reads “Bring your tithes every three years (Heb ‘yom’); and Gen 41:1 reads “at the end of two full years” (Heb ‘yom’); and 2 Chr 21:19+20 have two years  and thirty two years (both ‘yom’). Add these to many in Genesis 5 and 10 where years with numbers are ‘yom’. The word ‘yom’ has over 30 uses in the OT, whether daylight, years, days, time, age(s), and figurative days, etc. These show assigning creation days a definition of  ‘24-hours’ is arbitrary, and contrary to good Biblical Exegesis.

How long was Creation? 

This naturally follows the above question. The book SDA Believe… says ‘after six days of creation…’ assuming each ‘day’ as 24 hours. Yet Sabbath Under Crossfire speaks of ‘creation week’ affirming that God created the Sabbath on the seventh day! (p. 62) But the Bible says God ceased from all He had created and made on the seventh day, so He could not have created a Sabbath that day! 

E. G. White wrote “I was carried back to the creation and was shown that the first week, in which God performed the work of creation in six days…just like every other week” (Spiritual Gifts, vol 3, p.90). We see she contradicts herself here, for ‘every other week’ is seven days—not six.

When was the Sabbath made?  

The Clear Word Bible at Lev 23:3 says “There has always been the weekly Sabbath” making the Sabbath as eternal as God. Ellen White said the Sabbath is as old as the Earth itself (Patriarchs & Prophets, p.336), dating it to Gen 1:1, before the days of creation. Yet Dr. Bacchiocchi said “It originated at the completion of creation” (Sabbath Under Crossfire, p.62); clarifying “God’s last creative act was not the fashioning of Adam and Eve, but the creation of His rest for man…” (ibid, p.294)

Bible Readings emphasizes God blessed and sanctified the 7th day not while resting, but after His rest was past (p.302, 1958 ed.; p.415+416, ‘1914 ed.). This asks ‘How could He have kept that first Sabbath with Adam and Eve?’ and ‘If the Sabbath were created (as Bacchiocchi), how could it also be ‘a memorial of creation?’ and ‘If God created all things ‘in six days’ (Ex 20:11) how did He later create the Sabbath?’ 

How many Sabbaths were kept in Acts?

Bible Readings for the Home, 1914 edition, says “Here, then, were seventy-eight Sabbaths on which Paul preached in one city…we have a record of eighty-four Sabbaths on which the apostle held religious services…” But after the 1958 edition we’re told Acts 18:4+11 “do not definitely prove the Apostle held seventy-eight Sabbath meetings at Corinth…” but only a “comparatively brief time during which he was permitted to use the synagogue”. Their SDA Commentary concurs, so what we were told about 84 sabbaths in Acts was not true!  

Irrespective their Doctrinal Bible Studies for the Layman by Mary Walsh, p. 98 still touts 84 sabbaths as does their ‘Collins Edition’ of the KJV with ‘HMS Richard’s Study Helps’, sold prolifically in the 1960 & 1970’s. Still, 40 years later, the Voice of Prophecy “Puzzled?” tract above, says “The book of Acts records 84 Sabbaths on which the apostle Paul and his associates held religious services.”

Does Heb 4:9 prove we should keep the Sabbath?  

In earlier years this text was so used. But before their SDA Commentary came out, Elder F.D.Nichol wrote “If you look again at the galleys, you will note that we declare at some length that we do not believe that Hebrews 4:9 presents a valid argument for the sabbath…Hebrews is not the place to try to establish the Sabbath doctrine”. (Aug 29, 1957, SDA Archives). So their commentary says “The writer of Hebrews appears to use ‘katapausis’ and ‘sabbatismos’ more or less synonymously” and “Because Joshua did not lead literal Israel into spiritual rest would be no reason for Christians to observe the Sabbath”. They add Ellen White’s words “The rest spoken of is the rest of grace” (GC 253) “It is the true rest of faith” (MB 1).

Yet their book Watchtower?… (above), 10 years later says of Heb 4:9 “It proves that the people of God should still be keeping the Sabbath…there is danger for Christians, that they will not be finally saved… because of disobedience…Hebrews specially links this up with keeping of the seventh-day Sabbath” (p. 73-75). The above Collin’s edition Bible gives Heb 4:9 to show the ‘Sabbath in the New Testament’; 40 years later Dr. Bacchiocchi so uses Hebrews 4:9 many times (Sabbath Under Crossfire, 1998); SDA’s 

“Puzzled?” has “What did Paul teach in regard to Sabbath-keeping? 

“There remaineth therefore a keeping of Sabbath (margin) to the people of God”; and their 1994 Clear Word Bible  “So there remains the offer of a spiritual rest that God intends for each generation to have of which the Sabbath is a symbol” (Review & Herald pub, 1994). The last 12 words aren’t in any Greek text, but added to the Bible contrary to their saying it’s wrong to do, in their 1972 SABBATH SCHOOL Quarterly (above).

When was Sunday first known as ‘the Lord’s Day’? 

In Nov 1998 Signs of the Times, Dr. Bacchiocchi’s article “Deis Domini” tells “The first clear designation of Sunday as ‘the Lord’s day’ occurs toward the end of the second century…” This virtually echoes F.D.Nichol in Questions on Doctrine p 166, “The earliest authentic instance in early church writings of the first day of the week being called ‘the Lord’s day’ was…near the close of the second century.”

But ca. 107 AD, Ignatius wrote “no longer observing Sabbaths, but fashioning their lives after the Lord’s Day, on which our life also arose through Him”, clearly showing the Lord’s day is not the Sabbath, but Sunday, when Jesus rose from the dead. (To Magnesians, sec 9, Apostolic Fathers, J.B.Lightfoot). Further Dr. J.A.T.Robinson in Redating the New Testament, 1976 proved the Apostle John was sent to Patmos by Nero Caesar, not Domitan, so his epistles date before 70 AD. Thus Rev 1:10 using ‘the Lord’s day’ came before 70 AD. Robinson also shows ‘Didache’ was about 60 AD, saying “And on the Lord’s day, gather yourselves together and break bread and give thanks”. Luke defines this in 62 AD, “On the first day of the week, when they gathered together to break bread” (Acts 20:7).  Barnabas (75 AD, Robinson) also writes “wherefore we keep the 8th day with rejoicing, in the which Jesus rose from the dead”. So there is valid early and apostolic use of ‘the Lord’s day’ meaning Sunday.

What is the Mark of the Beast?  

In 1847 Ellen White said “I saw…all we were required to do was to give up God’s Sabbath and keep the Pope’s and then we should have the Mark of the Beast and of his image”. (Word to the Little Flock p. 19, 1847). As only a Sabbath keeper could ‘give it up’ to get this mark, she said of those observing the first day of the week “the observance of this day is the mark of the beast” (Ltr 31, 1898). Yet in 1897 she’d said “When you obey the decree that commands you to cease from labor on Sunday, and worship God…you consent to receive the mark of the beast” But in 1909 she claimed ‘light from the Lord’ that when Sunday laws come, SDA’s were to show wisdom by “refraining from ordinary work…doing missionary work…let religious services be held on Sunday” (Testimonies IX p.232+233) So here she’d counseled them to receive the mark of the Beast!

Did the Pope change the Sabbath?  

The Catholic church says that following Christ’s example and teaching, from the day of His resurrection, she through the apostles and elders changed the weekly day of worship from the Sabbath to the Lord’s day (Sunday). Yet SDA’s charge Rome changed the Sabbath. “From Saturday to Sunday”. Ellen White wrote “I saw …it was the Beast that changed the Sabbath, and the Image beast had followed on after, and kept the Pope’s, and not God’s Sabbath:” (Word to the Little Flock, p.19, 1847). 

But SDA scholars know that no Pope ever changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday, as shown from their 1919 Bible Conference, recorded in Spectrum 10, no 1, p.56. A.G.Daniels: “Why not? The Pope did not change the Sabbath?” H.L.House: “But the Pope stands for the Papacy”. A.G.Daniels: “There are people that just believe there was a certain pope that changed the Sabbath, because of the way they follow the words. She never meant to say that a certain Pope changed the Sabbath.” Citing the Edict of Constantine isn’t valid for he was an emperor—not a pope, and there was no Pope by his time!  Great Controversy p. 266 says the Papacy was established in 538 AD—long after the Papacy allegedly changed the Sabbath.

Did the Catholic Church change the Decalogue? 

SDAs allege Rome changed the Ten Commandments, by dropping the ‘second’, and ‘dividing’ the ninth into two to get ten. (Great Controversy p. 50+51, 446, 1888 ed.) Catholic Bibles have the decalogue in both Ex. 20 and Deut 5. Many catechisms have it complete; some short catechisms abbreviate prohibition of images! But, following the Masoretic Text, they include images in the first command, and hold desiring one’s wife as separate from covetousness. The Septuagint 1000 years before the MT, confirms this. Thus the Hebraic Jews followed this ancient mode of division, while the Hellenistic Jews began the new mode, which Protestants use today.

Did Ellen White give truthful history in Great Controversy? 

In their 1919 Bible Conference, the SDA’s scholars admitted many historic mistakes in Great Controversy (Spectrum 10, above). Bros. Crisler and Robinson corrected over 100 in the 1911 revision, in 6 months at Stanford and Berkeley (Robinson, “Historical Discrepancies…” Olson, 1979). Prescott and others furnished other quotes for this (Spectrum); and Prescott affirmed “they did involve quite large details”. He changed “Babylon could not mean the Romish church” to “could not mean the Roman Catholic Church alone”.  Robert Brinsmede showed the source Ellen copied for the Waldenses called them ‘faithful observers of the Lord’s day’ which Ellen changed to ‘the Sabbath’!

Thus the 1919 Conference concluded just her Philosophy of history was inspired—but “if she endorses the prophetic part of our interpretation, irrespective of details, she endorses it” thus making it right even while the details were wrong. So historic errors yielded philosophical ‘truth’!—But it is still error (Rom 3:5-7).

Does God contradict Himself? 

Their White Truth, p.69 says “God never contradicts Himself” to prevent using the Bible to test Ellen White. Yet on p.93 they allege Numb 25:9 contradicts 1 Cor 10:8, to imply  Ellen’s contradictions don’t affect her ‘inspiration’. But Bible inerrancy pertains to its autographs, written some 3500 years ago, translated into different languages and recopied, while Ellen wrote in our day and language with hundreds of errors corrected and suppressed, and scores more remain. Bible difficulties can be resolved—and most have—but Ellen’s contradictions cannot, nor can her false prophecies be fulfilled.

Contrary to White Truth (above), April ’83 Signs of the Times article ‘Your Bible’ says ‘Forty writers have been identified…writing over a period of 1600 years. Yet astonishingly they all agree” so the Bible has no contradictions!  Yet Dr. Ray Cottrell, at the San Diego Forum, Sept 13, ‘97 affirmed the inspired Bible writers “made gross errors”, only writing to their “best understanding for their time”!

Is it wrong to change the Bible?  

We began with the SABBATH SCHOOL Quarterly saying it’s wrong to ‘read into the Bible what it does not say. Regardless, by 1994 they published their own Clear Word Bible with prolific additions, deletions and changes from what the Hebrew and Greek texts say. Gen 1 has 20 changes; chs.1 to 3 have 16 more, as 38 words added to 3:21 and 75 added to 3:6. Re the Sabbath 28 key texts were distorted with 33 words added to Mark 3:5; and 35 to Heb 4:4; and 57 added to Heb 9:6. These changes uphold their false teachings about the Sabbath and maintain Ellen’s contradictions to the Bible. Isa 8:19+20 says “If they speak not according to this Word, there’s no light in them.” 

Was Ellen White a ‘Bible Scholar’? 

Years ago we were impressed her writings had to be inspired, for no one could write so well, having only a third grade education. But the flyleaf of their 1970 paperback edition of Desire of Ages reads “Written with authority by the noted religious leader and Bible Scholar, Ellen G. White…” How many ten thousands copies of this ‘White Lie’ went out in its 6 printings by 1975?

We’ve seen over a dozen areas of error and conflict in SDA’s “Sabbath Truth”. Certainly, like the Voice of Prophecy’s tract “Puzzled?” which was given my friend witnessing in the mall, they ‘puzzle’ the flock.

Thus WW Prescott wrote “It seems to me that a large responsibility rests upon those of us who know there are serious errors in our authorized books and yet make no special effort to correct them. The people and our average ministers trust us to furnish them with reliable statements…but we let them go on, year after year, asserting things we know to be untrue…we are betraying our trust and deceiving our ministers and people” (to W.C. White, Apr 6, 1915, White Estate, DF 198).

This shows the solid-state confusion SDAs have even in their Sabbath teaching. In 1 Cor 14:8 Paul said “If a trumpet makes an uncertain sound, who will rise to battle?”—especially when it becomes an attack on the Bible itself? Can we claim to ‘keep His commandments’ while we alter His Word? If we’ll disobey God, just to uphold our ‘prophet’ or the ‘pillars of our faith’, don’t they become other gods, which we hold above Him? Surely the Christian who loves Jesus, will flee from such a Babylon of teachings and attacks against the Word of God itself, and rather hold to Christ who is God our Savior, and to the Bible alone, which is our “more sure Word of prophecy”. Hundreds of SDA ministers, and thousands of laity, have rightly done just that!

—Republished from Proclamation!, January–February, 2002.