International Bible Teaching Ministries
General Questions Relating to the Sabbath
Question 1: Should Christians pray on the seventh day (Saturday)?
ANSWER: Christians are to pray consistently (I Thessalonians 5:17), which would include the seventh day. Note that the saved in Acts 2:42 "continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers." In the model prayer (Matthew 6:9-13), Jesus taught us to say, "Give us this day our daily bread." Surely, Christ and His followers prayed without ceasing every day!
Question 2: What is the understanding of Colossians 2:16?
ANSWER: Most of what Paul wrote to the various churches was to warn Christians not to go back under the Old Testament; not be brought in bondage again to it (Galatians 5:1-4); not to accept the binding of the old law of circumcision (Galatians 5:6; Galatians 6:15); and not to allow Judaizing Teachers to insist that Christians keep the Holy Days (including the Sabbaths) of the Old Testament. This is precisely his argument and directive in Colossians 2:16. Note carefully the context of the passage by reference to Colossians 2:14!
Question 3: Mark 1:21 and Luke 4:31 talk of Jesus going into the synagogues and teaching on the Sabbath Day. If the first day was a commanded day, why didn’t He encourage them to assemble on that day?
ANSWER: Jesus lived under the Old Testament and kept its laws perfectly, including worshipping on the Sabbath. The New Testament, under which Christians worship on the first day, did not come into effect until the Old Testament (including Sabbath keeping) was taken out of the way at the cross and death of Christ (Colossians 2:14-16)!
Question 4: Acts 17:2 and Acts 18:4 say that Paul went into the synagogues on the Sabbath Day for the purpose of worshipping. This was after Jesus’ ascension. Why did Paul not encourage people from worshipping on the Sabbath?
ANSWER: To say that these verses teach that Paul entered the synagogues for the purpose of worshipping is to read something into the passages that is not there. The reasons for Paul going into the synagogues are clearly stated, i.e., (1) that’s where the Jews were to whom he wanted to preach and (2) he wanted to preach Christ (New Testament) to them.
Paul encourages people of all time and for all time since the cross to worship on the first day of the week by his example (Acts 20:7) and by commandment (I Corinthians 16:1-2). Some questions need to be asked. Why did these inspired men on a missionary journey wait for seven days (Acts 20:6) to meet and commune on the first day (Acts 20:7) if that was not the appointed day? Why did they not simply abide six days and worship on the Sabbath if that was the appointed today? Why did the apostle Paul direct the Corinthian Christians to lay by in store on the first day of the week if the seventh day was the appointed day of assembling? It is interesting to note that in the original Greek the word “kata” is used (Verse two), which means “every” first day of the week. Can any suggest that the early Christians engaged in all items of worship except “giving” on Saturday, and then reassembled on the first day for the purpose of engaging in that particular act of worship? Surely not. But why the first day? Because that was the day on which our Lord conquered death by His resurrection and it was the day that He established His church in which we worship Him!
Not only does the Bible show that we are to meet on the first day, but it is interesting to note that such was the practice on the basis of secular history. In the writings of Justin Martyr (100 AD – 167 AD) who was a pupil of Polycarp who, in turn, was a pupil of the apostle John, we can read these words: “On Sunday a meeting is held of all who live in the cities and villages, and a section is read from the memoirs of the Apostles and the writings of the Prophets, as long as time permits. When the reading is finished the president, in a discourse, gives the admonition and exhortation to imitate these noble things. After this we all rise and offer a common prayer. At the close of the prayer, as we have before described, bread and wine and thanks for them according to his ability . . .” The writing goes on to talk about the distribution of the bread and wine to the homes of the sick and about the contribution. Clearly then, both the Bible and secular history evidences the fact that worship of the New Testament church was on the first day and not the seventh!
Question 5: Will you explain the idea of being slave to the law of sin by keeping the Decalogue (Sabbath Law) – Romans 7:14-22?
ANSWER: These passages* do not indicate that one is a slave to sin by keeping the Ten Commandments! Paul in Verse fourteen is talking about his and our condition before becoming Christians. He is simply saying that it wasn’t the Old Law (to which we died and from which we were delivered – Romans 7:4-6) that was the factor which caused us to die spiritually, but rather that the cause was sin! When we obeyed the law of sin we were the servants of sin (Romans 6:16-17). But when we obeyed from the heart the spiritual law that was delivered us, i.e., the Gospel of Christ (I Corinthians 15:1-4), we were then made free from sin (Romans 6:17-18). Because we were made free from the slavery of sin and made the servants of righteousness through our obedience to that “form of doctrine,” we were, at that time and following, made to delight in it (Romans 6:16-18; Romans 7:22)! The law of God, then, that is discussed in Verse twenty-two is the spiritual law of God that is binding upon men who live under it! In our case, reference is to the New Testament (Gospel) of Jesus Christ. Surely, none would suggest that Paul was saying he was still under and delighted by a Law to which he had died (Verse four) and been delivered from (Verse six)!
*[Though Romans 7:14/22 do not teach that one is a slave to sin by keeping the Sabbath, it is clear that other passages do teach that if we attempt to justify ourselves by reversion to the Old Law, including the Sabbath Commandment, we have “fallen from grace” and are, therefore, in a lost or sinful condition. See also Galatians 3:25; Galatians 4:9; Galatians 4:30; Galatians 5:1; Galatians 5:6-8, in addition to the passages cited in the above answers.]
Question 6: If the apostle Paul spoke only about the works of the law (Romans 3:28), why did he establish the law (Verse 31)?
ANSWER: Again, Romans 3:27 and 28 is a comparison of the Old Testament (the law of works) versus the New Testament (the law of faith). He goes on to say (Verse 28), that man could not be justified by the Old Law, thus the need for a New Law. In Verse 31 he says, “Do we then make void the law through faith.” The answer is no! Neither Christ, nor Paul thwarted the purpose of the Old Law, which was intended to bring man unto Christ (Galatians 3:24-25). The word “establish” in Verse 31 does not imply that Paul was the Law’s originator. Moses had already done that. The Law was established in the sense that its completion and fulfillment was “confirmed” by the teaching of Christ and His apostles. There is nothing at all in this passage to support Sabbath Day-keeping!
Question 7: You did not fully explain about the law and times in regard to Daniel 7:25, how those laws (commandments) will be changed; those commandments which the saints do keep (Revelation 12:17; Matthew 5:17), the testimony of Jesus.
ANSWER: The statement incorrectly assumes that the “commandments of God,” cited in Revelation 12:17, refers to the Ten Commandments. There is nothing in the text that would so indicate. Those who “keep the commandments of God” are those who have the “testimony of Jesus,” not the testimony of Moses! In other words the reference is to the Christians to whom John was writing!
Christians were told by the apostle Paul that they were “dead to the law, that they were “delivered from the law” that says, “thou shalt not covet.” It was the Ten Commandment Law that said, “thou shalt not covet!” Therefore, Christians were, and are, “dead to” and “delivered from” the Ten Commandment Law (Romans 7:4-7)!
Certainly Matthew 5:17 has reference to the Old Law, but to relate this passage to what is said in Revelation 12:17 is out of order, since John refers to the commandments kept by Christians who have the testimony of Jesus Christ while Matthew (in recording the words of Jesus) has reference to the commandments kept by those under the Old Law who had the testimony of Moses.
Neither does Matthew 5:17 teach that we are to keep the Ten Commandments today! Such is totally inconsistent with what Paul said in Romans 7:4-7. Jesus is saying that He did not come for the purpose of destroying the law and the prophets (Old Testament). His purpose was to fulfill it! He further stated that nothing would pass from the law (Old Testament) until that time when all of it would be fulfilled. That time came when He died on the cross. At that time all of the Old Testament was fulfilled or filled full. Upon its fulfillment, it had served its purpose of bringing man unto Christ (Galatians 3:24-25). Because it had served it's purpose, it was, at that time, taken out of the way (Colossians 2:14). It was nailed to the cross in His death (Colossians 2:14)! When Christ (the Testator) died, His New Testament became effective (Hebrews 9:16-17), "a better covenant, which was established upon better promises, for if that first covenant (Old Testament) had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second" (New Testament) - (Hebrews 8:7-8).
The SDA teaches that the fourth beast of Daniel 7:23-25 is Pope Paul of the Roman Catholic Church who was to change the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday, the seventh day to the first day! The only thing wrong with this theory is that there is no truth to it at all! It is an attempt by a false organization to support a false doctrine proposed by Ellen White in 1863 by taking a passage out of context that had reference to events that were to occur during the Roman Empire which existed from 166 BC to 476 AD! Those spoken of in our passage of study who were to “think to change time and laws” has reference to the Roman Empire during its period of rule. They were to enforce their times and laws upon the Jewish nation that they had conquered. This they did, bringing to an end the Jewish nation and its economy in 70AD! Daniel 7:25 had its fulfillment in the Roman Empire at that time, not at some time after that. It is worthy of note that the first Pope began his reign in 606AD!
In Verse twenty-three of Daniel 7, it says that the "fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon the earth". In Daniel 2:36-45, Daniel is interpreting King Nebuchadnezzar's dream (Daniel 2:31-35). Daniel speaks of four kingdoms, the first of which King Nebuchadnezzar is the head (vs.37). This was the Babylonian kingdom! Three other world kingdoms were to come into existence afterwards (Vs.39-40). Daniel 5:28 tells us that the second kingdom that came into existence was the Medo-Persian. We learn from history that the third kingdom was the Macedonian kingdom; the fourth kingdom was the Roman Empire under the Caesar’s. Daniel tells us in Verse 44, that during the days of this fourth kingdom, "the God of heaven shall set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed." This prophecy was of the church of Christ and had its fulfillment during the days of the Roman Empire in Acts, the second chapter.
The fourth kingdom designated by the fourth beast in Daniel 7:23-25 is the same kingdom to which reference is made in Daniel 2:36-45. In both places the fourth kingdom (which is the fourth beast) means the Roman Empire, not the pope!
Question 8: Please distinguish between the commandments of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ (Revelation 12:17).
ANSWER: Those to whom John was primarily writing were the Christians of the seven churches of Asia (Revelation 1:4). They were Christians because they kept the “commandments of God” that were applicable to Christians! They (these same Christians) had “the testimony of Jesus Christ” in that they would bear witness of Him (not Moses) by sacrificing their lives in His cause (Revelation 12:11)! My friend, you cannot wrest this passage to read that the “commandments of God” mean that we are to keep the Sabbath. It just isn’t there! And neither is this phrase to be contrasted with the “testimony of Jesus Christ,” with the implication that we, in “keeping” the testimony of Christ, must also “keep” the Sabbath! This is the wresting of scriptures that lead to destruction II Peter 3:16)!
Question 9: Can you explain Ezekiel 46:1-3? Do these verses teach that at the time of worship on the earth similar worship is going on in heaven?
ANSWER: The book of Ezekiel consists of three main divisions. (1) Chapters 1-23: The destruction of Jerusalem, resulting from their rejection of God; (2) Chapters 25-31: God’s judgment upon Israel through other nations; (3) Chapters 33-48: The restoration of God’s cause in Israel.
Ezekiel 46:1-3 is simply discussing the restoration of proper worship practices in a restored temple before God, but only for the people of Israel who lived during and under the Old Testament. In doing so it also instructs as to whom would participate in the restored worship, i.e., the people of that day, the prince/ruler of Israel, and the priests. It has nothing to do with those of us who live under the New Testament of Jesus Christ. Certainly it does not teach that similar worship practices are being practiced in Heaven at the same time or any other time for that matter. Heaven is a place of spiritual things. It is not a place with a physical temple in which physical animals are being sacrificed on literal fire. Note that Verse three discusses an opening of gates during the day and a shutting of gates during the night. This has reference to that which is physical. Of the gates of Heaven, John says in Revelation 21:25, “And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.”
The Sabbath-keepers have wrested this and many other passages in an effort to support the unsupportable!
Question 10: Would you explain Matthew 5:19 and Luke 16:17 more fully?
ANSWER: These passages are saying the same thing, but neither can be taken out of context. In other words, Matthew 5:19 cannot be properly understood without consideration of Matthew 5:17-18: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am come not to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” Adventist’s hold that “all” will not be fulfilled until the end of time! They hold that the ceremonial law (which they call the Law of Moses) was fulfilled at the Cross, but the Ten Commandments (which they call the Law of God) will not be fulfilled until the end of time! The Bible, however, does not make such a distinction. The notion, therefore, is in error! This certainly then cannot be the discussion of Matthew 5:17-19. What is being discussed is the fulfillment of the law and the prophets, which means “all” of the Old Testament! Jesus is simply saying that He did not come for the purpose of destroying the law and the prophets (Old Testament). His purpose was to fulfill it! He further stated that nothing would pass from the law (Old Testament) until that time when “all” of it would be fulfilled. That time came when He died on the cross. At that time all of the Old Testament was fulfilled or filled full. Upon its fulfillment, it had served its purpose of bringing man unto Christ (Galatians 3:24-25). Because it had served its purpose, it was, at that time, taken out of the way (Colossians 2:14).
Now to Verse nineteen: “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven; but whosoever shall do and teach them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” Every jot and tittle of the law was considered inspired of God. The “jot” had reference to the smallest letter of the Hebrew language and a “tittle” was a little mark used to distinguish between letters that would otherwise appear the same. Jesus said that even these would not pass until all be fulfilled, as explained above! Now the verse is not teaching, nor does it in any way imply, as the SDA might say, that these least, or any other, of the commandments of the Old Law were to be kept and obeyed in the Kingdom of God, the church. Note that at this time, the kingdom of God had not come, yet it was near (at hand) as we learn in Matthew 4:17. Jesus and His disciples, along with John and his disciples, were preparing a people for the kingdom that was to come on the Day of Pentecost as described in Acts, Chapter two. So, we know for sure that Jesus was not talking to people in Matthew 5:17-20 that were in the kingdom! With this knowledge then, let’s consider what is being said in Matthew 5:19. Christ is simply saying this: ‘Whosoever (of you to whom I am speaking that are under the Old Law) shall break one of these least commandments (before all is fulfilled), and shall so teach men (who are under that Old Law) shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven (when it comes): but whosoever (of you to whom I am speaking that are under the Old Law) shall do and teach them (before all is fulfilled), the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven (when it comes).” So the idea is that if one of these to whom Jesus was speaking, that was under the Old Law, would break the least of the commandments under that Old Law before the kingdom came, he would be of such character that, if he were in the kingdom yet to come, he would also break the laws of that kingdom and would, therefore, be the least in that kingdom and, of course, eventually be lost. Conversely, if one would keep the commandments under the Old Law before the kingdom came, if he were to be a citizen of that kingdom to come, he would be called “great,” because he would be of such character that he would also keep the commandments of the New Law of the kingdom, as he did the Old Law when it was in effect! Clearly, Christ is not saying that the commandments that were then binding under the Old Law would be carried over into the kingdom that was yet to come and be taught there along with the New Law, since He has said in Verses seventeen and eighteen, that with the fulfillment of the Law and the prophets (the Old Testament), it would, at that time, pass away! In Verse twenty, Christ refers to the Scribes and Pharisees, implying that they were those guilty of breaking the commandments and teaching others to do so. He further says that in order to enter the kingdom, those to whom He was speaking must not be of their character, but they must have greater character and be more righteous under the Old Law than were the Scribes and Pharisees, so that they could enter the kingdom that was to come. If one were no more righteous than the Scribes and Pharisees, they would not be permitted entry into the kingdom upon its arrival, because if they, as the Scribes and Pharisees, broke the old commandments of the Law, they would also, unrighteously, break the new commandments of the law of the kingdom!
Luke 16:17 when taken in concert with Verse sixteen expresses the same principle. The law and the prophets were “until” John, i.e., “until” the time that the kingdom that John and Christ preached (Matthew 3:2; Matthew 4:17) came into existence. If the law and the prophets (the Old Testament) was to be bound “until” the kingdom came, then it follows that those laws were not binding “after” that time and, therefore, were not a part of the promised kingdom, the church of Christ! Verse seventeen is simply teaching that it would have been easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one “tittle” of the law to pass away before the kingdom came!
Question 11: Could you list the works of the Mosaic Law (Galatians 2:16)?
ANSWER: There were, literally, hundreds of “works” or “requirements” within the Mosaic Law! Generally, they include all of the activities that were required of those answerable to the Mosaic Law as set forth in all governing laws, ordinances, and commandments that are contained in the books of Law, i.e., the Pentateuch, or the first five books of the Old Testament. To list these would require copying much of the material contained therein, especially the book of Leviticus. To do this would require more time than is available! However, a quick scanning of the subject matter of each chapter in this book, as indicated by the publishers of most King James Bibles, will attest to the reality of the hundreds of “works” under the Law of Moses!
Question 12: Does not Acts 2:46 teach that the Christians of that day communed on every day, not just the first day of the week?
ANSWER: No! It does not! The notion that Acts 2:46 refers to the Lord’s Supper is without scholarship. None but the SDA could begin to make such a claim. Acts 2:42, not 2:46, discusses those things of religious significance. According to what you suggest the people were in the temple and then left the temple to go home and partake of the Lord’s Supper. The notion doesn’t hold water and somehow, having often communicated with members of the SDA previously, I think you know better; that you’re not being totally up front with me in order to prove your contention! Paul and the other in Acts 20:7 were continuing steadfastly in the apostle’s doctrine (Acts 2:42) by partaking of the Lord’s Supper on the first day of the week. Paul abode there for seven days in order to do so! According to your teaching, he didn’t need to be there for seven days, since he should have partaken of the Lord’s Supper on the preceding day! Consider the first sentence of Acts 20:7 without the phrase: “And upon the first day of the week, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow.” Question: Why did he preach unto them on the first day of the week? Answer: According to the phrase, because that’s the day they came together to break bread! It cannot be successfully denied! In fact “break bread” is a figure of speech called a “synecdoche,” which is defined as that for which a part is put for the whole. In other words, “break bread” includes the Lord’s Supper, but also indicates the total worship service!
Question 13: Does not I Corinthians 16:1 teach that Christians are to lay by in store on the first day of the week in their homes?
ANSWER: No! The idea that Paul is telling the Corinthians to collect (lay by in store) on the first day of the week in their homes so they can contribute it in on the seventh day of the week is irrational! Why would such a command be necessary? Would one be sinning if he were to “lay by in store” at home upon the second day of the week? Would this not be a violation of the command? Surely! Are not all provisions for the offering to be made prior to the offering? The very command to “give” as one “purposeth in his heart” (II Corinthians 9:7) of itself demands prior preparation. To suggest that Paul is saying in I Corinthians 16:1-2 that individuals were told that they were to “give” into a common treasury on the seventh day of the week, but were so stupid they didn’t know they had to make the necessary preparation to do so, and, therefore, had to be told to make that preparation on the first day of every week to the exclusion of all other days approaches the absurd! The idea of the passage is that each Christian within the congregation at Corinth was told to “lay by in store” upon the first day of every week, so that there would be no collection necessary “when I come.” In order that there be no collection necessary ‘when he came,’ it follows that all that was collected was to be in “one place.” How could this be assured? Only if that which had been previously purposed by each individual was put into “one place.” When was it put into that “one place?” On the first day of every week! Why would they do it on that day? Because that’s the day they came together to worship (Acts 20:7)! According to SDA doctrine, one must assume that the passage teaches that a collection was to be made by each individual on the first day of every week and that it was to be kept in each individual’s house until Paul came. Whatever specific collection was to be taken up was specifically so that there would be no gatherings when Paul came! There is no allowance in this passage for a general collection of the individual collections on the seventh day of the week as alleged by the SDA! The passage is teaching one collection or the other, but not both! If it teaches that the collection is to be made by each individual in the home on the first day of every week, then where does this passage teach that these are to bring it to the general assembly, and on what day, in order to prevent the necessity of collection when Paul came? The SDA error and their illogical approach to this passage is typical of their approach to all other passages. The effort is not to seek he truth, but rather to prove the teachings of Ellen White whom many of them accept as inspired! The reason the SDA teaches what they do on this passage is that they must do so, because they know it would be ridiculous to assemble on the seventh day for worship, go home, then return on the first day to give as they had been prospered! Nonetheless, that which they have wrested this passage to mean is just as ridiculous! If they accepted the truth of I Corinthians 16:1-2, then it would be an admission that they are in error as to the day of worship. Thus, they construct a second error that is even more ridiculous to cover their first error!