THE SEVEN FEAST DAYS..still valid?

THE SEVEN FEAST DAYS..still valid?

First Prev
of 10
Next Last
jurgens

AOL

#1 Mar 2, 2008
I have noticed that there are a number of SDA who privately or in house-groups observe or utilise especially the FALL FEAST DAYS like Bacchiocci recommends we do
Jack

Blue Bell, PA

#2 Mar 3, 2008
There were many sabbaths, feasts, festivals, events, sacred pilgrimages, and ordinances spoken of in the Bible that are not practiced today.

Many of these, though spoken of, were not decreed by God, but rather were inventions by man. This is not to say such things were necessarily bad, quite the contrary. They were demonstrations of faith and the desire to please God.

But God made it very clear that indeed, obedience to his simple laws is more important than all of the trappings of the Old Testament sabbaths, feasts, and so forth.

Consequently, it is essential that distill what we are taught to only contain that which God ordered.

For instance, THE SABBATH, is a day God set aside at the beginning of this world.

The 10 commandments, are purely from God.

The two great commandments Jesus described in the New Testament.

The bottom line: Just because a sabbath, feast, or ordinance is described in the bible, does not necessarily mean that it was ordered or commanded by God.

Jack
jurgens

AOL

#3 Mar 3, 2008
In Levit 23 it speaks of the Feasts OF THE LORD...were they man-made?
Lay worker

Australia

#4 Mar 3, 2008
In Lev 23 there is an important distinction between the ceremonial sabbaths and the Sabbath of God. One needs to understand the differences concerning 'servile work' and why they are so described .

Later in the same chapter it speaks of the "Day of Atonement(s)" plural (Heb.); a holy convocation and please note God's emphasis on soul affliction and how the Day of Atonement(s) is a Sabbath of rest.

This Day of Atonement aspect is vitally important for all SDA's who appreciate one of the Main Pilars of Adventism ~ the Sanctuary Doctrine.

More info - go to

http://www.adventistlaymen.com/THE%20SANCTUAR...
SDA

Loma Linda, CA

#5 Mar 6, 2008
I am in the process of evaluating this very topic too. Let me recommend to you a couple of books by Andrew Roth ( www.ruachqadim.com ). I am not sure that he addresses this specifically but he does, in my view, clarify some difficult NT texts. The basic points of clarification from his and other writers for me is the history of God's church (i.e. "the Way" as it is called in Acts) and role of the Mosaic system for the (Re)New(ed) Covenant.

THE COVENANT –

There are two points here: First, there needs to be a clarification of the much of what is said by Paul in reference to what is translated as "the law". In many of Paul’s statements this almost certainly refers to what was commonly known at that time as a "code of the law". Besides Andrew Roth’s derivation from a purely NT analysis, there is now essentially absolute proof from the writings at Qumran….this more “scholarly approach” is derived by several academicians.

A “code of the law” is a system that was espoused by the rabbinate and the scribes (each had their own code of the law). It was a system of regulations by which a “fence” was built around each OT law to “guard it” and make sure one did not break God’s law. For example, God’s law includes not working on Sabbath. A “code of the law” would be that one should not walk more than 100 feet on Sabbath…the idea is that, while it is not clear how far one has to walk before one is “working”(i.e. would it be one mile or two miles??), walking less than 100 feet ensures that one does not work by walking. There were several different codes of the law in Jesus’ day…another code might regulate walking up to 150 feet as long as the temperature was cool ect. Another idiom for “code of the law” was “yoke”…Jesus said, "My yoke is easy". This is what He was referring too.

When you get a handle on this basic (and I think proper) perspective on what Paul and others are writing you see that the OT law is never belittled in any way. On the other hand, there is very explicit vitriol spoken of these yokes which are the "traditions of men". These yokes never made anyone perfect....never enabled anyone to actually "keep" God's law. When I was young I was allowed to wade but not swim on Sabbath...this is an SDA code of the law. God hates these codes/yokes. I think if you read Paul from this historical, and I believe Biblically correct, perspective he will make much more sense. The difficulty is that the idiom for “works of the law” was very similar to the word for (God’s) law and so many misunderstand Paul and think he is talking about God’s law. Much of the time, the difference between “yoke of the law” and “God’s law” in Paul’s writings has to be derived from the context because of the similarity of words in the Greek translations.

Paul (and other NT writers) say that the law is actually kept through faith. In practical terms this means that we, in good conscious, set aside the Sabbath as He leads us by His Spirit. Like Abraham, faith in Messiah is what transforms these intentions into Righteousness. These intentions (kavanah in Hebrew) are transformed by Jesus not only into Righteousness but also transform our heart…the law becomes inscribed in our hearts. The transformation into Righteousness of the sincere setting aside of the Sabbath is immediate while the transformation of our hearts is a gradual process…Paul talks about dying daily and the putting away of the man of sin etc.
SDA

Loma Linda, CA

#6 Mar 6, 2008
Second (on a deeper level) the author of Hebrews makes the clear point that the methods (i.e. ordinances etc….not at all referring to manmade codes of the law) of the first covenant could not make anybody perfect. Specifically, it could not change the heart or inscribe the law in the heart. Many people incorrectly (I believe) link these statements to Paul’s statements about codes/yokes resulting in much confusion. In fact, Paul is often talking about the “works of the law” while the author of Hebrews (possibly Paul) is discussing the inability of the ordinances of the OT law to effect the transformation of the heart. This system only performed two functions: it covered (atoned) the sins that were continually committed and pointed forward to the time when Christ would cover and remove the sins once and for all. The Hebrews lost their covenant with God not because they sinned…the whole system was a provision for their sins. Interestingly, they would have never lost their covenant for sin only. They lost their covenant because they failed to keep the ordinances which would atone/cover their sins until they could be properly dealt with by Jesus. So, there is no derogatory words for God’s law in the book of Hebrews either…just the reminder (and it would/should have been only a reminder to the Hebrew mind) that the ordinances of the first covenant were not a way to effect the promise in Deut that the law would become inscribed on their hearts…only a temporary measure to deal with sin so God could dweal in their midst until the Messiah. The ordinances of the New Covenant do not require sacrifices but a contrite heart etc.

So, in my opinion, God hates codes of the law and Paul (or whoever the author of Hebrews is) indicates that the ordinances of the Mosaic covenant could not achieve the reunification of man with God which requires perfect harmony with His law. Two distinct but important points.
SDA

Loma Linda, CA

#7 Mar 6, 2008
Early Church –
Most people, in my opinion, misunderstand the early church. In Acts there is a statement from the Jerusalem church that the newly converted non-Hebrews need only do a few things such as not eat meat with blood etc to enter the “congregation”. Most people stop reading here…however, it goes on to say that the Law (God’s law is meant here) is preached in all the synagogues which is were they would meet. The point easily taken by a Hebrew mind being that exposure of these new non-Hebrew “converts” to these teachings in the synagogue and God’s guiding Spirit would lead these “converts” to understand and “keep” God’s law by faith as discussed above. So the bar was set very low for entering into the congregation with the understanding that those entering the congregation would learn God’s law and incorporate it into their lives (i.e.“be convinced in his own mid” as discussed elsewhere in the NT regarding the Sabbath). The heresy of making people achieve some arduous code of the law before entering into the congregation was outright rejected. Interestingly, we Adventists have a code of the law that we require that people achieve before they enter into our congregation. God hates this and it is not Biblical. We should follow the teaching of the Jerusalem church.

So, in my opinion, it was always the purpose of God for us to keep His law. The sacrifices have been negated but God’s Sabbaths have not nor ever will be. To me, this includes the festivals.

What say you all.

Peace.
SDA

Loma Linda, CA

#8 Mar 6, 2008
Jurgens,(somehow my first post got lost so I am reposting and it is out of order...this and the next post should be read first before the two prior)

I am in the process of evaluating this very topic too. Let me recommend to you a couple of books by Andrew Roth ( www.ruachqadim.com ). I am not sure that he addresses this specifically but he does, in my view, clarify some difficult NT texts. The basic points of clarification from his and other writers for me is the history of God's church (i.e. "the Way" as it is called in Acts) and role of the Mosaic system for the (Re)New(ed) Covenant.

THE COVENANT –

There are two points here: First, there needs to be a clarification of the much of what is said by Paul in reference to what is translated as "the law". In many of Paul’s statements this almost certainly refers to what was commonly known at that time as a "code of the law". Besides Andrew Roth’s derivation from a purely NT analysis, there is now essentially absolute proof from the writings at Qumran….this more “scholarly approach” is derived by several academicians.

A “code of the law” is a system that was espoused by the rabbinate and the scribes (each had their own code of the law). It was a system of regulations by which a “fence” was built around each OT law to “guard it” and make sure one did not break God’s law. For example, God’s law includes not working on Sabbath. A “code of the law” would be that one should not walk more than 100 feet on Sabbath…the idea is that, while it is not clear how far one has to walk before one is “working”(i.e. would it be one mile or two miles??), walking less than 100 feet ensures that one does not work by walking. There were several different codes of the law in Jesus’ day…another code might regulate walking up to 150 feet as long as the temperature was cool ect. Another idiom for “code of the law” was “yoke”…Jesus said, "My yoke is easy". This is what He was referring too.
jurgens

AOL

#9 Mar 7, 2008
SDA : This is extremely helpful...I sincerely appreciate your commentary. I understand that the sacrificial part was done away with...however the memorial and teaching mechanism is still there. I believe the rediscovery of God's Feast Days are becoming a very interesting topic for SDA's. I cannot find anywhere the doing away with the FALL FEAST DAYS. To study this, in my opinion, is more important than insisting that you chew your food 32 times before you swallow it, or even the 8 glasses of water. Again, thanks for your sober analysis
Lay worker

Australia

#10 Mar 7, 2008
jurgens wrote:
SDA : This is extremely helpful...I sincerely appreciate your commentary. I understand that the sacrificial part was done away with...however the memorial and teaching mechanism is still there. I believe the rediscovery of God's Feast Days are becoming a very interesting topic for SDA's. I cannot find anywhere the doing away with the FALL FEAST DAYS. To study this, in my opinion, is more important than insisting that you chew your food 32 times before you swallow it, or even the 8 glasses of water. Again, thanks for your sober analysis
It is significant Paul makes NO emphasis or lodges any importance to the festal sabbaths; rather in distinct effort explains over and over the importance of the type of our Great Apostle and High Priest of our profession AND the Heavenly Sanctuary, where He is minister of the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man!

Concerning the matter Jurgens; you are not to JUDGE those who keep not as you suggest “in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the 'sabbath days ( ie ceremonial; "sabbath" which is genetive plural).

God has left in the type [Lev 4 & 16] for us ALL the great Antitype of the Sanctuary Service now and the cleansing of the heavenly which includes the cleansing and sealing of His people! What is to be remembered – there was no overlap of the feast days with the Day of Atonement. Those who wish to keep the feast days today are in denial of the antitypical Day of Atonement and declaring that Christ is no longer interceding in the Most Holy.

Heb 9:8-11 for example does away with the festal. Concerning the Everlasting (Age long) Gospel it is the truly circumcised heart which God despises not!(Rom 2:28,29; Deut 30:6; Jer 4:4 Ezek 11:19 ...)

Is this not the CENTRAL issue in the dealing with sin? Besides, circumcision was not an animal sacrifice or an offering; it was a type to be performed just like the feasts or other non sacrificial types until the antitype came. Paul said outward circumcision means nothing! Circumcision of the heart was always the issue! In other words, is circumcision painful; then is the cross painful? Then as to entering His rest –“For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither [is that] circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he [is] a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision [is that] of the heart, in the spirit,[and] not in the letter; whose praise [is] not of men, but of God!

So just like the law of circumcision being advocated anciently, if any come unto you today telling you that, you must keep the feasts they are only troubling God’s people with words and trying to subvert and JUDAIZE souls!

Rather Paul has said -“Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love (Gal 5:1-5)

If anyone keeps the feasts Christ shall profit nothing and your spiritual exercises are an affront and insult to God.
Lay worker

Australia

#11 Mar 7, 2008
There are some thoughts interposed by "SDA" above which require clarification...

SDA wrote:
"it covered (atoned) the sins that were continually committed and pointed forward to the time when Christ would cover and remove the sins once and for all."
COMMENT - this remark does immediately away with the Day of Atonement and the ministration of the High Priest and further this same comment used today also removes one of the Pillars of Seventh-day Adventism - the Sanctuary! The individual confessed their sins and was atoned, and stood as forgiven sinners; whereas the Day of Atonement however, sets forth they were to be cleansed in the type.
SDA wrote:
"The Hebrews lost their covenant with God not because they sinned…the whole system was a provision for their sins. Interestingly, they would have never lost their covenant for sin only."
COMMENT: As to the so called "Old Covenant" did not GOD require then, as He does now, a broken and contrite heart, than rivers of sacrifice?(Psa 51:16,17)

A broken heart exhibits a "circumcised heart" of true belief (Deut 30:6; 10:16); the sin problem vanishes into its true perspective; God will provide all to overcome. Grace is required at the beginning, grace is required at each advanced step; and grace alone will complete the work.
SDA wrote:
"So, in my opinion, it was always the purpose of God for us to keep His law. The sacrifices have been negated but God’s Sabbaths have not nor ever will be. To me, this includes the festivals."
COMMENT - this is a confusing statement and not clear - are you negating the festivals or including them for observance?
jurgens

AOL

#12 Mar 7, 2008
Bacchiocci wrote a thick book showing how Paul and other NT figures all kept the Feast Day Sabbaths. When were the Feast of Trumpets and the Feast of Tabernacles fulfilled? I believe the Feast Days go way beyond Isreal, and has much to say to the Christian..Say, SDA, are there any Sabbatarian Fellowships in your neck of the woods, who honor the Feast Days? When I visit my kids in the Loma Linda area, I would like to visit. A have noticed that Sam tried hard to bring the Investigative Judgment into the Feast Days...it simply IS NOT THERE!!
SDA

Loma Linda, CA

#13 Mar 7, 2008
I think Jesus said it best,(paraphrasing) "if you drink 8 glasses of water today, tomorrow you will still be thirsty. If you focus instead on the water I give to drink you will thirst no more."

Pretty much sums it up doesn't it...and pretty damning if you think about it.

Jesus said, "If I be lifted up I will draw all men unto me." From what I can tell, if you instead lift up postum, you pretty much just draw the kooks.

Peace.
SDA

Loma Linda, CA

#14 Mar 7, 2008
Lay worker wrote:
<quoted text>
So just like the law of circumcision being advocated anciently, if any come unto you today telling you that, you must keep the feasts they are only troubling God’s people with words and trying to subvert and JUDAIZE souls!
JUDAIZE. Wow that is a loaded word :)

Paul says, "For if thou (us gentiles) wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree (we were grafted into the Christ CONTRARY to nature no less): how much more shall these (Hebrews), which be the natural [branches], be graffed into their own olive tree?"

I suspect you mean RABINISIZE instead of Judaize. Christ was, of course, a Judean and is the author of the Judean faith. I can think of no higher calling than to be Judeanized :) And it is a pretty interesting event according to Paul who says that this act of God is "contrary to nature".

All kidding aside, I believe as stated above that the Rabinic Judaic system which is an extensive excerise in "codes of the law" is something that God hates. He much prefers/requires, as you suggest, a contrite heart. Abraham circumsized himself with a contrite heart. The point being that he did circumsize himself. I think Paul is pretty explicit (as is James) that we keep God's law. But the action doen't make us a Judean...Christ makes us a Judean.

Above I spoke of the Kavanah...but I was not clear..it is the Kavanah of the action. Kavanah without action is no Kavanah at all as James says.

What say you all.

Peace
Janitor

Seattle, WA

#15 Mar 11, 2008
SDA wrote:
I think Jesus said it best,(paraphrasing) "if you drink 8 glasses of water today, tomorrow you will still be thirsty. If you focus instead on the water I give to drink you will thirst no more."
Pretty much sums it up doesn't it...and pretty damning if you think about it.
Jesus said, "If I be lifted up I will draw all men unto me." From what I can tell, if you instead lift up postum, you pretty much just draw the kooks.
Peace.
What was that supposed to mean? You got something against people who like healthy alternatives to coffee? Adventists are hardly the only ones who drink wheat substitutes for coffee. It used to be much more common in the mid west in the nineteenth century among poorer people. It wasn't fancy, but it made a hot beverage and people drank it instead of coffee or tea.
Janitor

Seattle, WA

#16 Mar 11, 2008
jurgens wrote:
Bacchiocci wrote a thick book showing how Paul and other NT figures all kept the Feast Day Sabbaths. When were the Feast of Trumpets and the Feast of Tabernacles fulfilled? I believe the Feast Days go way beyond Isreal, and has much to say to the Christian..Say, SDA, are there any Sabbatarian Fellowships in your neck of the woods, who honor the Feast Days? When I visit my kids in the Loma Linda area, I would like to visit. A have noticed that Sam tried hard to bring the Investigative Judgment into the Feast Days...it simply IS NOT THERE!!
That's a pretty interesting book.(Actually two books), but I don't know any SDA who keep the feast days. The person who gave me the book was a member of the Church of God. They do.
jurgens

AOL

#17 Mar 12, 2008
SDA did not say anything against or for coffee..read the context. By the way, I drink the java and celebrate the Fall Feast Days. Bacchiocci ALSO seems to utilize those days. PURIM is coming up...read up on the Web on how the Jews celebrated this...makes SDA cringe..they drank wine until they forgot the difference between Haman and Mordechai..deals with Book of Esther.Do you drink the 8 glasses of water a day? On www.ellenwhiteexposed.com they say EGW ate oysters! Do YOU believe that? Go Janitor!
Janitor

Seattle, WA

#18 Mar 12, 2008
jurgens wrote:
SDA did not say anything against or for coffee..read the context. By the way, I drink the java and celebrate the Fall Feast Days. Bacchiocci ALSO seems to utilize those days. PURIM is coming up...read up on the Web on how the Jews celebrated this...makes SDA cringe..they drank wine until they forgot the difference between Haman and Mordechai..deals with Book of Esther.Do you drink the 8 glasses of water a day? On www.ellenwhiteexposed.com they say EGW ate oysters! Do YOU believe that? Go Janitor!
Ellen White didn't believe in drinking coffee or tea. She was apposed to drinking alcohol as well, which wasn't too unusual, she was raised a Methodist. It probably has a lot to do with much of what she didn't think right,(such as dancing, though I dance and many SDA do now). I belong to a congregation which keeps the Sabbath and a lot of the SDA customs, such as foot washing, but allows it's members to drink coffee and eat meat, if they so desire,(though most don't). I personally believe the Sabbath is the seventh day, but I never really agreed with much of the things Ellen White thought were so important to being a good Christian. I'm also a vegetarian, but I was long before I became an Adventist.
Janitor

Seattle, WA

#19 Mar 12, 2008
Oh, I drink plenty of water, but that too has nothing to do with Ellen White. I always drank a lot of water. I don't know if Ellen White ate oysters, or care. Like I said, I'm an adventist because I believe the seventh day is still the Sabbath. Ellen White was just one of the founders of the church to me. She wrote a lot, but it was just her own opinion in mine.
SDA

Loma Linda, CA

#20 Mar 12, 2008
Re: LLU visit.

I would be remiss if I did not point you to our guiding light...the university church! There you will find intense spirituality pouring from the pulpit. Last time I was there the sermon was titled "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer". Now this is loaded so hang on...evidently Rudolph was special and...guess if you can...Jesus was special!! I could go on mining the depths of this spiritual gem that Randy shared with us that day for hours...well actually that is about the only similarity but that shouldn't deter one from seeing the abject simplicity of this premise. I am still floored by the recitation of the whole song from the pulpit. True, Randy randomly interspersed it with phrases like "no..its just a trifle" and "its just a jingle you say" but I am here to report that he did not let that stop him and pressed on to the finish. Truly amazing.

Recently, the topic has been on the USS Freedom. This is a ship from which Randy writes letters. Now i think you can see the rich theological subject matter to be dredged from this scenario so i will not spoil it further.

Don't forget your Bible if you visit. You will need it a least once during either Sabbath school or the sermon.

Truly remarkable. I can honestly say I firmly believe they are enlightened in every sense of the word.

What say you all.

Peace.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 10
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Seventh-day Adventist Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
1260 days of the Papacy from 538 AD to 1798 (May '14) 2 hr Lay Worker 632
Heb. 9:23 revisited 2 hr Lay Worker 30
Why I Believe Ellen G. White was a Prophet (May '17) 5 hr Zog Has-fallen 349
What was the light from Gen. 1:3? 14 hr teacher 57
Questions for Seventh-Day Adventist 23 hr Zog Has-fallen 3
The Mark of the Beast is Imminent! 23 hr Earburner 68
Does sabbath day still exist Fri Romans 3-31 and 13-9 813
More from around the web