I am a huge fan of Amazing Facts. Those where the first Bible studies I got when I met up with the Adventist people 12 years ago. In those colorful, beautiful Bible studies, I saw sincerity. They really put alot into this ministry. That means they really care. I was instructed in all kinds of sound doctrine and was reborn in this knowledge.

I don't want anyone to think that I wish to criticize this ministry. But there are a few things that when I hear Doug say, I cringe. I will just list some of the things I disagree with:

For instance, there are 3 verses which supposedly all deal with the Jewish feast days. I believe, one verse deals with feast days, another addresses the issue of pagan holidays, and another rebukes gentiles for their returning to astrology.



Obviously these are are the annual feast days which required meat and drink offerings and the eating of certain kinds of food. This one verse does not abolish the Sabbath of the Ten Commandments from which Jesus said no jot or tittle shall ever fail. I agree with that.

But what about this one?



This can't be talking about the feast days. An observer of times is an astrologer. Alot of Christians think astrology is ok and doesn't conflict with Christianity.



Also:


These where gentiles. They had not been keeping Jewish feast days, so how could they be brought in bondage again?

Also the Apostles didn't call feast days a bondage or "beggarly elements". Paul said "Let no man[/b] therefore judge you" concerning feast days. He didn't criticize people if they wanted to keep them.
These elements where "elements of the world". The feasts are not of the world. He's talking about pagan gods, possibly even signs of the zodiac.

The other verse:



How can this have anything to do with yearly feast days established in the law of Moses. Did men esteem those days, or did God? God established those days, not men. They cannot be called "days esteemed by men".

And was Paul a raving lunatic? Was he a mad man who couldn't keep his mind focused?

He was talking about pagan idolatry then he talks about Jewish feast days for half a verse and switches back again to the topic of pagan idolatry?

No. Paul was yet of sound mind and body.

He's talking about pagan holidays.



There where Gentile Christians who are afraid of relapsing into idolatry and avoiding idols is a big thing for them to show their faith. Then there where Jewish Christians who never worshipped the idols, but where so used to seeing them, they seemed like nothing more than decoration. You can read more about this in 1 Cor 8 and 10.

Some eat, with no regard to the idol and some are afraid to eat because of their idolatrous past.



Some also don't want to honor Pagan gods by observing pagan holidays, and others don't see the harm in it.

Take Christmas for instance. Alot of people decorate a tree, but that comes from paganism. The pagans used to take a tree and hang the shrunken heads of their enemies on it and put gifts under it. That's where that custom comes from. Some might be conscientious of this and refuse to celebrate Christmas. We are to respect their convictions. Others feel differently and use Christmas to have a family reunion and have no problems with the tree or Santa's magic or any of it. We are not to trouble them about it.

Some might feel strongly about Easter, which gets it's name from the pagan Goddess Ishtar, in the Bible known as Ashtaroth: ("And they forsook the LORD, and served Baal and Ashtaroth", Judges 2:13; 10:6; 1 Sam. 7:3,4; 12:10; 31:10.). Bunnies and eggs are fertility symbols.

Some feel conscientious about Easter while others will give their children bunny shaped chocolates and let them do the super fun activities with the other children, lest they should harden their hearts.

We can understand things from either perspective.

But Romans 14 has not one single comment pertaining to annual Jewish feast days. The whole chapter deals with people's convictions about paganism in our culture.

Good perspective on the passage. I have never heard this one.

This is being moved over to the Theology section.

The Feast Days is an interesting subject. It has been reviewed and failed several times by various folks. I know many have found compelling statements for this, and claimed to have 'new light'. There is nothing new here here.

In my opinion and experience, this has split Churches and done much harm to the work.

Finally I'm able to reply.

This is about interpretations, not theology. This also has nothing to do with whether or not Christians should keep feast days. I don't see how you could have come to that conclusion if you had read it.

Perhaps it's an honest mistake. I just didn't see it coming.

I can see how you may have thought it was not theological, but any time we are discussing the will of God as revealed in the Bible, there is a sense in which it is theological.

The will of God in this matter is that we need to keep the Sabbath, but not the feast days.

I'm not changing this. I'm not trying to reveal some new will of God or some new doctrine.

I'm saying that certain things have been interpreted wrong. Not that it changes any doctrine. I've found that Ellen White backs me up on some of these things.

...a coupla observations:

As often as not - 'theology' does not reflect - even Holy Writ.

And, do not SDAs celebrate, after a fashion, at least a feast day - by their participation in communion? and do not they, at least, give countenance to another with the dogmatic Atonement/Investigative Judgement teaching?


RE:
Townhall
Re: Doug Batchelor's interpretations - part 1 - Three anti-Sabbath verses #177218 - Today at 07:00 PM




I notice that you joined this forum only this past May. Perhaps, after having been here for a while longer, you’ll prefer to post thoughts upon certain of your topical issues – on one of the more Biblically-oriented boards as – there is so much of the inane to be found on Townhall.

Treat your more serious thoughts with the respect they ought, seemingly, deserve by avoiding posting them on Townhall – regardless of readership numbers. Those who will more likely engage you to the degree you deserve – will more likely be found on the

boards aforementioned.

Others will censor you in the matter of their choosing; some subtly, some by ignoring you, some as they might... Then again,

you’ll receive, every now and again, a response that simply goes ‘ping’! somewhere north of your brain stem

Lastly, yes, it is startlingly unfortunate that the threads on the Biblically-oriented boards seem to fall off the page rather quickly. One might only surmise...

Rush4hire,

You are right that the passages from Galatians 4 and Romans 14 are not speaking of God's feast days.

The passage from Colossians 2:16-17 is often misinterpreted because people approach it with a false assumption-- that the believers in Colosse were being judged (by Jews) for not keeping the Sabbaths. However, the context of Colossians 2 shows that folks who were condemning the believers were not teaching from the Old Testament. Instead they were teaching "hollow and deceptive philosophy", "human tradition", "basic principles of the world", "false humility", "human commands and teachings", and "self-imposed worship". These are not phrases that Paul uses when speaking of God's Word. When Paul was speaking of the Old Testament (the only Scriptures available at that time) he says, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2 Tim. 3:16-17 NIV) If anyone had been using the Old Testament to teach the Colossians to keep the Sabbaths or to rebuke them for neglecting the Sabbaths, he would have been using the Scriptures exactly as Paul taught they should be used.

Colossians 2 is a powerful discourse against the popular Greek philosophy of asceticism which taught that "physical" things are evil and that "spiritual" things are good, and that in order to be spiritual a person needed to deny the physical body by fasting and avoiding pleasurable things. Asceticism is contrary to the teachings of the Old Testament. Ascetics would have viewed God's Sabbaths as sensual occasions of gluttony because of the feasting, fellowship, and worship that occurred. The ascetics would have been judging the believers for following God's Old Testament instructions regarding observing the Sabbath and annual Sabbaths. Go back and read Colossians 2 and make note of how Paul uses the words pertaining to the physical (body, head, substance, flesh, etc.) and how he compares/contrasts those to words pertaining to the spiritual (spirit, shadow, etc.). Paul makes it clear that asceticism is opposed to Christ, who was physical and yet holy and spiritual.

Stan,
I would be dubious of any claims of 'new light' regarding keeping the Feast Days because God's Feasts are at least as old as Moses and they were being kept by Jesus and by the New Testament authors nearly 2000 years ago.

In what way have God's Feast days "failed"? Is God aware of this? :-)

I've read the statements by SDA scholars and "experts" that purportedly refute feast-keeping by modern Christians. I would be embarrassed to share those materials with my Feast-keeping friends from other groups because the SDA statements have dealt with the issue from the perspective of traditional teachings rather than by examining the relevant Scriptures in context. Even teens who are familiar with Scripture and Feast-keeping can point out the fallacies in the published statements. When I read the anti-feast-keeping statements produced by the church, I can't help but remember the words of Jesus, "Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven." (Matt 5:19 NIV) I know the scholars are considered by SDA's to be "great in the kingdom", but Jesus seems to have a different view. I'm also aware that SDA's interpret Jesus' words to refer exclusively to the Ten Commandments, but I've never heard SDA's explain which of the Ten Commandments are considered the "least of these commandments". There is nothing in the context of Jesus statement that would limit his statement to only the Ten Commandments rather than to the whole written law contained in the "the Law and the Prophets" (the Old Testament) which Jesus specifically mentions in the context. When Jesus chose the "greatest commandment" from the Law, he chose commands from the Law of Moses that were not part of the Ten Commandments (Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18), so it seems that the "least of these commandments" would also be from the Law of Moses rather than from the Ten.

If Feast-keeping SDA's were promoting some bizarre behaviour, then it would be better to avoid the controversy. But Feast-keeping is not bizarre, it is something that Jesus and the apostles did. If following the example of Jesus in keeping the Feasts has "done much harm to the work" then apparently "the work" needs to be re-evaluated. Alarm bells should ring loudly whenever the example of Jesus conflicts with the accepted practices within the church.

@jasd

Ya, maybe you're right. In town hall, they like to spam alot and change the topic. The disciples of Jack Sequeira have been turning my threads into a debates about "New Theology".

Maybe getting a theology forum going is a good thing. Maybe this forum just started? I don't know. I was mainly upset about being falsely accused.


@Ron Ammundsen

That's good. I will use that as a reference about Galatians.

I also don't believe feast keepers are causing divisions, but I'm not a feast keeper. It's like:
Gal. 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as [the gospel] of the circumcision [was] unto Peter;

It's like:

I believe people should have a legal right to drink and smoke, and even smoke pot, but I don't do any of those.

I believe the Branch Davidians where just doing Bible studies, but they sold guns to make money and to look tough. I don't think they where planning to shoot up the town. I don't believe they where adulterers and child molesters like the media and the false witnesses made them out to be. I believe they where set up by the Jesuits.

But that doesn't mean I endorse the Branch Davidian doctrine.

I don't believe polygamists should be made to get divorce, because it doesn't say that in the Bible, but I'm not a polygamist.

And I could list many things like that. Not that I'm saying feast keeping is like these things.

Let's not be so dull. Let's be intelligent, thinking people. This is just my theory, but I suspect some people may be suffering damage to their IQ because of watching football. It's just a theory. Anyway...

I just want us to be accurate in what we say and teach. I'm a computer programmer. Things that are done sloppy, might get us by, but if they use up more CPU than necessary, it torments me until I fix it and make it as efficient as possible. :) If it's going to cause an error and crash the program, then it has be fixed, though the circumstances that would cause the error might not happen alot. If there's only a 1 in 1000 chance that the user will trigger the error, then some would not bother fixing it. But what if it becomes popular and a million people use the program? Then you have you will have 1000 people or so having crashes. And that's embarrassing.

So even if it works to apply certain verses to certain things, it's not necessarily what the author intended. You have to put yourself in that author's place and use all of the context available and find parallels.

In this day and age, people are very smart. Eventually someone will discover this flaw and use it against you. You may as well fix it before that happens. Though it takes humility to fix things like this.

3000 years ago a some kings hardened their hearts and punished the prophets and some took the advice of the prophet and where corrected. Now we have suffered 3000 years of degeneracy. Mankind is less noble than back then and kings are more likely to harden their hearts, (at least this has been my experience). So we have the greatest leaders, who do stuff for the Lord, hardening their hearts when someone has counsel from the Lord.

They teach us not to trust in our works, yet when they face correction, they refuse it because they look at their works and then the works of the one offering the advice, and they see their works are greater and despise the counsel.


Yet I would not teach people that when Jesus "not one jot or tittle", He was talking about the Ten Commandments + other things. I think He's only talking about the Ten Commandments. If we add to that, we weaken the testimony. The Ten Commandments is the Law and the Prophets, or the Law and the Testimony. Because all prophets where dependent on that law to verify them as true prophets, ([color:"#BF0000"]Isaiah 8:20[/color]).

If you want to keep feast days, more power to you. But if you say disregard for the feast days is comparable to breaking the Sabbath, then I believe you've crossed a line. If those feast days where permanent, they would have been set in stone and kept by Adam and Eve before the fall, as the Sabbath was.

The feasts call for animal sacrifices. We can't do that or we would deny the blood of Jesus. And there are many prophecies that foretell the end of sacrifice:

Daniel 9:27 ..he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease..

Isaiah 66:3 He that killeth an ox [is as if] he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, [as if] he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, [as if he offered] swine's blood; he that burneth incense, [as if] he blessed an idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations.

And there are a few more.

So some feel without sacrificing animals, you can't do the feasts justice. And they might conflict with our new feast, the Last Supper, like circumcision as a rite of initiation might conflict with Baptism. And they where a shadow, which where fulfilled in Christ.

Then on the other hand, some might use these occasions for fellowship, like camp-meetings. Ellen said it's a shame if you miss camp-meetings.



I would say this applies: "[color:"#000080"]...Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. [/color]", ([color:"#BF0000"]Romans 14:5[/color]).

Even though that whole verse may not have been intended for the feasts, that principle might also apply to such things.