| Author | Message | ||
| Weimarred Registered user Username: Weimarred Post Number: 4 Registered: 1-2005 |
Amazingly, after all this time that has passed since I left SDA, I still have this Bible from way back. It was published in 1975 by ěThe National Publishing Companyî. It mentions ěHMS Richards Helpsî in a couple of places, but absolutely nowhere does it mention ěSDAî, ěSeventh-Day Adventistî, or anything remotely connected to the church. But obviously, the 84 pages of ěHelpsî at the back are a crash course in SDA indoctrination. I find that to be just the slightest bit sly! Anyways, one topic is the ěThe Law as Given by Godî vs. ěAs Changed By Manî. In other words, the Protestant Canon lists the 4th as a seventh-day Sabbath, while the Catholic version doesnít even list a Sabbath commandment. I remember at various times this was an argument that was used quite extensively by SDA. Iím wondering at the validity of this claim. Does the actual Catholic Canon not list it? And if not, what difference does this really make to the OT? I donít have much opportunity to go to the library, and I havenít yet read all your posts on the 7th day Sabbaths, so this may not be a truly new topic. ButÖ Iím curious, and Iíve learned to every SDA assertion with a grain of salt. (Well, okay, maybe with a couple of spoonfuls of salt! Crunching on that much salt would a more pleasant experience!) | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 251 Registered: 10-2004 |
The Catholic Bible (I believe all versions), contrary to SDA myth, contains the Sabbath commandment unaltered in both listings of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5). You can check it out for yourself online right here: Deuteronomy 5 New American Bible (Catholic), Exodus 20 NAB You'll also see that they do not change the second commandment, either, as claimed by SDAs. Jeremy | ||
| Raven Registered user Username: Raven Post Number: 166 Registered: 7-2004 |
We have a Catholic Bible in our house (along with many other Bibles), and I remember how surprised I was the first time I read through the 10 Commandments in there, that they were completely unchanged. I had been taught as an SDA that the Catholic church did change them. I'm wondering if any "change" ocurred, maybe it's only in a catechism rather than their Bible? But if that were the case, what would be the big deal about how they chose to print it in a teaching aid? | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 252 Registered: 10-2004 |
And the SDAs try to make the Catholics seem so evil for changing a couple verses (which would be bad but which they did not even do!) and then they publish their own "Clear Word Bible" which has hundreds of heretical and blasphemous changes!! I guess the only thing that matters is the Ten Commandments, according to SDAs. The rest was not verbally inspired and can't be trusted fully, anyway! Since SDAs believe in "thought inspiration" why do they even call it the "Word of God"? They should call it the "Thought of God, the Word of Man"! Jeremy | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 557 Registered: 7-2003 |
Just from memory, I believe that Catholics divide and number the Decalogue in an arrangement that is slightly different from the traditional Protestant division. I believe Jewish scholars also divide and number the 10 differently then Protestant Christians (I believe the 1st 2 commandments are considered to be 1 and then one of the later commandments is split into 2......sorry I'm at work and don't have all my references handy). For what it's worth, no one actually knows the exact way the 10 were originally divided and numbered on the the tablets of stone and it's not at all clear from the Hebrew manuscripts. There's no way to say if Jews, Catholics, or Protestants have correctly divided and numbered the 10, but they all agree on the content regardless of the division. Chris | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 559 Registered: 7-2003 |
Just to add a bit of documentation to my rather content-poor post above: "The "Ten Commandments" or "Decalogue" (from the Greek, "Ten Words") "were designed to convey to the Israelites a representative sampling of the laws to be given subsequently but was in no sense to be a summary of them, much less an act of legislation in their own right. Thus it [the Decalogue] contains some of each of the two main types of religious law: those pertaining to the individual's obligations toward God and those pertaining to his relations with other people. It also contains both forms of command, positive and prohibitive. ... The Bible nowhere refers to the Decalogue as ten commandments. The text of the Decalogue does not even divide naturally into pronouncements; the number of commands (positive and negative) is more than ten, whereas the number of topics is nine. ... Yet the Bible refers to it as 'the ten words'...apparently using this round number as an expression of totality, as is found in other places in biblical and Talmudic literature. Various methods arose for dividing the passage into ten commandments. ... The two versions of the Decalogue (in Ex.and Dt.) differ in several particulars, all of which are stylistic and not substantive in nature." [from The Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion (1997), pp.683f.] Chris | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 281 Registered: 4-2000 |
Chris, Thank you for your comments. The source you quoted from failed to include Deuteronomy 10:4 and 4:13 (NASU) as passages that distinctly refer to the "Ten Commandments" (Lit. Words). In Deut. 4:13, we learn that the "Ten Commandments" were a covenant, by themselves, between God and Israel. Also, I disagree with the Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion when it says, "The Bible nowhere refers to the Decalogue as ten commandments. The text of the Decalogue does not even divide naturally into pronouncements..." The "thou shalt not" phrases are indeed clear pronouncements or commandments. As to the numbering variations, that is open to debate among various scholars to this day. In all variations, the scholars are definitely bent toward ten distinct pronouncements. By the way, which version of the Decalogue (Ex.20 and Deut. 5) was in the Ark of the Covenant? Dennis J. Fischer | ||
| Weimarred Registered user Username: Weimarred Post Number: 5 Registered: 1-2005 |
Thanks to all for your very enlightening answers! You know, I'm really not surprised by all this. I remember even as a child wondering about the following. Now, I know this isn't a particularly scholary or intelligent argument, but here goes: (Wait, let me get my most Carl Sagan imitation going here. Ok.) BILLYUNS, AND BILLYUNS of Christians have lived and died since the time of Christ. How is it that 99% have been wrong on the whole Saturday thing? Why would Jesus wait 1,850 years, and then say to all of His followers, "Oh, and by the way....."? Then there was that whole Reformation thing. What better way to nail the Catholics than to say, "Just look at you! You charge for salvation, you profane the communion, you worship graven images, and, to beat all, you can't even worship on the right day! We Protest!" I know I'm being silly, and that humans can be ignorant, but not THAT ignorant, especially with a Divine Redeemer backing them up! | ||
| Weimarred Registered user Username: Weimarred Post Number: 6 Registered: 1-2005 |
Raven - You mentioned the Decalogue might be different in the Cahechism. Well, sure enough, that's what's listed as the source in the "Helps". Perhaps Catholics share this tenant with NCT? That we are under a new covenant? | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 1245 Registered: 12-2003 |
Great point, Tom! How crazy is it to try to say God waited until the 19th century to really unveil the true church? Adventists really don't have a grasp of Pentecost or its signficance. After all, they can't really teach that the church began way back then--how would they account for themselves? Colleen | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 563 Registered: 7-2003 |
Dennis, in Deut. 10:4 & 4:13, the transliterated Hebrew is "asarah dabar", quite literally "ten words". Many modern literal English translations, such as the NASB, will have a notation saying, "Lit. Words". If the Moses had wanted to refer to the "ten words" as the " ten commandments" he would have written "asarah mitsvah". Chris | ||
| Carol_2 Registered user Username: Carol_2 Post Number: 220 Registered: 2-2002 |
Totally irrelevant and off subject here....but something above reminded me of an episode of something my grown kids watch.....cannot remember the show, one of the adult cartoons I think...but my daughter said on one show some people were waiting to enter hell, extremely confused why they had ended up there....one saying what a good Protestant Christian he'd been, another remarking he'd been such a faithful Catholic. Somebody asks "Who really had it right?," and the gatekeeper to hell says, "Oh, it was the Mormoms. The Mormons had it right." (Extremely paraphrased.) Made me think of SDAs and chuckle. | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 1342 Registered: 11-2002 |
Someone mentioned the numbering of the 10 commandments. All the Bibles, no matter if you use the ones mostly used by Protestants or the New Jeresulem Bible or any of the others that are not just fiction such as The Clear Word and the New World Translation by the JW's, all of them are the same in Ex. 20 and then again in Duet. where they are laid out. However, there are a number of Chriastian churches that divided them up differently. The "Thou shalt remember the seventh day to keep it holy" commandment to SDA's is the 4th commandment. To us Lutherans it's the third. So, often I will hear SDA's talk about how important the 4th commandment is and I wuill think they are feferring to "honor your father and mother". Them I remember I'm talking to an Adventist and I have to readjust my thinking. I asked the pastor about the diference and I think he said something about the last commandment being devided into two because wifes were thought of differently than the rest of a mans property. | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 678 Registered: 7-2003 |
I actually did go to the library and study this. The 2 catholic encyclopedia's i looked at (one from 1950s and one from 2002) both listed the 10 commandments in their entirety as you would see in any Bible. however, as has been alluded to above, they believe the Deuteronomy version was what was written on the tablets. There are 4 main divisions of the 10 Cs, and the catholics did not see coveting a wife in the same vein as coveting an ox, so they divided the last one and combine the first two, but not a single word is misplaced or changed. As I recall, there are two different ways Jews divide them, and the Catholic tradition is the same as one of the Jewish groups. If you look up sabbath in the Catholic encyclopedia, it will reference Saturday. If you look up Sunday, it will talk about the day of the Lord's resurrection and the day Christians worshipped in that memorial. Now, I have not read a catechism (or however you spell it.) But I know there are several versions of the catechism and the only one B referenced was dated 1921. Now I know that is a copy of a copy. So, no matter how you call it, when referencing the passages in Ex 20 and Deut 5, the Catholic encyclopedia is identical to the Bible. I did not find one SDA claim substantiated by my research and I spent the better part of a Saturday checking it out. I copied the relevant pages, but B was not interested in their real teachings .... | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 566 Registered: 7-2003 |
I did go over to Barnes & Nobel one evening and pull out a Catholic Catechism to see if the quote about the Catholic church conferring the solemnity of the Sabbath day onto the Lord's Day could be substantiated. I did find such a quote in the Q&A section of the book. However, it takes on a very different spin when read in context. Essentially the Catholic argument is that the primary day of worship shifted during the time of the apostles and since they are the only church to trace their lineage and line of authority all the way back to the apostles, the Catholic Church via the apostles changed the day. Ultimately they are appealing to apostolic authority while equating the apostles with the Catholic church. There are several points that I would disagree with strongly in the Catholic take on this, but my main point here is that the Catholic catechism doesn't really support the SDA claim that worshipping on the Lord's day only came about as the result of a decree from Constatine or some Pope after Constatine's time. Interestingly enough, Samuel Bacchioci's research confirms that EGW was wrong on this point as did the research group headed by DA Carson. Chris | ||
| Pw Registered user Username: Pw Post Number: 258 Registered: 6-2004 |
Now matter how much evidence you show an SDA member, they still believe that man changed the sabbath day and is under a curse for observing a false day of worship. It's a debate that will never end on this planet. | ||
| Pheeki Registered user Username: Pheeki Post Number: 460 Registered: 1-2003 |
I also feel Ellen is responsible for the large amount of mental illness and substance abuse among SDA, or fringe SDA, I should say...always trying, yet falling short of the standards. The other guy who killed himself (the second person I mentioned) at one time climbed the college radio tower shouting, "The latter rain is falling!" I suspect he was also trying to be perfect, but he had a drug addiction and mental illness, probably in a large part related to being raised SDA! | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 1251 Registered: 12-2003 |
Interesting, all of this! It's not surprising, I guess, that a prophet who claimed God showed her things that really came from others' writings would also misrepresent the CATHOLICS, of all people! I've often wondered if there was deliberate slander against Catholics among the early Adventists as a cover up for the fact that Adventist curch organization is really very much like the Catholics, Mary and the pope are revered about as much as Ellen, etc. Nah, I'm probably taking this 'way too far--but I do find Adventism's camping on the evils of Catholicism to be creating a HUGE blind spot that prevents Adventists from even thinking about the possible danger of other powers in the world, including Islam. Yes, I agree that Adventism attracts the emotionally and mentally unstable by offering standards and rules and a formula for righteousness. It offers a physical way to "clean up" and thus deal with one's guilt over things that can't be admitted publicly. Adventism's "health message" and lifestyle offers a sort of holy-looking penance for intractable sin. Colleen | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 1347 Registered: 11-2002 |
Now, think about it, why wouldn't the Catholic church claim to have had the authority to change anything? It is only logical. The Catholic church claims to be the first Christian church, headed from its beginning by Pope Peter. It believes it is the sole source of all truth. Also it is the first and only 100% pure and true Christian church. Nevermind that there are no historical records of the Catholic church changing the main day of worsghip from Saturdays to Sundays. It doesn't matter. God is Catholic to the Catholic church so when the change came about for Christians IT HAD TO BE CATHOLIC IN ORGIN. Did that make sense at all? I hope so. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 1259 Registered: 12-2003 |
Yes, Susan--I followed you! Arrogance is quite a powerful state of mind. It blinds us to reality and deceives us about our own motives. Colleen |
