Argument XV
A Cynic Cries out
In a cynical attempt to justify his sin of seeking out a restaurant where God's Sabbath is being desecrated, and paying for its services, Mr. George advances a very popular argument. He claims that if you can pay money for necessities on the Sabbath then you can also pay for luxuries. However, even then he has to resort to contorted logic and syllogistic reasoning when making his point. This is one argument we believe illustrates how far someone will go when justifying a practice that God Almighty forcefully condemns.
Mr. George begins his Sabbath breaking spin by accusing Mr. Dennis Fischer of failing to explain how he can pay for such things as utilities, and then criticize those who purchase their Sabbath meals on the seventh day. What follows are a series of "challenges" Mr. George thinks cannot be answered, followed by specific answers obtained from Mr. Fischer.
Mr. George:
He never answered the question about paid services. You have total control over your newspaper subscription. Does God want you drop the Saturday paper because it forces the delivery person to work on the Sabbath to get it to you, "within your gates," at your home? Do you take down your mailbox each Friday so the postal carrier can't deliver "within your gates" that day (increasing the workload taking it back to the station for delivery Monday)? Those are both far more specific to your "gates at home" than a distant restaurant. You seem to say other utilities (power, gas, water, etc.) you "can't control" are ok, but omit to explain why the logic is different. What about boarding your pets or arranging for the care of your livestock during the Feast; those arrangements must cover all the Sabbaths. If you have an elderly parent in a nursing home, do you pay for only six days' meals and care? If you're trying to decide which Sabbath expenses you can and should "control," are these "necessities" more important than enhancing the quality of Sabbath observance?
Our Response:
Question:
Mr. George implied that you were evasive in your message because you didn't explain why you think you can spend money on some things like utilities, but not at a restaurant on the Sabbath. Were you trying to avoid the issue?
Mr. Fischer:
I think we addressed this issue very thoroughly in the book. As far as the message is concerned, we (Mr. Braidic and myself) were both operating under time constraints. I personally used all of my allotted time.
Question:
Would you be willing to answer some questions Mr. George presents in his letter to you?
Mr. Fischer:
I would be happy to.
Question:
Do you subscribe to a newspaper and if so is it delivered on the Sabbath?
Mr. Fischer:
I do subscribe to a daily newspaper and it is NOT delivered on the Sabbath or the holy days.
Question:
What about mail delivery? Do you suspend that too? And if not, why?
Mr. Fischer:
We do not suspend the delivery of our mail on the Sabbath or holy days. Quite frankly, I can't understand why people would advance this as an argument comparable to newspaper delivery anyway. It actually isn't even close. A newspaper is a service we purchase for our benefit. The labor is directly related to this service. [In other words,] we pay a company to have their product brought to us. To have it delivered to our home requires that we contract for someone to bring it here. We won't do that on the Sabbath.
Mail delivery is just the opposite. The postal worker that delivers your mail is not working for you or representing your interests. He is working on behalf of the sender of the letters and their interest. In effect the sender of a letter is purchasing the services of the US Post Office to deposit a message at your home. Nothing more.
With that said, there is something we will not do. Occasionally we will have mail to send out and will simply leave it in our box for the postman to pick up. We will not do that on the Sabbath because it would involve labor for our benefit even though the stamp was purchased before the Sabbath.
Question:
What about utilities? Some argue that it is inconsistent to pay for those services which are performed on the Sabbath while condemning the practice of paying for a Sabbath meal at a restaurant.
Mr. Fischer:
Actually the differences are considerable. First of all, I do not seek out this service on the Sabbath. Those who go to restaurants do exactly that. Second, I do not pay my bill on the Sabbath. Those who go to restaurants do exactly that. Third, I do not require labor to be performed for me on the Sabbath. Those who go to restaurants depend on that labor--without it they don't eat. Finally, the Bible specifically mentions that food is not to be prepared on the Sabbath. It makes no mention of utilities.
I realize some will think I'm just splitting hairs here, but to me there is a significant difference between using a utility that is a part of the operation of a modern home and seeking out a restaurant and its labor on the Sabbath. Personally, I don't think its a close call.
Question:
Just out of curiosity, do you watch television on the Sabbath--for instance news related stories?
Mr. Fischer:
I do not. The only thing I do that comes close to that is the internet. I do visit some COG websites on the Sabbath as a part of my Sabbath study. I also participate in Blow the Trumpet's Sabbath chatroom discussions as well as visit with brethren online.
Question:
How would you respond to the following questions made by Mr. George in his letter to you and Mr. Braidic?
What about boarding your pets or arranging for the care of your livestock during the Feast; those arrangements must cover all the Sabbaths. If you have an elderly parent in a nursing home, do you pay for only six days' meals and care? If you're trying to decide which Sabbath expenses you can and should "control," are these "necessities" more important than enhancing the quality of Sabbath observance?
Mr. Fischer:
I would tell Mr. George and others that believe as he does, that dining out on the Sabbath is not a necessity anymore than gathering manna on the Sabbath was a necessity. I would also tell him that his Sabbath is not enhanced by going to a restaurant, it is enhanced by obeying God.
As far as boarding animals during the feast or arranging for nursing care for a parent, I would do it in a heartbeat. But once again I would not seek out this service on the Sabbath. By the way, those ARE necessities.
Mr. George continued:
Of course, a balanced person doesn't "mountain-climb over molehills." The restaurant question is one of those, not the clear-cut violation of Sabbath you pretend it to be. My explanation of the master/servant relationship shows why all of these costs are acceptable expenditures for those who keep the Sabbath.
Response from Blow the Trumpet:
Whether Mr. George wants to accept it or not, dining out on the Sabbath and holy days is a clear violation of the enduring moral principles contained in both the fourth commandment and the preparation day instructions God gave His people. Tragically, many of the ancient Israelites elected to profane the Sabbath then just like Mr. George does now. He may want to dismiss this as a minor point, but he is gravely mistaken.
With respect Mr. George's explanation of the master/servant relationship, God's word forcefully disagrees. While Mr. George argues that those who work in restaurants are not his servants, he completely misses a profound lesson articulated in A Sabbath Test. Those people are in truth SLAVES TO SIN and its great SLAVE MASTER, Satan the Devil. Despite this fact Mr. George considers going into Satan's world on God's Sabbath and purchasing the fruits of his contempt for the Almighty, a "blessing" from the very God it dishonors. We just can't understand that.
Mr. George continued:
Does your fellowship not pay rent for facilities at which to worship on the Sabbath? If that's ok because you pay in advance, although there may be a manager or janitor "forced to work," could your members just order and pay for their Sabbath restaurant meals in advance? (I've heard some Jews do this.) Is it wrong to pay a toll while driving to church, or for parking at an urban church with no private lot? (Silly questions, but they highlight how inconsistent and bankrupt the argument against every last bit of "buying and selling" really is. The "buying and selling" at which the Sabbath command and every Bible example squarely aims is the usual course of business and pleasure-seeking, to the exclusion of worship. Doing business that generates income for the Sabbath-keeper, or pursuing unrelated pleasure instead of Sabbath keeping. That's what Nehemiah fought. Nowhere are expenditures in furtherance of Sabbath-keeping proscribed. Nor pleasure which fair-minded Sabbath keepers, including our Savior, accept as a worthy possible part of Sabbath-keeping. Communing with converted minds in a restaurant is hardly the kind of "buying and selling" God plainly opposes. Condemning eating out is misunderstanding the words and missing the point, which is the real meaning of legalism. Keeping God's law isn't legalism; but misapplying it in a petty, negative way is.
Our Response:
Once again we offer the words of Dennis Fischer in response to Mr. George's questions/comments.
Question:
Does your fellowship not pay rent for facilities at which to worship on the Sabbath? If that's ok because you pay in advance, although there may be a manager or janitor "forced to work," could your members just order and pay for their Sabbath restaurant meals in advance? (I've heard some Jews do this.)
Mr. Fischer:
The halls which are rented by COGs around the world are specifically dedicated to the service of God's people. And although some require personnel to be there it is not a requirement of the Church. The Church does not need facility staff in order to hold services. The Church is renting space, not manpower. The hall is not laboring on its behalf. Furthermore, the attendant who may be there is not laboring for the Church either. He is representing the interests of those who manage the hall. He is there at their behest.
When it comes to dining out on the Sabbath the personnel working at the restaurant are absolutely essential to what Mr. George is doing there. That is what is being contracted. There must be people there to prepare and serve the food as well as a host of other functions. To me there is no comparison. For this reason paying early would not change anything--not that that would matter to those who dine out on the Sabbath anyway.
Question:
Is it wrong to pay a toll while driving to church, or for parking at an urban church with no private lot? (Silly questions, but they highlight how inconsistent and bankrupt the argument against every last bit of "buying and selling" really is. The "buying and selling" at which the Sabbath command and every Bible example squarely aims is the usual course of business and pleasure-seeking, to the exclusion of worship.
Mr. Fischer:
Paying a toll or for parking on the Sabbath may be unavoidable under certain circumstances. Going out to a restaurant is a different thing altogether. Those who do it have a choice. They could have honored God's command and prepared their food in advance. But they choose not to.
The decision to dine out on the Sabbath is driven by convenience and pleasure. Obedience to God never enters into that equation. Mr. George may call what he does, "worship," but it is not. What God's people do in a restaurant on the Sabbath no more honors Him than what millions do during Easter sunrise services. Their words cry out to Him but the actions reject everything He stands for.
Mr. George's final comments:
Doing business that generates income for the Sabbath-keeper, or pursuing unrelated pleasure instead of Sabbath keeping. That's what Nehemiah fought. Nowhere are expenditures in furtherance of Sabbath-keeping proscribed. Nor pleasure which fair-minded Sabbath keepers, including our Savior, accept as a worthy possible part of Sabbath-keeping. Communing with converted minds in a restaurant is hardly the kind of "buying and selling" God plainly opposes. Condemning eating out is misunderstanding the words and missing the point, which is the real meaning of legalism. Keeping God's law isn't legalism; but misapplying it in a petty, negative way is.
Our Response:
Once again Mr. George is reading something into the scriptures that simply isn't there. For example, he claims that "nowhere are expenditures in furtherance of Sabbath-keeping proscribed." What he fails to tell you is that the opposite is also true. The only mention of money in connection to the Sabbath is that it should not be used when purchasing wares including food--ANY food.
And if the people of the land bring ware or ANY victuals on the sabbath day to sell, that we would not buy it of them on the sabbath, or on the holy day: and that we would leave the seventh year, and the exaction of every debt. (Neh. 10:31)
Mr. George can play "This is what God really Meant" all he wants. But Nehemiah knew that what those merchants were doing in Jerusalem was an insult to God and His wonderful Sabbath day. And He wasn't going to tolerate it.
While Mr. George insists that going out into the world where God's holy Sabbath is being trampled on is somehow a "worthy part of Sabbath-keeping," it is no such thing. What restaurant personnel engage in on God's day is a rejection of everything that is holy. Despite this fact, Mr. George thinks he can purchase a small piece of their sacrilege and do so with God's blessing. Here is what God said to the children of Israel when they thought they could dine out on the Sabbath.
And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse you to keep my commandments and my laws? (Ex. 16:28)
Those words are spoken to Mr. George too. How long will you refuse to keep my commandments and my law?
Argument XVI