Argument X
Causing Division
At one point in their defense of dining out on the Sabbath, the United Church of God requests that those who refuse to engage in this practice keep their views to themselves. They contend that to speak out on this issue is divisive. Here is how they express their point, followed by our response.
United Church of God:
There are many other things that can be said about this issue, but the conclusion of the Church is that eating out on the Sabbath does not violate the Sabbath command. Whether one eats out on the Sabbath or does not eat out is a personal choice. But it must not become a point of division within the Church.
If, after looking at all the scriptures on this subject, an individual feels compelled not to eat out in a restaurant on the Sabbath, the Church respects his position. We simply ask that he keep it as a personal decision and not make any effort to persuade others of his view. To attempt to persuade others would be divisive (1 Corinthians 14:26). All things should be used for the purpose of edifying or building up and not tearing down.
Our Response:
The UCG is correct when they assert that, "whether one eats out on the Sabbath or does not eat out is a personal choice." However, the same can be said about whether one chooses to keep the Sabbath at all. In truth, everything we do involves choices. With that said, God's people must understand that when it comes to obeying the TRUE GOD, there is more. The issue is not only what one chooses, but what God commands. Although the UCG insists that He is silent on this subject, they couldn't be more wrong.
The scriptures declare that labor performed at a restaurant on HOLY TIME is an act of defiance against God Himself. It is a CAPITAL CRIME. Furthermore, that SIN involved in that labor required the brutal execution of Jesus Christ. Despite this fact, the UCG teaches that purchasing the fruit of this CRIME is "a wonderful way to spend a portion of the Sabbath" (See Argument VIII). Can you imagine making such a claim?
Slaves to Sin
Those who labor in restaurants every Sabbath are slaves to sin (Ro. 6:16) and the great slave master, Satan the devil (2 Cor. 4:4). Equally true is the fact that God's people were once slaves to sin as well. But we were mercifully delivered from this bondage.
Now for the question of the day:
Why would anyone believe that God would condone His people going back into spiritual Egypt and purchasing the fruit of the same bondage that once enslaved them? To believe such a thing is utter madness. This is why the Almighty commanded His people to not compel servants to work on the Sabbath.
But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD your God: in it you shall not do any work, you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your manservant, nor your maidservant, nor your ox, nor your ass, nor any of your cattle, nor the stranger that is within your gates; that your manservant and your maidservant may rest as well as you.
And remember that you were once a slave in the land of Egypt, and that the LORD your God brought you out through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD your God commanded you to keep the sabbath day. (Deut 5: 14-15)
These words are so clear it is remarkable that any of God's people would debate them. Sadly, the UCG argues that although one should not compel their personal servants to work, they may go back into spiritual Egypt and let its slaves labor on their behalf. What an insult to GOD and His Sabbath! The bottom line is this: what takes place in restaurants every seventh day is a perfect example of bondage. On the other hand, God's Sabbath is a perfect picture of FREEDOM and deliverance from bondage. There is nothing compatible between these two practices, regardless of what the UCG claims.
Causing Division
With respect to causing division, this is not the first time such an accusation has been leveled against those who bare the truth. Peter and John were given "cease and desist" orders from the religious leaders of their day too. Furthermore, when the Worldwide Church of God started preaching heresy, they tried to silence the truth with threats that to preach such things was also divisive.
Here is a news flash for the United Church of God. It is not TRUTH that divides God's people, it is LIES. For them to advance their position on this critical end-time issue and then demand that those who oppose them remain silent is typical of leaders today. If these men are genuinely committed to unity in the Church, they should be anxious to publicly debate this issue.
Additionally, the UCG only requests that those who refuse to dine out on the Sabbath keep their opinion to themselves, not the other way around. Today there are scores of UCG brethren who have been pressured to give up their belief on this issue. Even pastors have exerted pressure on them.
Here is a thought for all the leaders in God's Church to ponder: silence doesn't foster unity, open and honest dialogue does. This lesson is made graphically clear in the scriptures. In Acts 15, the church openly addressed an issue that divided God's people in the first century. We strongly suggest that the UCG follow that example and do it again. However, in the interest of fairness it should be done with genuine advocates on both sides presenting their case. For obvious reasons, our suggestion is not likely to be acted on. One only has to honestly consider the two positions being advanced to see why the UCG wants to silence its critics. Quite frankly, the alternative would be too embarrassing for them.
A Note from Blow the Trumpet
Throughout this series of articles we have vigorously argued against the UCG's position regarding dining out on the Sabbath. And although we often mock some of their points, we firmly believe these men are steadfast in their desire to honor God and His law. The United Church of God is a wonderful community of believers with a very talented and gifted team of leaders. Any thought that we think this issue brings into question the legitimacy of the UCG is TOTALLY FALSE. We love the United Church of God and would encourage anyone to fellowship with them.
Counter Argument
United Church of God
Advisory Committee for Doctrine
April 16,2007
Dear Mr. Fischer,
Blow the Trumpet says:
"With respect to causing division, this is not the first time such an accusation has been leveled against those who bare the truth. Peter and John were given `cease and desist' orders from the religious leaders of their day too. Furthermore, when the Worldwide Church of God started preaching heresy, they tried to silence the truth with threats that to preach such things was also divisive."
There are a number of significant differences between the example above and the Blow the Trumpet paper. Peter and John were commissioned and sent forth by Christ to do a certain work (Matthew 28:19-20). Their audience was nonmembers, not other baptized members of God's Church (Acts 3). They were not teaching anything contrary to the established doctrine in the Church where they attended. Their message did not cause other leaders in God's Church to provide a written response in order to address related problems. They were not disrespecting the Church or its leadership. The truth that Peter and John taught was primarily objective among the Church members.
Sincerely,
Advisory Committee for Doctrine
Response from Dennis Fischer
Note: from Blow the Trumpet
Because of the nature of this particular page, Mr. Fischer has elected to address his response directly to the United Church of God,
Dear UCG Advisory Committee for Doctrine,
I realize that you would like to dismiss our work and those who are a part of it. This is understandable in light of the fact we are so critical of your position on this issue. With this said, I would like to address the points you raise concerning what you think are "significant differences" between the work of Blow the Trumpet and that done by Jesus' disciples.
# I
"Peter and John were commissioned and sent forth by Christ to do a certain work (Matthew 28:19-20)."
The implication here is that you believe we have no such calling. By the way, we are confident that you believe you do. With that said, here is how history will play this one out. The day will come when you will suffer greatly for the sin you practice and teach, unless you repent. I personally believe the consequences will be the Great Tribulation. This is what is implied by Nehemiah when he rebuked the nobles of Judah (Neh. 13:17-18). In truth, Nehemiah’s indictment was directly linked to Jeremiah’s rebuke prior to the Babylonian captivity. Here is how that rebuke was expressed.
Tell the kings and all the people of Judah and everyone who lives in Jerusalem and enters these gates, to listen to what I say.
Tell them that if they love their lives, they must not carry any load on the Sabbath; they must not carry anything in through the gates of Jerusalem
or carry anything out of their houses on the Sabbath. They must not work on the Sabbath; they must observe it as a sacred day, as I commanded their ancestors.
"Tell these people that they must obey all my commands. They must not carry any load in through the gates of this city on the Sabbath. They must observe the Sabbath as a sacred day and must not do any work at all.
But they must obey me and observe the Sabbath as a sacred day. They must not carry any load through the gates of Jerusalem on that day, for if they do, I will set the gates of Jerusalem on fire. Fire will burn down the palaces of Jerusalem, and no one will be able to put it out." (Jer. 17:20-22, 24, 27 Good News Translations)
Tragically, the leaders of Judah refused to heed God’s word and they would pay dearly for their defiance. For you see, God was not bluffing. Unfortunately, His people would have to find this out the hard way. Both the scriptures as well as secular history reveal that a powerful Chaldean army would attack Jerusalem and leave it in ruins. Here is how Jeremiah described its utter destruction and the price it would have to pay for not heeding God’s warning.
Now on the tenth day of the fifth month, which was the nineteenth year of King Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, Nebuzaradan the captain of the bodyguard, who was in the service of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. He burned the house of the Lord, the king’s house and all the houses of Jerusalem; even every large house he burned with fire. So all the army of the Chaldeans who were with the captain of the guard broke down all the walls around Jerusalem. (Jer. 52:12-14)
A Tragic Consequence
The book of Lamentations bewails what happened to this once great city. Here is how Jeremiah expressed his sorrow at its destruction.
How lonely sits the city
That was full of people!
She has become like a widow
Who was once great among the nations!
She who was a princess among the provinces
Has become a forced laborer! (Lam. 1:1 New American Standard Version)
“A forced laborer”
God’s people were thrust into captivity because they thought they could trifle with the Sabbath. They did so because they would rather embrace their traditions than listen to the truth. They thought they could decide for themselves how the Sabbath could be observed. They thought they could make up their own rules concerning this holy convocation. But in the end all they got was bondage.
This is what Jeremiah was warning Judah about during the Days of King Zedekiah.
It is what Nehemiah was warning the nobles of Judah about during the days of Artaxerxes.
And it is what “A Sabbath Test” warns God’s leaders about today.
The point to this is simple. Because God is a merciful Father, He has commissioned us, that's right, US, to warn His people to turn from the terrible sin you promote. You may reject this now, but that won't always be the case. We are very comfortable with your lack of faith in us, it is your lack of faith in God's word on this issue that has us concerned.
# II
Their audience was nonmembers, not other baptized members of God's Church (Acts 3).
This assertion is simply not true. Peter and John were speaking to God's people of their day. They went directly into the Temple and proclaimed the gospel of Christ. Peter even called his audience "brethren" (Acts 3:17) as well as "children of the covenant" (verse 25). For you to imply that these people were outsiders is false. It is true that Peter exhorted them to repent and be converted (verse 19), but that is exactly what we are exhorting you to do in this issue.
# III
They were not teaching anything contrary to the established doctrine in the Church where they attended.
On the contrary, this is exactly what they were doing. These men spoke boldly about the greatest contrary teaching in the history of religion. Furthermore, it was their regular practice to enter the synagogue on the Sabbath and proclaim their message. Even Paul was a part of synagogue life, much to the frustration of the religious leaders of his day. Personally, I think these men would be shocked to hear your assessment of their message.
# IV
Their message did not cause other leaders in God's Church to provide a written response in order to address related problems.
This sounds more like whining to me than a biblical argument. Furthermore, Blow the Trumpet didn't cause you to write your counter letter to me anymore than you caused us to write our rebuttal to your totally unbiblical study paper. Personally, I believe you responded to Blow the Trumpet as a courtesy to Mr. Dennis Luker, and he asked you to respond as a courtesy to me. Additionally, I think your case would have been better served by not writing at all, as opposed to producing the nonsense you presented in your letter.
# V
They were not disrespecting the Church or its leadership.
John the Baptist called the religious leaders of his time a "generation of vipers" (Mt. 3:7). Jesus excoriated church leaders with a mountain of insults because of their contempt for God and his word (Mt. 23). And I am sure that the religious leaders during the early years of God's Church thought Peter and John weren't showing them the respect they deserved either.
Here is something for you to think about. The real leader of the Church is Jesus Christ. He also happens to be the Lord of the Sabbath. It is your position on this issue that shows complete disrespect to Him. At every turn you have clung to a practice that disgraces what He made holy. It gives me no pleasure to say this. On the contrary, it grieves me to do so. But you have no idea the peril you are bringing on both yourselves and God's people.
# VI
The truth that Peter and John taught was primarily objective among the Church members.
If you are suggesting that our position regarding dining out in restaurants on the Sabbath is "subjective," you are simply in denial of the Biblical facts pertaining to this issue. Throughout your paper, as well as your letter, you reject both God's Sabbath law as well as its enduring moral principles. We, on the other hand, take God's word to mean what it says. It is my personal belief that if the Almighty announced that the salvation of His people rested on this issue, you wouldn't go close to a restaurant on the Sabbath or the holy days.
Respectfully,
Dennis Fischer
Counter Argument continued
United Church of God
Advisory Committee for Doctrine
April 16,2007
Dear Mr. Fischer,
We appreciate your assessment,
"We firmly believe these men are steadfast in their desire to honor God and His law. The United Church of God is a wonderful community of believers with a very talented and gifted team of leaders. Any thought that we think this issue brings into question the legitimacy of the UCG is TOTALLY FALSE. We love the United Church of God and would encourage anyone to fellowship with them."
However, we feel that some of your "mocking" is inappropriate and contradictory to this conclusion. We consider the following statements from your paper to be both inaccurate and contrary to scriptural principles:
We would certainly acknowledge that we all have gaps in our understanding. Even Paul said, "We know in part..." (1 Corinthians 13:9). After Christ returns, we will find out for sure who was right on the subject of eating out on the Sabbath. In the meantime, God holds us accountable for living our lives according to our own faith and understanding (Romans 14:22-23) and to refrain from condemning each other over differences of belief and practice.
However, we should. avoid ad hominem attacks or imputed evil motives. We would appreciate if you would refrain from these condemning statements in any future dialogue with us or others on this topic.
Sincerely,
Advisory Committee for Doctrine
Response from Dennis Fischer
Dear UCG Advisory Committee for Doctrine,
I realize that some of our words have a sharp edge to them. However, your approach to this issue is so insulting to God's law, we are compelled to speak out with force. If you could just step back for a moment and see what you are advancing in this debate, I am convinced you would be embarrassed beyond words.
At every turn you argue that customers bear no responsibility for the work performed by restaurant personnel even though they are the ones who proactively seek out those services and pay for them. You claim that restaurants today actually satisfy a critical need in the Church and that seeking out Sabbath breakers to prepare your meals frees up God’s people from labor of their own. You also claim that seeking out Sabbath breakers to prepare your meals is the moral equivalent of turning on a light switch or attending the Feast of Tabernacles.
Every point you presented in your paper and your letter to me was laced with one deception after another—and for what? So you can go out into the world like other Sabbath breakers and profane what God made holy.
Here is something to consider. When Nehemiah contended with the nobles of Judah he made a direct link between them allowing merchants access to their lives and CAPTIVITY. You on the other hand encourage that access, and by doing so invite the CAPTIVITY.
Well here is the bad news
If you as the contemporary nobles of God’s people persist in promoting the HORRIBLE LIE that claims you just can’t know for sure whether God approves of His people seeking out Sabbath breakers and paying them to labor on holy time—and if you persist in parading out a steady stream of distortions of the Biblical record in an attempt to indulge your own Sabbath breaking appetite, then you will bring about—and PERSONALLY EXPERIENCE—the same “EVIL” Nehemiah spoke of so very long ago. You may dismiss this warning now but you won’t be so dismissive of it when it comes to pass. With that said here are some questions you would be well advised to prayerfully consider.
Because that is exactly what the stakes are
Because that is exactly what the stakes are
Because that is exactly what the stakes are
Because that is exactly what the stakes are
Because that is exactly what the stakes are
Because that is exactly what the stakes are
Because that is exactly what the stakes are
Because that is exactly what the stakes are
Because that is exactly what the stakes are
Because that is exactly what the stakes are
Because that is exactly what the stakes are
Because that is exactly what the stakes are
Respectfully,
Dennis Fischer