Argument VIII
Insults and Accusations
At the beginning of his letter, Mr. George seemed gracious and deferential toward the authors of A Sabbath Test. He indicated that he was coming to them as a brother and that he wanted to address the issue of dining out on the Sabbath, in the spirit of "comity." When we read the segment of his argument that appears below, we had to look that word up. We thought we knew what it meant, but apparently Mr. George has a different understanding of this term. We say this because what we read in Mr. George's words is many things, but "comity" is not one of them.
The word "comity" comes from the Latin comitas and means among other things, "courteous" and having "social harmony." However, in just two short paragraphs Mr. George cast "comity" to the wind and proceeded to hurl insult after insult at those who have been persuaded by A Sabbath Test and its message. He characterized them as lacking "spiritual depth and maturity." He then eviscerates the intellectual talents of his unsophisticated brethren after which he claimed he was not calling them stupid, just gullible.
Mr. George:
One horrific irony about your messages is that they may appeal to many who lack the degree of analytical ability or spiritual depth and maturity to realize your research, logic, and examples are invalid and incomplete. They will accept your viewpoint entirely and uncritically, yet pride themselves on "thinking for themselves!" What a sad paradox.
NOTE from Blow the Trumpet
It is clear that Mr. George prides himself as a critical thinker who would never allow himself to be deceived by clever arguments--especially those that pertain to God's Sabbath. After all, his "spiritual depth and maturity" will protect him from such deception--or so he thinks. If you would like to see how gullible someone with Mr. George's intellectual and spiritual depth can really be, check out what he has bought into. CLICK HERE
Mr. George continued:
It is so easy to be guilty of that we accuse others. There is such a huge risk of getting caught and infected with heresy against which we lack defense when people unwisely go "shopping for sermons," always craving something more exciting, something new, something purportedly "deeper." In this troubled time, it is best not to accept any message uncritically, no matter how trusted the source. Time spent double-checking even those which prove fully sound will sharpen our spiritual "survival skills."
Perhaps because it is so easy to misunderstand something written to disagree with a position, I should clarify that I'm not calling people who fall for a slick misrepresentation stupid or insincere. (I call them "brothers and sisters;" and I hope they call me "brother.") They may just be swayed by the emotional intensity and sincerity of a speaker, or miss the mis-statements and omissions. But they do reveal a dangerous "blind spot" when they uncritically accept messages from anyone who, however sincere, proves to be spreading harmful misinformation.
Our Response:
In all due respect to Mr. George, it is not his skills in critical analysis that enabled him to draw his conclusions about dining out on the Sabbath, it is his determination to justify this sin. So committed is this desire that he actually argues against historical and Biblical truth when making his case. Consider what Mr. George's intellectual talents have lead him to believe.
He believes that dining out on the Sabbath is "God's gift" to His end-time Church (Argument VI). The very nature of this conclusion suggests that God not only approves of, but actually embraces the behavior of those who labor on this day. So much for critical analysis.
~~~
He believes that purchasing the services of those who desecrate God's Sabbath is a "tool" for better keeping it holy (Argument VI). We have heard of the armor of God and the fruits of the spirit as tools of the faith, but never the tool of going out into the world and purchasing the services of those who profane what God has declared SACRED. So much for critical analysis.
~~~
He contends that because ancient Levitical chefs slaughtered and prepared sacrifices brought by God's people every Sabbath, he can go to a restaurant and pay those who worship the god of this world to do the same for him (Argument I). By the way, if Mr. George had employed his critical analysis skills a bit more honestly, he would have discovered that ancient Israel never did what he claims. In truth, both history and the Bible reveal that God prohibited His people from bringing sacrifices on His weekly Sabbath. So much for critical analysis.
~~~
He believes that the Sabbath is a modern day pilgrimage feast much the same as the Passover was in ancient times (Argument IV). Therefore, work may not only be done on the seventh day, but may actually be contracted from those who serve the god of this world. This, even though God Almighty specifically declared that NO WORK may be done on the seventh day (Ex. 20:8-11, 31:14). So much for critical analysis.
~~~
He believes that because Jesus accepted food that was allegedly prepared by paid servants in clear contradiction of God's commandment, he may now accept food prepared by restaurant personnel (Argument II). What he fails to acknowledge is that it was the Pharisees who he claims solicited this labor, not Jesus. Therefore, it is their behavior he wishes to model, not the Messiah's. So much for critical analysis.
At every turn Mr. George employs shoddy research and a steady stream of "yeah buts" and "what ifs" to advance his cause. He then insults everyone who believes that God just might want His people to refrain from soliciting the sacrilege of a godless society when keeping His Sabbath holy. Mr. George, your considerable labor in this debate is not the result of "critical analysis." It is simply desperation disguised as scholarship.
Finally, what we are going to do now is done with great respect for God's people in general and Mr. George in particular. This man who possesses a degree of influence within a genuine community of faith asserted at the beginning of his letter that he sought God's wisdom on this matter. We regret to inform him that HE DIDN"T GET IT! However, that wisdom fills the pages of a book that boldly declares that God is serious about His holy Sabbath and how it is to be honored. Furthermore, what Mr. George embraces as a result of his "critical thinking" doesn't impress the Lord of the Sabbath. It infuriates Him.
Argument IX