You are on page 1of 88

Defending the Remnant Church

of God:
Answering the Main Contentions Against 7th Day

It is the hope of the author of this work to show you, Reader, that the 7th Day Adventist faith is the oldest faith
known to mankind, that it is the true doctrine of the Apostolic Church, and that prophetically Adventism is the
Remnant Church of the Church in the Wilderness found in Revelation 12. The author will also attempt to prove
infinitively what the Seal of God is and what the Mark of the Beast is. Lastly, it will be the purpose to provide a
defense for the prophethood of Ellen G. White. This work is not an attempt to try and defend every wind of
doctrine minimizing the Apostolic faith from the world out there; it is only for the purpose of addressing three
main areas of contention that shake and bother the world of all professing Christians: the Sabbath, Mark of the
Beast, and Ellen G. White. Quotes that have boldness and underling are my emphases, unless otherwise stated; and
italics in quotes may or may not be my emphasis, but a note will be placed after to clarify. Wherever the following
brackets appear ‘{ }’, the source inside the brackets comes from the original author’s footnote of who I am quoting
from; it may or it may not have further commentary in addition to that author’s source citation. All Bible quotes
are taken from the King James Version (Authorized Version), unless otherwise stated.
Page |2

Table of Contents

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................ 3

Part One: The Laws................................................................................................................................................................. 5

Part Two: Jesus and the Sabbath ......................................................................................................................................... 12

Part Three: The Significance of the Sabbath Commandment ............................................................................................. 14

Part Four: The Sabbath and the Covenants of God ............................................................................................................. 19

Part Five: The Sabbath Through History: From the Apostolic Church Until Today ............................................................ 23

Part Six: The Mark of the Beast ........................................................................................................................................... 34

Part Seven: What Rome is Saying Today ............................................................................................................................. 46

Part Eight: International Sunday Law: The Mark of the Beast’s Authority ........................................................................ 50

Part Nine: Significance of the Sabbath Keeping People ...................................................................................................... 59

Part Ten: Conclusion of the Whole Matter ......................................................................................................................... 67

Appendix: A Brief Examination of Ellen G. White ............................................................................................................... 72

Page |3


“I charge [thee] before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and
his kingdom; preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all
longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their
own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away [their] ears from
the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an
evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.” 2 Timothy 4:34.

“…the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, …was preached to every creature which is under heaven…”
Colossians 1:23.

It is most unfortunate that very few people in the Christian world out there today know that 7th Day
Adventism is the oldest faith known to mankind, surely the very first faith. The Scriptures and facts seem to
support this truth brazenly and forthrightly. And, regardless of how people would like to think of Christianity, or
what they would like to believe regarding doctrine, the so-called ‘evangelical’ doctrines of so-called ‘evangelical’
Christianity today are not those of the true Apostolic Christianity that Jesus and the Holy Ghost were responsible
for founding. That is the truth. The vast multitudes of professing Christians push cult theology unawares, which
have its main roots planted in Alexandria, Egypt and Rome.
Today 7th Day Adventism is accused as being a cult. All the better, I say, because I know that the truth is
never popular with mortal man and is thus bound to be accused and attacked on one front or another. In actual fact
the theology of every other Christian denomination is the cult theology of the true cults, rooted in the real Kingdom
of the Cults in the form of the Gnostics and the pagans of Rome, which history records as having their roots in
ancient Neo-Babylon. This, too, is the truth.
It is time for Christians to be exposed to and presented with the facts of their own history that they have
been kept ignorant of, indeed by powers of this world higher then they; and it is time for Adventists to take a stand
against the errors flooding the Church, “decently and in order” (1 Corinthians 14:40). It is time to shake the
Christian world to its core, and to hold the banner of the Sabbath to the heights of heaven, and to let the world
know that God still has a people on this earth that will live up to Biblical truths.
“The Subjects which we present to the world must be to us a living reality,” writes Ellen G. White. “It is
important that in defending the doctrines which we consider fundamental articles of faith, we should never allow
ourselves to employ arguments that are not wholly sound. These may avail to silence an opposer, but they do not
honor the truth. We should present sound arguments, that will not only silence our opponents, but will bear
the closest and most searching scrutiny.”1 As she says, so I agree and will endeavor to do as such.
I encourage you, Reader, to have an open mind as we continue, and prayerfully, wholeheartedly consider
the issues being presented with a Bible at hand. Surely it must be easy to get worked up about doctrinal issues that
many may not be comfortable with; but, nevertheless, I encourage all who read this to not rush through it, nor to
put it aside and forget about it simply because it doesn’t conform with their own ideologies. The fact is that the
Christian world is paralyzed and needs a cure to the rampant disease of error flooding the churches. Not only that,
but the rest of the world out there would do well in familiarizing themselves with the concepts in the writing that
follows, especially with the Mark of the Beast; for the events that are going to come about following the inception of
the Beast’s mark will affect everybody on the planet whether everybody wants to be affected by them or not. And
my hope is that this writing may assist in aiding in those missions.

Ellen G. White, Gospel Workers, p. 299
Page |4

“But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and [be] ready always to [give] an answer to every man that asketh
you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: having a good conscience; that, whereas they
speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in
Christ.” 1 Peter 3:15-16
Page |5

Part 1: The Laws

“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have
preached unto you, let him be accursed.” Galatians 1:8.

Vast hordes of individuals in the Christian world out there stand firm in their belief that the Sabbath is
either a Jewish thing that was only for the Jews, that it is or was part of the Ceremonial Law, and/or that it no
longer applies to the people of God today because it has been done away with one way or another. Often with
unwavering minds do they stick to one, if not all three, of these positions. Ask your local church—or any local
church for that matter if they believe that the Sabbath, or fourth commandment should still be kept, and kept on
Saturday, the seventh day of the week, and 99% of the churches will teach that the Sabbath does not have to be
kept based upon being either (1) a Jewish thing and/or (2) being part of the Ceremonial Law, or (1) that any day
observed is okay and/or (2) Sunday, the first day of the week, is observed on the basis of Jesus’ death and
resurrection. How sound are these claims in truth? How much weight do they really hold?
We must first determine what the laws are that the Bible speaks of before answering any questions. There
are only two main laws mentioned in the pages of Scripture and both are found in the Old Testament. The first Law
we find expressly mentioned is the Moral Law of God that God enumerated for Moses in the wilderness upon Mount
Sinai. Exodus 20 is where we find mention of this Law as it is enumerated. This Law is also known as the Ten
Commandments, or the Decalogue. This Law was written with the very finger of God Himself (Exodus 31:18) on
two tables of stone.
The second law we find is the Ceremonial Law. This law had to do with various things. It had to do mainly
with the sanctuary and practices concerning it, for example, and certain feast days and offerings to God. Most of
these can be found in the Book of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. This law was written by Moses and not by God
Himself. We read: “And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a
book, until they were finished, that Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD,
saying, Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may
be there for a witness against thee.” Deuteronomy 31:24-26. The fact that Moses wrote these commandments,
as will be made clear, proves that they were meant to be done away with; because, had God done it, these laws
would have remained.
So the two laws are the Moral Law and the Ceremonial Law. The difference between these two laws is that
one is binding and one has been done away with. We know that one is binding because one is an eternal Law and
the other was a temporary law. How do we know this? Let’s look at the Moral Law first.
First of all, what is sin? 1 John 3:4 gives us the answer to what sin is. We read that “Whosoever committeth
sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.” When a person transgresses the Law of
God that person is committing sin. Secondly, we should understand that “…where no law is, there is no
transgression.” Romans 4:15. So what does this tell us? This tells us that the Moral Law existed before God
enumerated them on stone and gave them to Moses. How? Well, did Adam and Eve also have a Law? Yes;
otherwise they couldn’t have transgressed. Which one of the Decalogue commandments did they break? The first
one: to have no other gods before God—which Jesus clarifies as meaning loving God with all our heart and soul
(Mark 12:30).
So is the Law therefore a Jewish custom or tradition? No; it existed long before a Jew. The Sabbath was
made on the seventh day after creation (Genesis 2:1-3)—way before a Jew ever lived. Did the Law therefore come
into being when God wrote them on stone for Moses? No; it already existed because if there were no Law to begin
with, Adam and Eve would not have sinned. Compare this plain truth with the beliefs of the Celtic Church during
the time of St. Patrick:
Page |6

“The binding obligation of the Decalogue was a burning issue in Patrick’s age. In theory, all the parties in
disagreement upon the Trinity recognized the Ten Commandments as the moral law of God, perfect eternal, and
unchangeable. It could easily be seen that in the judgment, the Lord could not have one standard for angels
and another for men. There was not one law for the Jews and a different one for the Gentiles. The rebellion of
Satan in heaven had initiated the great revolt against the eternal moral law. All the disputants over the Trinity
recognized that when God made man in His image it was the equivalent of writing the Ten Commandments in
his heart by creating man with a flawless moral nature. All parties went a step further. They confessed and
denied not that in all the universe there was found no one, neither angel, cherubim, seraphim, man, nor any
other creature, except Christ, whose death could atone for the broken law.”2

What the Celts believed only makes sense, that the Law was already upon the hearts of the first humans from the
very beginning. Man has a knack for forgetting God and His ways, so surely God wrote them on stone for the
children of Israel so that we should not forget again. So we see that the Moral Law is not a tradition at all—Jewish
or otherwise. Rather, the Moral Law is a guideline for the character that God would like us to develop through His
grace, plain and simple. But as we’ll see, it is also more than just a guideline for righteousness.
God out of His love for us expressly revealed to man what His own desire was for man to be, both for our
own good and our protection. Because it’s God’s desired standard, and God’s given perimeters for a righteous life, it
not only (1) seems that it would be quite unreasonable for God, being one who has limited Himself to His own
standard of character, to suddenly change His desire and standard for how our character should be molded, but (2)
that it would also seem that this standard, which we find in His law, is from everlasting, because it is from God’s
infinite, unchanging character.
Would it be right for us to go ahead and say that God did away with the Law? Let me ask: are people no
longer sinning today? Even Christians? No. Didn’t Jesus insist that we ask for forgiveness every time we pray
(Matthew 6:9-13)? Why should we ask for forgiveness if we can no longer sin because there is no Law? The
answer is that we shouldn’t. But Jesus taught that we should. So does the Law stand? Obviously, because people
are still sinners and therefore transgressors of the Moral Law.
Should we then be so bold as to say that God’s Law can change? It’s written in stone, shouldn’t that tell us
something? Simply because God wrote it means it will never, and has never, changed. How do we know? Because
we “know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from
it: and God doeth [it], that [men] should fear before him.” Ecclesiastes 3:14. The same God who wrote out the
commandments on stone also declared through the prophet Malachi, “I [am] the LORD, I change not”. Malachi 3:6.
So should His standard of righteousness be altered?
We see from Romans 6:23 that we deserve to die because of sin; for “the wages of sin is death”. The Law
requires our death. Now there are two options that can be done here: either (1) God can do away with the Law, or
(2) we can find a substitute who will die in our stead to free us from the condemnation of the Law, giving us a
second chance to live by the grace of God. Obviously God will not do away with the Law because He Himself wrote
it, and whatever God does is forever. He will not change His ways. This is the very same God wherein “All things
were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.” John 1:3. God would never do away
with the Law, for “Jesus Christ (is) the same yesterday, and today, and for ever.” (Parentheses added) Hebrews
13:8. God does not change, so why would His Law? Walter Veith does well in saying the following: “Had it been
possible for Him to take away the Law, would it then be necessary to pay the penalty of the Law? Yes or no?
No. So in other words, the fact that Christ came and died means He paid the penalty. Right or wrong? Does the
Law, then, still stand? Yes or no? Absolutely. So some people like to say, ‘The cross does away with the Law;’ I
would like to tell you, ‘The cross is the guarantee that the Law stands.’ …Because, had it been possible to
take the Law away, then Christ need not have died. Does that make sense?”3 This makes perfect sense; for why

B. G. Wilkinson, Truth Triumphant, p. 87
Video: Walter Veith, “An Advocate for Our Time”
Page |7

else would God send His only begotten Son to die, rather than to simply take away the Law? The wages of sin death
and God still requires our death. God requires the death of the old man of sin (Romans 6:6) and that we sin no
more (John 8:11). Therefore we are obviously still under the Law. The simple and downright evident truth of the
matter is that God cannot do away with the Law because He has limited Himself in His standard of holiness and
character and thus will not change what He has done and decreed. That is why Solomon declared that he knew that
what God does is forever.
People tend to get tremendously confused though about this. Ephesians 2:8-9 says that “by grace are ye
saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast.” I
believe the problem comes from misunderstanding this verse. People believe that when we keep the Moral Law of
God we are performing works to gain salvation. But that is not the case. (Surely this is a deception devised from
the father of lies.) When they read this verse they put two and two together and disregard the Law of God because
they feel it is works to salvation, and Paul clearly says that works cannot save us. But it would then do us good to
take note of what James says on this very point: “What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath
faith, and have not works? can faith save him?” James 2:14. This is a good question. If believing in Jesus were
the sole criteria for salvation, doesn’t that mean Satan would enter into the kingdom of God? For James also says
that “the devils also believe, and tremble.” James 2:19. Continuing on, James writes that “If a brother or sister be
naked, and destitute of daily food, and one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be [ye] warmed and filled;
notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what [doth it] profit? Even so faith,
if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.”—is what? James says that faith is dead, being alone—“Yea, a man may
say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by
my works.” James 2:15-18. “…wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham
our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought
with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?”—made what? His faith was made perfect—“And the
scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and
he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only?
Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent
[them] out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.”
James 2:20-26. Therefore must we also work to be saved? Isn’t that what James is saying? Isn’t that what Jesus
Himself says in the Book of Revelation when we find written, “behold, I come quickly; and my reward [is] with me,
to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first
and the last. Blessed [are] they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and
may enter in through the gate into the city”? Revelation 22:12. For what is our faith without works? Faith is
what justifies us before God, but can that alone save us if we do not obey the commandments of God? Reread what
James says if you, Reader, are unsure.
Jesus Himself was saved from death by faith which was wrought by works. Had He not worked to obey the
commandments of His heavenly Father, every single one, He would not have been sinless. Had He faith in God only,
yet did not the works of obedience to God, and had He not delighted in the Moral Law of God, to do it and to exalt it,
Jesus would not have been without sin, for He would have been casting aside the Law and would have been found a
transgressor and therefore with sin.
James goes on to admonish us further to “be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your
own selves. For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a
glass: for he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. But
whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth [therein], he being not a forgetful hearer, but a
doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.” James 1:22-25. Isn’t James also here telling us that the
Law of God sets man at liberty, that it is perfect, and that those who keep and obey it will be blessed? Yes, that is
exactly what James is saying! That’s why we read in the Book of Proverbs that “Where [there is] no vision, the
Page |8

people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy [is] he.” Proverbs 29:18. Notice, also, that it does not say
“miserable is he”. It says, happy is he. Keeping the Law is not bondage; keeping the Law means happiness and
If the Law has been done away with, by what standard will God judge the world? “...whosoever shall keep
the whole law, and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said
also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law. So
speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.” James 2:10-12. Hence, it is appropriate
to ask, then, what law is God going to judge the world with if the Moral Law has been done away with? Isn’t God’s
judgment a spiritual matter? Romans 7:14 tells us yes, “the law is spiritual”. And isn’t spirituality a moral issue?
Then, certainly the Moral Law must stand for God’s judgment.
The bottom line is that the Ten Commandment Law still stands today and is binding upon our lives as much
as it was upon Adam and Eve’s lives; it never was, and never will be meant to be done away with, nor has it ever
and never will be changed. Neither is any one part of the Ten Commandments Moral Law part of the Ceremonial
Law—not now, not in the past, not ever; for the Law of God is spiritual, while the Ceremonial Law is carnal
(Hebrews 9:9-10). That is why we read in Psalm 111:7-8, “The works of his (God’s) hands [are] verity and
judgment; all his commandments [are] sure. They stand fast for ever and ever, [and are] done in truth and
uprightness.” (Parentheses added) And again in Psalm 18:30, “As [for] God, his way [is] perfect: the word of the
LORD is tried: he [is] a buckler to all those that trust in him.”
We have more to add on this point though, because we find more interesting things to quote from the
Psalms. In Psalm 117:1-2 we read: “O Praise the LORD, all ye nations: praise him, all ye people. For his merciful
kindness is great toward us: and the truth of the LORD [endureth] for ever. Praise ye the LORD.” The
commandments endure for all time, and they are done in truth. This psalm here tells us that the truth of the Lord
endures forever. Put two and two together here, and we find more evidence that God’s Law cannot possibly have
been done away with at Calvary.
But we can go further than this even. God through the prophet Isaiah says “my salvation shall be for ever,
and my righteousness shall not be abolished.” Isaiah 51:6. Then the psalmist adds, “My tongue shall speak of
thy word: for all thy commandments [are] righteousness.” Psalm 119:172. In one breath God says that He will
not allow His righteousness to be abolished, and then in another breath God through the psalmist assures us that
all His commandments are righteousness. What does that tell you, Reader? It tells me that God’s Law stands sure
even today, for His Law is righteous and His righteousness will stand as it is forever and ever.
The one that nails the point to the floorboard is Psalm 119:142, 151-152 which says, “Thy righteousness
[is] an everlasting righteousness, and thy law [is] the truth. …Thou [art] near, O LORD; and all thy
commandments are truth. Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them
for ever.” We have both ingredients found in the other psalms here: (1) God’s righteousness, and (2) truth. Both
endure for all of eternity, and the Law is both righteous, a transcript of God’s righteousness, and Truth. Does the
Law stand, therefore? Was it nailed to the cross? Reader, you tell me.
In Daniel 9:27, speaking of Christ, we read, “And he (Messiah) shall confirm the covenant with many for one
week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease….” (Parentheses
added) This prophecy corresponds directly to Jesus’ work on the cross. It is His work on the cross as the real
Lamb of God that caused “the sacrifice and the oblation to cease”, the rituals that regarded sanctuary practices.
Once Jesus said, “It is finished” (John 19:30), His roles as the sacrificial Lamb of the Ceremonial Law was finished,
eventually bringing an end to the earthly sanctuary, ceremonial rituals. Thus, the Ceremonial Law has been
abolished and we no longer have to hold it today. If we were to take a lamb and sacrifice it upon an altar, what
would we be saying to Jesus’ work on the cross? We would be saying, ‘Thanks, but no thanks, Jesus; I have my own
way of being saved.’ This, by the way, and not obedience to the Law, would be salvation by works now that the real
Lamb of God has done His work.
Page |9

Moses told the Levites that the Ceremonial Law would be a witness against us (Deuteronomy 31:24-26); it
would be there to tell us that we play a part in this sinful world. Then we read in Colossians 2:13-15, “And you,
being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven
you all trespasses; blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which were contrary to
us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; [and] having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a
shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.” This verse in Colossians is telling us that the law nailed to the
cross was a law that was against us. Isn’t that the same Ceremonial Law that Moses says was to be a witness
against us? Isn’t Colossians thus blatantly saying that the law that was nailed to the cross was not the Ten
Commandment, Moral Law of God, but the Ceremonial Law? I don’t see how anyone could deny it.
The Ceremonial Law came after sin. Paul says in Galatians 3:19, that “It (the Ceremonial Law) was added
because of transgression, till the seed (Jesus) should come whom the promise was made…”4 (Parentheses added)
The Moral Law was not added because of transgression, because if the Moral Law didn’t exist until Moses was given
it there was obviously no Law to be transgressed. That is why Paul asks in the same verse, “Wherefore then
[serveth] the law?” because Jesus had already taken away that law. Paul here does not refer to the Moral Law. We
can even reread this same verse differently as follows: ‘There was a law added because of another Law that was
transgressed.’ The Moral Law was transgressed, and the Ceremonial Law was added because of that transgression as
a temporary remedy for transgressions until Christ should come. In other words, the solution to the problem was
added because of the first problem that was created by the transgression of the Law; simple as that.
When Jesus became the sacrificial Lamb of God He fulfilled the Ceremonial Law and became our new
solution to sin. This is why Paul went on to write in regards to the Ceremonial Law, that “sin shall not have
dominion over you: for ye are not under the (Ceremonial) law, but under grace. (However) What then? shall we
sin (transgress the Moral Law), because we are not under the (Ceremonial) law, but under grace?”—what does
Paul then say?—“God forbid.” (Parentheses added) Romans 6:14-15. Also notice here that Paul is speaking as
though we can still sin, for he asks “shall we sin?”; thus he is also implying the Law—the Moral Law, stands,
because if it didn’t then we could not sin any longer, for “sin is the transgression of the law.” So what exactly is
Paul saying? Walter Veith sums it up nicely when he says, “In other words, what he is saying here is, ‘Grace saves
me; and works cannot save me. But sin must not rule over me, transgression of the Law must not be part of
my life.’ So, because grace saves me, what then? Shall I now be able to sin? Yes or no? “God forbid.” …Grace
establishes the Law (Romans 3:31) (for that has always been the means of salvation from the condemnation of
the Law). I look to the cross and say, ‘Wow, Lord, why did you have to suffer for me and die?’ And the Lord says,
‘Because you are a transgressor and the Law requires that you die; therefore, I pay the price for you’, and the
justice has been done. Justice has been done. …[Christ] took upon Himself the penalty, and He paid the price,
and He died.”5 (Parentheses added) “Therefore by the deeds of the (Ceremonial) law there shall no flesh be
justified in his sight:” (Parentheses added) (Romans 3:19) because it is both our faith in and our obedience
(works) to Christ, the real, true living Lamb of the living God that we can be justified, just as Abraham was.
I said a bit ago that there is more to the Moral Law than just being a guideline of righteous character that
we are to follow, so what is the purpose of the Moral Law? The purpose of the Moral Law is to reveal sin. “For by
the law is the knowledge of sin.” Romans 3:20. Walter Veith does well again in saying that “the Law cannot save

This also means that the Ceremonial practice, at least of slaughtering and sacrificing a literal lamb upon an altar, existed from the
time of Adam and Eve because that’s when “the promise was made” (Genesis 3:15). Salvation by grace has always been the means
of being saved. Salvation by grace from sin caused by transgressing the Law has existed since the Law was transgressed. We can
come to this conclusion not only based off of Galatians 3:19, but also because Hebrews 11:4 says that “By faith Abel offered unto
God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he
being dead yet speaketh.” In other words, Abel offered a lamb, having faith that God would accept his righteousness by faith in the
merits of the lamb, while Cain offered up grains and such, having faith in His own merits, trusting in the works of his own hands to
be counted as righteous.
Video: Walter Veith, An Advocate for Our Time
P a g e | 10

me, only Jesus can save me; but, the Law can tell me what’s right and wrong. So, if I know what is right and do it
not, …then it be for me what?—sin”6, as the writer(s) of the Book of Hebrews says (Hebrews 10:26). That’s why
Paul asks us, “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we”—what?—“establish the law.”
Romans 3:31. “…it’s amazing how Paul is distorted on this particular point. Because people believe that we
are under grace and keeping the Law—‘that was a Jewish thing.’ No, no, no, no…the Bible teaches we are under
grace and that works cannot save us; we can do right as much as we like, but if we don’t accept the free gift of
salvation in Christ it’s meaningless (just as James talks about). …When I come into harmony with Christ I will
keep His commandments.”7 (Parentheses added) Does this make sense to you, Reader? It is up to us to obey
(that’s works) God and His Christ and to have faith in the work Jesus did, and is doing for us for our atonement.
Once we have come into harmony with Christ by obeying His commandments and putting our trust in His merits,
we can then say along with Paul that “There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus,
who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” Romans 8:1.
And if people want to say, ‘O no, you see, the old commandments have been done away with, and Jesus gave
us a new commandment to love each other as ourselves,’ consider what Paul also said: “Owe no man any thing, but
to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery,
Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if [there be]
any other commandment, it is breifly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as
thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love [is] the fulfilling of the law.” Romans 13:8-10.
Furthermore, because love is the fulfilling of the Law, that’s why John said, “Brethren, I write no new
commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old
commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning. Again, a new commandment I write unto
you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth.” 1
John 2:7-8. In other words John is saying, ‘I’m not giving you word to do something that wasn’t already given in
times past. When you manifest the love for one another, you are fulfilling that which was preached before, which
was fulfilled in Christ and is now fulfilled in you, because the error of misunderstanding the word from before is
now passed and the truth of that word is now manifest in Christ and in you.’ Make sense?
John goes on to say, “Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that
which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye shall continue in the Son, and in the Father.
And this is the promise that he hath promised us, [even] eternal life.” 1 John 2:24-25. If we really want to follow
Christ and are to be found in Him we will long to do His will and to keep His commandments. “For this is the love
of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.” 1 John 5:3. There are
two things to take note of here. First, note that this obviously does not refer to the Ceremonial Law because those
laws that were commanded to Moses by God were done away with. The “old commandment”, or “the word…heard
from the beginning” in 1 John 2, and the “commandments” in 1 John 5 that John must undoubtedly be referring to
are the Ten Commandments of the Moral Law. Secondly, like Paul and James, John is clearly saying that if we obey
the commandments of God, then we shall remain in the grace of the Father and the Son, and thereby receive eternal
life which has been promised. For “the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of
God abideth for ever.” 1 John 2:17.
The confusion surrounding the laws is nicely summed up in the “Life Application Study Bible (KJV)” as thus:
“Part of the Jewish law included those laws found in the Old Testament. When Paul says that non-Jews (Gentiles)
are no longer bound by these laws, he is not saying that the Old Testament laws do not apply to us today. He
is saying certain types of laws may not apply to us. In the Old Testament there were three categories of laws:
Ceremonial law – This kind of law relates specifically to Israel’s worship (see, for example, Leviticus 1:1-13). Its
primary purpose was to point forward to Jesus Christ. Therefore, these laws were no longer necessary after Jesus’

P a g e | 11

death and resurrection. While we are no longer bound by ceremonial laws, the principles behind them—to
worship and love a holy God—still apply. The Jewish Christians often accused the Gentile Christians of violating
the ceremonial law. Civil law – This type of law dictated Israel’s daily living (see Deuteronomy 24:10-11, for
example). …Moral law – This sort of law is the direct command of God—for example, the Ten Commandments
(Exodus 20:1-17). It requires strict obedience. It reveals the nature and will of God, and it still applies to us
today. We are to obey this moral law, not to obtain salvation, but to live in ways pleasing to God.”8
Jesus went on to tell His disciples that, “If ye love me, keep my commandments.” John 14:15. Maybe I’m
totally out of my mind and so far off into left field that I can’t understand what this is saying, but I’m pretty sure
this is telling us that if we love Jesus, we will obey His Moral Law. “Christians are those who believe inwardly and
outwardly that Jesus’ death has allowed God to offer them forgiveness and eternal life as a gift. They have accepted
that gift through faith and are seeking to live a life of obedient gratitude for what God has done for them.”9
And how does a Christian show their “obedient gratitude for what God has done for them”? They keep His
commandments. Jesus said, “If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my
Father’s commandments, and abide in his love.” John 15:10.

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I
say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be
called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach [them], the same shall be
called great in the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 5:18.

Tyndale Life Application Study Bible (KJV), Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 1996, p. 2335
Ibid. p. 2337
P a g e | 12

Part 2: Jesus and the Sabbath

“Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD….” Isaiah 1:18.

We just covered the two laws of God: the Moral Law and the Ceremonial Law. We used Biblical evidence to
support the facts that it is the Ceremonial Law that has been done away with on the cross, and not the Moral Law.
We have come to the conclusion, based on Biblical texts, that the Moral Law has not been done away with, it is
binding to this day, eternal, prefect, sets people free, makes people happy and God blesses them who keep them.
We have seen that the prominent difference between the two laws is not what they consist of, but what their
function is for us: the Ceremonial Law tells us something about ourselves; it tells us that we are sinners. The Moral
Law tells us what sin is. The deeper purpose of the Ceremonial Law is to tell us the part we play in causing a sinful
world, and to point us to the Solution to transgression, Jesus Christ the true Sacrificial Lamb of God. The deeper
purpose of the Moral Law is to reveal the standard of holiness and righteousness that God has limited Himself to
and to provide us with a character that God would like us to develop and have through His grace. Now we will
begin to focus on the Sabbath commandment of the Moral Law
We read in a prophecy concerning the life of Jesus in the Book of Isaiah, “The LORD is well pleased for his
(Christ’s) righteousness’ sake; he (Christ) will magnify the law, and make [it] honorable.” (Parentheses added)
Isaiah 42:21. Wow. That’s interesting; in a prophecy concerning the life of Jesus almost 700 years before He was
born it was predicted that Jesus would uphold and magnify the law, making it honorable—not to show us that ‘it
was a burden’. We can find a prophecy about Christ upholding the Law; but can we find anywhere in Scripture
where it says Christ would come to abolish the Moral Law? I think not. For if so, why did Jesus clearly tell the
people to “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil”?
Matthew 5:17. It almost sounds like Jesus was looking into the future when the day would come that people would
believe that the Law had been done away with.
Did you know that Jesus kept the commandments of His Father so perfectly that He even kept the Sabbath
day in death? Jesus rested in the grave on the seventh day and rose the following Sunday morning. Does that not
speak louder than words? Yes, Jesus also gave the Jewish religious leaders a hard time about the Sabbath, but that
is only because of how severely they ritualized them. Their heart had trailed away from the meaning behind the
letter to rigorously demanding strict observance to the letter.
It is written by the Apostle John that “whoso keepeth his (Christ’s) word, in him verily is the love of God
perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. He that saith he abideth in him (Christ) ought himself also so
to walk, even as he walked.” (Parentheses added) 1 John 2:5-6. The Apostle Peter also that Jesus left “us an
example, that ye should follow his steps….” 1 Peter 2:21. Because Jesus was sinless, and He kept all the Ten
Commandments, and we are to walk as He walked, shouldn’t we then keep the same commandments that He kept?
Jesus kept the Sabbath (Mark 1:21). Shouldn’t we then do so also? Yes, I believe we should. We have seen that the
Law has not been done away with. So why should we for one minute think that we no longer have to obey the
Law? Shall we go rob now, and murder, lie, and fornicate? Didn’t John write that “we do know that we know
him, if we keep his commandments”; “He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a
liar, and the truth is not in him”? 1 John 2:3-4. These are very powerful words, and yes, John did write this. So
shall we say that we know Him, not keep His commandments, and then be found outright liars before God? For
again, “If we say that we have fellowship with him (Christ), and walk in darkness (error), we lie, and do not
the truth: but if we walk in the light (truth), as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the
blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.” (Parentheses added) 1 John 1:6-7.
In John chapter 1 we see that Jesus is also the Creator of everything: “In the beginning was the Word, and
the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made
by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.” John 1:1-3. Again in Colossians 1:16-17 we
P a g e | 13

read, “for by him (Jesus) were all things created, that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible,
whether [they be] thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for
him: and he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” (Parentheses added) Therefore, because Jesus
is the Creator of the universe, He is the one responsible for giving the Ten Commandments. That’s why Jesus could
say in Luke 6:5 that “the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.” (See also Matthew 12:8 or Mark 2:28.)
So, when the Bible in various places in the New Testament tells us to keep Jesus’ commandments, seeing
that Jesus is the Great Lawgiver, which ones are the writers talking about? Yes, there are various other
commandments that Jesus gave besides those of the Ten Commandments that are found in the New Testament that
we should indeed follow, such as the one in John 5:39,10 but the main ones referred to are obviously the Ten
Commandments of the Moral Law because those a Jesus’ Ten Commandments.
We read also in Hebrews 4:4-10, “For he (God through Moses) spake in a certain place of the seventh
[day] on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works (Genesis 2:2). And in this [place] again, If
they shall enter into my rest (Psalm 95:11). Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they
whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief: again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David,
Today, after so long a time; as it is said, Today if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts. For if Jesus had
given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. There remaineth therefore a
rest to the people of God. For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as
God [did] from his.” (Parentheses added) This passage clearly speaks of the seventh day as the day of rest,
connecting it as the day that God rested. In so doing, it is twice confirming that the Sabbath is what the writer(s)
are teaching about here. The word for rest in verse 9 is also a translation from the word ‘sabbatismos’, meaning
keeping the Sabbath.11 Therefore the writer(s) of the Book of Hebrews are also making it a point to tell the readers
that Jesus is the one who had given them the day of rest, and that there is no other day to enter into that rest except
for the Sabbath day. Thus, “there remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God”, the Sabbath day; “for he that is
entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God [did] from his.” If we want to enter into Jesus’
rest then, we need to keep the Sabbath day, according to this passage.
Because Jesus is the Maker of all things, and He says that if we love Him we should keep His
commandments, we should keep all commandments, including resting on the Sabbath day—especially if we want
to enter into His rest—which He wrote on tables of stone to ensure that they were never to be forgotten again. But
what makes the Sabbath important? It’s just a day, isn’t it?

“Come unto me, all [ye] that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and
learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke [is] easy,
and my burden is light.” Matthew 11:28-30.

“Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.”
Strong’s Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon, #4520 (http://www.apostolic-
P a g e | 14

Part 3: The Significance of the Sabbath Commandment

“Blessed [is] the man [that] doeth this, and the son of man [that] layeth hold on it; that keepeth the sabbath from
polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil. …thus saith the LORD unto the eunuchs that keep my
sabbaths, and choose [the things] that please me, and take hold of my covenant; even unto them will I give in
mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them
an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off. Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to
sever him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, everyone that keepeth the sabbath from
polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant; even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them
joyful in my house of prayer:” Isaiah 56:2, 4-7

As Walter Veith points out again, “The Sabbath has nothing to do with a day; that’s incidental. The Sabbath
has to do with authority.”12 Does it? First let us ask, what is the Sabbath? “It [is] a sign between me (God) and
the children of Israel (God’s people) for ever: for [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the
seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.” (Parentheses added) Exodus 31:17. In the Hebrew language the word
for sign here in the KJV is ‘owth. It is a sign, signal, a distinguishing mark, banner, remembrance, miraculous sign,
omen, warning, token, ensign, standard, miracle, and proof.13
In Exodus 20:11 we read, “For [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them
[is], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.” In this verse and
the one above we see that (1) God blessed the Sabbath and hallowed it, he put it aside for holy use, and (2) it would
be a distinguishing mark, a banner and an ensign, a token and a standard, and a proof to the world between God
and His people forever that the world may know that they are His people.
Next let us read what 1 Chronicles 17:27 says. We read: “…thou blessest, O LORD, and [it shall be]
blessed for ever.” Now let’s go back to the Book of Genesis. In Genesis 2:1-3 it is written, “Thus the heavens and
the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made;
and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and
sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.” The Bible tells us
that the Sabbath is blessed forever. The Bible also tells us that what is blessed of God cannot be reversed
(Numbers 23:20 and 1 Chronicles 17:27). So has the Sabbath then been unblessed and discarded as not binding
upon our lives today? Hardly. Besides, what was it that Solomon wrote? Solomon wrote that, “I know that,
whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth [it],
that [men] should fear before him.” Therefore, because God is the one who blessed and sanctified the Sabbath day,
will it always be blessed and sanctified? Yes. Why? Because what God does is forever. Thus the Sabbath is still
binding today, right? Is it, along with the other nine commandments still binding today? You bet. Do we therefore
need to keep and observe it because of it being binding upon our lives? We will if we love Jesus.
Secondly, what are to distinguish the Sabbath are two things: (1) the sanctification that is tied to the
Sabbath, and (2) God’s mark of authority. Let’s first look at the sanctification aspect. In Exodus 31:13 it is written,
“Speak thou unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it [is] a sign between me and
you throughout your generations; that [ye] may know that I [am] the LORD that doth sanctify you.” God is
telling us here that His Sabbath days will be a sign, a distinguishing mark that He is the Lord that sanctifies us.
There are many gods (read that, devils) out there, and one god of this world (2 Corinthians 4:4) who can be the
sanctifying power over our lives. So how do we know that the God of gods is the one that is sanctifying us? By
keeping the Sabbath. Keep that in mind as we continue.
Video: Walter Veith, The Final Conflict
Strong’s Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon, #0226 (http://www.apostolic-
P a g e | 15

In John 17 we find the final moments before Christ must be crucified. Jesus is praying to the Father in
heaven and asks Him to sanctify Jesus’ disciples through God’s truth: “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word
is truth.” John 17:17. Jesus goes on to say, “And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be
sanctified through the truth.” John 17:19. Jesus thus is telling us that if we are to be sanctified, that that
sanctification comes through the Truth.
There are only three definitions of Truth in the Bible. The first definition of Truth we find in Psalm
119:151: “Thou [art] near, O LORD; and all thy commandments [are] truth.” The second definition of Truth is
found in John 14:6: “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but
by me.” The third definition of Truth is found in John 17:17 and that is the Word of God. In Psalms 100:5 we read,
“For the LORD [is] good; his mercy [is] everlasting; and his truth [endureth] to all generations.” So we can
conclude that the Truth, according to this psalm will endure to all people.
Now let’s try putting this all together in light of sanctification of the Sabbath. In John 1 we find that Jesus is
the Word of God made flesh: “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the
glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” John 1:14. In 1 John 5:7 we read, “For there are
three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” Therefore,
putting this together, because Jesus is the Word, and the Word is God’s, we can say that Jesus and His words are
God’s Word and words; we can say further that Jesus’ commandments are God’s commandments and that God’s
commandments are part of His Word. All three are summed up by Jesus as being Truth in John 17:17 when He says
that God’s Word is Truth.
In Acts 26:15-18 is recorded the vision that Paul received from Jesus commissioning him to go unto the
Gentiles. We read, “…I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared
unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of
those things in the which I will appear unto thee; delivering thee from the people, and [from] the Gentiles, unto
whom now I send thee, to open their eyes, [and] to turn [them] from darkness to light, and [from] the power of
Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by
faith that is in me.” This seems to make the whole argument about Sabbath sanctification null, because it
blatantly says that sanctification comes through faith in Jesus, and not by keeping the Sabbath. But what then do
we do with the other verses we have just covered? Throw them out the window?
We must ask ourselves what exactly is faith in Jesus? In Hebrews 11 we get the definition of faith: “…faith
is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Hebrews 11:1. So let’s say it like this: ‘I
send thee, to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that
they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by the substance of things
hoped for and the evidence of things not seen in me.’ In other words, faith in Christ is our trust that He will provide
those things which He has promised. So simple a kindergartener could understand.
But what of His commandments? If we love Christ, Jesus says we will keep them. So what is our faith, then,
if we believe in Jesus and do not what He says? Doesn’t James say that our faith is dead without our works? So
what must we do to keep our faith in Jesus alive? We must obey His commandments, plain and simple. Yes, as
Hebrews 10:10 assures us, “we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once [for all]” that
comes from the faith that is in His merits and promises, but without our obedience to Jesus what is our faith and
the sanctification of Christ? Again, it is dead. Therefore, ultimately, based off of Biblical teaching, sanctification
does not come through faith in Jesus alone, because faith in Jesus alone would be dead. Rather, sanctification will
come through faith in and obedience to Jesus, the Word of God. Hence, if we truly love and trust Him, we will keep
His commandments.
P a g e | 16

This is how this all ties into the Sabbath. Yes, sanctification comes from Christ14, and by the Holy Spirit
(Romans 15:16), but it is obedience to God’s commandments that gets us that sanctification over our lives. To be
sanctified by the Truth we have to be obedient to God’s commandments. That is why it is written in Romans 6:16,
“Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey;
whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?” If we are willing to accept Christ as our Savior
we have to be ready to accept Christ as our King and Ruler, and thus to be ready to subject ourselves to His rules. It
is our obedience that makes us servants and subjects of the Most High, and if we obey not the commandments of
God we are not servants of God. And if we keep the Sabbath commandment, we know, based off what the Bible
says, that the Most High God is the one that sanctifies us; but, if we keep all nine commandments, and we discard
the fourth commandment to keep the Sabbath day holy, we are unsure about the one who sanctifies us and
therefore may or may not be sanctified by Jesus, “Lord also of the Sabbath.” And as it is written, “both he that
sanctifieth and they who are sanctified [are] all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them
brethren….” Hebrews 2:11.
As I said a moment ago, sanctification is not the only distinguishing aspect of the Sabbath commandment. It
is also distinguished by the Mark of God which is the seal of sanctification. The Mark of God is His seal of authority.
We find in Exodus 20:11, the Sabbath commandment, His name, His title, and His territory. His name is the LORD,
His title is Maker, and His territory is the heaven, the earth, the sea, and all that in them is. As Walter Veith says,
“God placed His seal…in the heart of the Ten Commandments which gives the entire Law its authority.
Without a seal, a governmental seal, saying who the lawmaker is and what the territory is the law has no
validity. So the Sabbath commandment gives validity to the entire Law of God. Without the Sabbath
commandment, the Law could have been given by Joe Blow—anybody. And we need not be intimidated or bow
down to its precepts; but with the Sabbath commandment, it is the LORD thy God, the Creator that gave the Law….
So I have to do nothing but keep the Sabbath and I am acknowledging an authority over my life that cannot
be gainsaid because it’s from the Creator and Re-Creator. I stand for righteousness by faith, if… I love Him
enough to keep His commandments. That’s the bottom line.”15 (Italic emphasis in original) And isn’t that what
we have just been going over? When one is obedient unto the Lawmaker and keeps the Sabbath, they are willfully
accepting a sanctifying power from the God of gods over their lives.
But notice that the Sabbath is more than just a commandment as Veith points out. The Sabbath is what
makes the Law binding over us today because it is what validates the Law. It’s simple: if I were to try and make a
law that says don’t kill, don’t steal, don’t commit adultery, keep such and such a day as holy unto me, and love me
with all your soul, heart and mind etc., people will, for one, think I’ve gone absolutely nuts, and secondly they will
say to themselves, ‘Who’s this guy that thinks he can tell me what to do?’ The problem is that I have no authority—
neither a territory to enforce the law nor a title to my name. Now if Adolf Hitler passed a law in Nazi Germany,
demanding, say, to have all the German people come out every Tuesday at noon and yell out ‘Heil Hitler!’, would
the people perhaps obey this demand? You bet. Why? Because he had the territory—Germany, the title—Fuehrer,
and name—Adolf Hitler, he had, in other words, a distinguishing mark of authority. Now what if the God of the
entire universe said, ‘You shall have no other gods before me, you shall not make and worship idols, you shall not
take my name in vain, remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy,’ etc? Should we then perhaps obey Him? One
hundred percent. Why? Because He has a title and territory above all other titles and territories, and therefore has
a mark of authority greater than any other mark of authority that can be put forth.
What makes His Law binding is His mark, and that mark is found in the fourth commandment. Therefore, if
the Sabbath was, as some like to say, part of the Ceremonial Law, and nailed to the cross, then what validity do the
rest of the Ten Commandments have? The point is that the rest of the commandments have no validity if this is the
case. So does the argument that the Sabbath was part of the Ceremonial Law still stand? Not one smidgen.

See also 1 Corinthians 1:30
Video: Walter Veith, The Final Conflict
P a g e | 17

There is, however, one verse that is used a lot that can be problematic when used by most individuals. In
the KJV, Colossians 2:16 reads, “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or
of the new moon, or of the sabbath [days]….” However, in every New Age Bible, such as the NKJV, NASB, NRSV,
NIV, etc, the text has been altered. I ask myself a simple question: ‘Why?’ People love to use this verse against
Adventists who rebuke the world of their error in not keeping the Sabbath. The world out there like a parrot
consistently yaks, yaks, yaks this same verse over, and over, and over again. First let’s ask what do meats and
drinks, and holy days, and new moons, and Sabbath days refer to? These refer to the Ceremonial Law and its
ordinances, not the Ten Commandments. However, with the new ‘Bibles’ it becomes a lot harder for the reader to
discern this because they either say “Sabbaths” (e.g. the NKJV and NRSV), “a Sabbath day” (e.g. the NIV, TNIV, and
NASB) or “Sabbath” (e.g. the NAB, NEB, and Amplified), rather than (ceremonial) Sabbath days. Check out the

“By translating the word sabbaton as the singular “Sabbath” in Colossians 2:16, translators have left the
reader to have to study the original words for better understanding. If translated “Sabbath,” then one
would be led to conclude that Paul was speaking about the weekly Sabbath. But the word sabbaton is
indeed plural:

Strong’s Hebrew/Greek definition

Sab’-bat-on: Of Hebrew origin [H7676]; the Sabbath (that is, Shabbath), or day of weekly repose from secular
avocations (also the observance or institution itself); by extension a se’nnight, that is, the interval between
two Sabbaths; likewise the plural in all the above applications: - sabbath (day), week.

Therefore, the King James Version’s translation of this word into the plural “sabbath days” is justified. Why
some translations translated this plural word into the singular “sabbath” is beyond us, but the honest
researcher will see that, given the context and the testimony of the rest of scripture, this is not limited to one
sabbath, but a plurality of “Sabbaths.””16 (Emphasis in the original)

Therefore we can prove by an easier way that Colossians 2:16 is not speaking of the Moral Law at all when
we examine the context of the passage. Colossians 2:14 speaks of “the handwriting of ordinances that was
against us, which was contrary to us,” being nailed to the cross. So when Paul refers to feast days and new moons
and the like, he is actually referring to what? Ordinances. But what do ordinances have to do with? What law was
contrary to us and against us? We already went over it: the Ceremonial Law. So in actual fact, Paul is referring to
the Sabbath days of the Ceremonial, and not Sabbath day of the Moral Law when he refers to “sabbath [days]”.17
The Bible tells us that God has a throne, a kingdom, He is a governor and that He reigns over the earth
(Psalms 11:4, 22:28, 47:8, and 103:19, respectively). The King established a Law from everlasting that is
enumerated in the Decalogue that is to be obeyed in that kingdom. Where there is a Law there is a Lawmaker, and
where there is a Lawmaker there is a government. Therefore there is a government in the kingdom of heaven.
More ‘proof’ of this is that the earthly tends to be a copy of the heavenly. The earthly sanctuary is a copy of the
heavenly sanctuary (Hebrews 9:24), “which the Lord pitched, and not man” (Hebrews 8:2), for example. There are
governments here on earth. There must be a government in heaven. But we don’t have to speculate on this
because the Bible tells us that there is indeed a government, kingdom, and reigning King in heaven. Thus, because
of this the Lawmaker must have a mark authenticating His ruler ship. To say that God ‘must’ have it may be a
stretch, because who is to say that God must have anything; but I believe that it is safe to say based upon the fact
that the Bible tells us that He is a Governor and King that He would have a governmental seal to authenticate the

For a much more in-depth exposé, see the link of footnote fifteen above.
P a g e | 18

Law, because just as He has limited Himself to a perfect standard of holiness, so, it seems, that He would limit
Himself to such logical doings as making sure that there is indeed a governmental seal, or a distinguishing mark of
authority within His Law or commandments—just as it is on earth with earthly governments. And, that mark of
that Lawmaker’s authority is found… in the Sabbath commandment.
When people keep the Sabbath, we should be able to see clear as crystal that it is not, by any means,
because they believe that they are saved by keeping the Law. Quite the contrary; they show their gratefulness
towards their God and His Christ for the work they’ve done to save us from our sin. (It is absolutely amazing how
turned upside down this is among professing Christians.) Therefore, for those who accuse the 7th Day Adventists
as trying to save themselves by their own works for keeping the Law, and believing that every bit of it is binding
today, not only are the 7th Day Adventists right by keeping the Law and in believing that it is binding upon us today,
we are also keeping the Law out of love for Christ, rather than trying to push and enforce it upon others.
Next we should ask, ‘What importance does the Sabbath have to Satan?’ “Well, what is Satan attacking in
the government of heaven? It’s the authority of Jesus Christ. And here [the Sabbath] is the symbol of His authority.
If he wants to attack the authority of Jesus Christ, he has no option but to attack the Sabbath.”18 Satan has no
option because the Sabbath commandment, the Mark of God, is God’s seal and sign of authority throughout the
entire universe. We must then ask ourselves which authority is going to be relevant in our life, because either it’s
God’s or it’s someone else’s. If we keep the Sabbath we acknowledge that it is God’s authority that is significant in
our lives; by rejecting it, and therefore trampling upon the whole Law of God by rejecting it’s binding authority in
our lives, we leave ourselves open to another authority to be pushed upon us.
Ellen White says, “God’s presentation of the detestable works of the inhabitants of the ruling powers of the
world who bind themselves into secret societies and confederacies, not honoring the law of God, should enable the
people who have the light of truth to keep clear of all these evils. More and more will all false religionists of the
world manifest their evil doings; for there are but two parties: those who keep the commandments of God
and those who war against God’s holy law.”19

“He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth.” Luke 11:23.

“Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will
of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy
name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess
unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Therefore whosoever heareth these
sayings of mind, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: and
the rain descended (tribulation and judgment), and the floods came (nations), and the winds blew (war), and beat
upon that house; and it fell (died) not: for it was founded upon a rock (Jesus).” (Parentheses added)20 Matthew

“(For not the hearers of the law [are] just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.” Romans 2:13.

Ellen G. White, Manuscript 139, 1903, pp. 5-6 (“The Message in Revelation,” October 23, 1903.) Released June 21, 1978
{Manuscript Release, vol. 8, 322.1}
This is just an interpretation of this verse that came to this author as he was writing out this work.
P a g e | 19

Part 4: The Sabbath and the Covenants of God

There are three major covenants in the Bible. Many people today like to believe that the Sabbath was part
of an old covenant that has been fulfilled and has passed away. We have seen already how that cannot possibly be
the case, not by any means. So what are the major covenants in the Bible?
The old covenant was the sacrificial system. The Book of Hebrews is the NT book that mainly deals with
the new covenant. It also speaks of the old covenant in detail. Keep in mind as we continue that Hebrews deals
very little with the Moral Law of God, but deals most of everything with the Ceremonial Law, so most of everything
should be viewed through the lens of the Ceremonial Law. Hebrews 8:6 reads: “But now hath he (Christ) obtained
a more excellent ministry (than the earthly high priests), by how much also he is the mediator of a better (new)
covenant, which was established upon better promises.” (Parentheses added) This verse illustrates that the first
covenant was the ceremonial procedures to be done by Israel, including the sanctuary ordinances, by connecting
and comparing Christ’s ministry in the heavenly sanctuary with that of the old covenant by saying that His ministry
is “of a better covenant.” “For if that first [covenant],” continues the next verse, “had been faultless, then
should no place have been sought for the second.” Hebrews 8:7. Obviously this is not talking about the Ten
Commandment covenant because the Law is faultless and perfect.21
Hebrews 7:11-12 and 18-19 proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the old covenant was the ceremonial
procedures by connecting the lack of perfection of the Levitical priesthood with that of the faultfullness of the first
covenant which we read about above. It says, “If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for
under it the people received the (Ceremonial) law,) what further need [was there] that another priest should
rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being
changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. …For there is verily a disannulling of the
commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing
perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope [did]; by the which we draw nigh unto God.” (Parentheses within the
parentheses added) We can again do some connecting the dots with these verses to the ones mentioned above.
In the forefront of things, let’s realize that this law spoken of is not the Moral Law, because that Law is very
strong and profitable, setting men at liberty and such as were covered by James and in the psalms. Moreover, the
Moral Law can make us perfect unto righteousness through our obedience to its precepts; the Ceremonial Law of
itself could not make anything perfect for, as Hebrews explains, the ministry of the high priest was not an
everlasting ministry, which is why Jesus’ ministry, being a High Priest who ever lives, is a better hope than any
earthy high priests could have been.
Secondly, as there is mention of a change in the covenant, so there is a change in the law. Which one? The
Ceremonial Law. What kind of change? Naturally, a being done away with, or a fulfillment rather, just as the
covenant is spoken of as being done away with: “In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old.
Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready t vanish away.” Hebrews 8:13. Lastly, we can connect the
“unprofitableness” and “weakness” of the law with that of the faultfulness quoted above of the first covenant and
easily conclude based upon this connection that the old covenant is simply the Ceremonial Law. That is why there
is a new covenant spoken of; because the former covenant was fulfilled in Christ. But can we be absolutely sure of
Well, Hebrews 9:1 clears up the whole issue for certain by saying that “verily the first [covenant] had also
ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.” So yes, the first covenant without a doubt was the
Ceremonial Law and the sacrificial system. Hebrews 12:24 tells us that “Jesus (is) the mediator of the new
covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than [that of] Abel.” (Parentheses added)

“The law of the LORD *is+ perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD *is+ sure, making wise the simple.” Psalm 19:7.
P a g e | 20

This is telling us two things: (1) that the first covenant was the ceremonial practices of the sacrificial system,
alluded to by the phrase “sprinkling of blood,” and (2) what the new covenant is.
The new covenant according to Hebrews 12:24 is the atoning work of Jesus in the heavenly sanctuary and,
according to Hebrews 8:10-12, is the sanctification through the atonement being done in heaven. “For this [is] the
covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into
their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: and
they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know
me, from the least to the greatest.22 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their
iniquities will I remember no more.” Hebrews 8:10-12. Rather than having a temporary high priest for the
atonement of individuals once a year, as the old testament that was against us required, Christ “is the mediator of
the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions (against the Moral law)
[that were] under the first testament (of the Ceremonial Law), they which are called might receive the promise
of eternal inheritance.” (Parentheses added) Hebrews 9:15.
Again we get a clear image of Christ and the heavenly atonement being the new covenant, versus that of an
earthly atonement by a temporary, mortal high priest as the former covenant: “For the (Ceremonial) law having a
shadow of good things to come (Christ and His work above), [and] not the very image of the things, can never
with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. For
then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no
more conscience of sins. But in those [sacrifices there is] a remembrance again [made] of sins every year.
For [it is] not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. Wherefore when he cometh
into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: in burnt
offerings and [sacrifices] for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is
written of me,) to do thy will, O God. Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burn offerings and [offering]
for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure [therein]; which are offered by the law; then said he, Lo, I come
to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first that he may establish the second. By the which will we are
sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once [for all].” (First two parentheses added)
Hebrews 10:1-10. In simple terms, this passage tells us that the Ceremonial Law was a shadow of the coming of
Christ and His fulfilling of the law, to remove it and replace it with a better and faultless new covenant law unto
These are the two main covenants which the Bible speaks of. One, the old sacrificial, ceremonial system,
has been done away with, while the other stands today. It is also worthy to note there that this second covenant
could not be unbroken if the Moral Law of God had been done away with; for what, then, is to be written in the minds
and on the hearts of God’s people if it no longer existed? But there is yet another major covenant that is different
from both of these.
“My covenant,” begins Psalm 89:34, “will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.”
We can keep in mind ahead of time that whatever it is that God says we can be sure that it will not change, and
whenever God makes a covenant, we can be assured that it will be broken, except in as much as it is fulfilled.
Now, in Deuteronomy 4:12-13 it is written that “the LORD spake unto you (the Israelites) out of the midst
of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; only [ye heard] a voice. And he declared unto
you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, [even] ten commandments; and he wrote them upon
two tables of stone.” (Parentheses added) In other words, this third covenant is a duty to keep God’s Moral Law.
Yet it gets more interesting. In Exodus 31:13-16 we read, “Speak thou also unto the children of Israel
(God’s people), saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it [is] a sign between me and you throughout your
generations; that [ye] may know that I [am] the LORD that doth sanctify you. Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore;
for it [is] holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall be put to death: for whosoever doeth [any] work therein,
See John 6:45
P a g e | 21

that soul shall be cut off from among his people. Six days may work be done; but in the seventh [is] sabbath of rest,
holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth [any] work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. Wherefore the
children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, [for] a
perpetual covenant.” (Parentheses added) The definition of the word translated ‘perpetual’ here according to
the Strong’s Concordance is:

1) long duration, antiquity, futurity, for ever, ever, everlasting,

evermore, perpetual, old, ancient, world
1a) ancient time, long time (of past)
1b) (of future)
1b1) for ever, always
1b2) continuous existence, perpetual
1b3) everlasting, indefinite or unending future, eternity23

Seeing that this use of ‘perpetual’ is used to speak of the future, we can see that it is meant to be an everlasting and
eternal covenant, with an unending future. Should we thus, for any reason, except for pure, downright and open
ignorance, believe that the Sabbath has been done away with, and that we should not keep it any longer?
Doesn’t it make sense to ask, though, why God would make the Sabbath a perpetual covenant? God made
obedience to His Moral Law the third covenant; doesn’t this make a fourth covenant? Well, no; you see, it’s quite
simple actually. It’s the fact that the Sabbath commandment is what makes the Law binding, which therefore makes
the Ten Commandment Law into a covenant at all. Were the Sabbath commandment not a part of the Law, then our
duty to obey the Moral Law could not be a covenant at all, because the Ten Commandments would not be binding,
and therefore would not have to be obeyed. It’s as simple as that. But doesn’t that also mean that our duty to stay
in line with the Law of God is also a perpetual covenant? I would think so.
However, this gets even yet more interesting because these covenants tie in with sanctification. Hebrews
10:10 says that “we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once [for all],” that is to say, by
the atoning work in the heavenly sanctuary which He earned by His self-sacrifice for all people. The atoning work
of Christ is also the new covenant. Now, according to the new covenant, God will write His Law upon our heart and
in our mind. Hebrews 10:12-14 states that “this man (Christ), after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever,
sat down on the right hand of God; from henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by one
offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.” In other words, Christ will cover the sins of those
sinners that are sanctified through faith in His sacrifice for sins. But as we saw, faith is dead without our
obedience, so that’s why Christ, “being made perfect, …became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that
obey him; called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.” Hebrews 5:9-10. And again, if one is ready
to accept Christ as their Savior and High Priest, they must also be ready to accept Him as their King and Ruler, and
thus be ready to be subjected to His rules. Let’s tie this together, then.
The sanctification of Christ comes from His atoning for us in the heavenly sanctuary, but He atones for them
which are sanctified. Those that are sanctified are those that obey Him. We already saw that we know that we are
sanctified by Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath day when we keep the Sabbath. This would mean that those who are
sanctified are sanctified by keeping the perpetual covenant and respecting their duty to keep all ten of the Ten
Commandments. Thus, if we want to take part in the new covenant to obtain absolution from sins, we have to
keep the commandment of God—including the Sabbath commandment which assures us that God is indeed
the one sanctifying us.

Strong’s Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon, #05769 (http://www.apostolic-
P a g e | 22

In conclusion, the difference between the perpetual covenant and the other covenants is that this one is an
everlasting one—it is to be continuous and for eternity. This not only means that the new covenant, just like the
old, will be fulfilled and will pass away, but that the claim that the Sabbath was part of an old covenant is proved to
be false. Lastly, to be partakers of the new covenant, we have to abide in the perpetual covenant.

“Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines.” Hebrews 13:9
P a g e | 23

Part 5: The Sabbath Through History: From the Apostolic Church until Today

“My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge….” Hosea 4:6.

“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to
themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be
turned unto fables.” 2 Timothy 4:3-4.

The purpose of this section is to trace the succession of the Apostolic Church up until the present day on the
Sabbath issue. Because we have seen how the Sabbath, and indeed all the Ten Commandments are still binding on
humanity today, surely the pure and primitive Church would have kept the Sabbath. Surely they would have
known the importance of the Sabbath and its implications tied to divine sanctification. Did they therefore keep the
The following comes from a man named Benjamin G. Wilkinson. The man was very brilliant and was able
to speak and write in eight different languages, of which consisted all of the Biblical languages. He traveled all over
the Eastern and Western world to research and discover the roots of the Apostolic Church and their beliefs and
practices they held, which later was published in his timeless work, Truth Triumphant.
We read that:

“It was from Antioch that Paul and Barnabas, set apart by the Holy Ghost, went forth as the first foreign
missionaries. The results were a revelation. Little did the apostles foresee the manner in which the Gentiles
would desert the heathen temples for the churches, as they had seen the Jews come into the church from the
synagogues. Leaving the island of Cyprus, where the Gentiles had heard with astonishment the doctrines of
the Lord, Paul and Barnabas went into Asia Minor. Here, as in Syria, the cities were full of Jews. Paul was
proud that he was a son of Israel, because he knew the fifteen hundred years of sacred teaching on
each recurring Sabbath had enriched the Hebrews with a mentality in things divine which enabled
them to grasp readily such truths as God, sin, morality, and the need of a Redeemer. He entered
therefore into the synagogues on the Sabbath day. The synagogues had long been established in the
regions which were new to Paul and his helpers, and through the Jews they were able to secure an
introduction to the Gentiles. A new vision came to the churches in Syria and Judea when the two men who
launched Christianity’s foreign mission program returned with the reports of their successes. Even before
Paul had finished his labors, or before Jerusalem was in ruins, the apostle Thomas had left for Persia and

Based on this quotation we can see that Paul kept the Sabbath—he taught in the synagogues on the Sabbath
day, just as Jesus did. Remember, “He that saith he abideth in him (Jesus) ought himself also so to walk, even as he
walked.” (Parentheses added) 1 John 2:6. If Paul, when writing about the law being done away with in Galatians
and Colossians, meant the Moral Law, wouldn’t he then have here made the case that the Sabbath had to be kept no
longer to the Jewish Christians? Perhaps he would have made an example of himself and not gone to teach on the
Sabbath day? Instead, Paul kept the Sabbath and did no such things.
We also have Scriptural evidence as supportive of the apostles keeping the Sabbath day. Acts 20:7 reads,
“And upon the first [day] of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them,
ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.” The New English Bible reads that they
came together “…on Saturday night….” Regardless of resorting to this translation, the KJV makes it clear in verse 8
that it was Saturday evening. Now, the first day of the week starts at the end of the Sabbath in the evening (Genesis
1:5, 8, 13 etc.) In other words, the Sabbath had ended and they came together Saturday evening (Sunday) and met
B. G. Wilkinson, Truth Triumphant, p. 21
P a g e | 24

with each other while also having a meal. But Paul preached to them, “ready to depart on the morrow” so when the
light should dawn it would still be Sunday. Later in the chapter we read that Paul planned to travel a long, long
distance. Paul and the disciples did not hold their meeting on Friday evening (Saturday) with Paul planning to
travel many miles the following daybreak because Saturday was holy to them, and when the day should dawn Paul
would have feared that he would have been breaking the fourth commandment of the Ten Commandments. This
was the only time to have the meeting before Paul’s departure. If Saturday no longer mattered to Paul or the
disciples no longer kept it, why didn’t they just have the meeting on the seventh day instead of having to squeeze it
in on the first day?
In 1 Corinthians 16:1-2 we read, “Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the
churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first [day] of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as [God]
hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.” The Weymoth translation says to lay by “…at his
home….” The Tyndale KJV study Bible I have gives the alternate way of putting 16:2 as every one of you “…put
something aside and save….” What this text is then referring to is to the putting aside of money at home for the
following week. People at that time, like people now who get paid on a weekly basis, got paid on Friday. In the
mindset of the Hebrew, though, Friday is the preparation day before the Sabbath (Luke 23:54). That’s why Paul
says to put the savings aside on the first day of the week, because Paul recognized that the Sabbath was coming and
that it was holy unto the Lord. Paul is basically saying, ‘Don’t put your money aside on the Friday when you get
your money, the Sabbath is coming; put your money aside early on the first day of the week after God’s holy day
has come and went.’
We can even go to the Book of Revelation 1:10 were John says that he “was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day”
and see that John acknowledged a peculiar day as holy. But which day? As the Bible must explain itself “precept
upon precept; line upon line” (Isaiah 28:9-13), we will find our answer in the Bible. Isaiah 58:13-14 says, “If thou
turn away thy foot from the sabbath, [from] doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the
holy of the LORD, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure,
nor speaking [thine own] words: then shalt thou delight thyself in the LORD; and I will cause thee to ride upon the
high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken
[it].” So which day is the Lord’s Day? Sabbath, the seventh day is the Lord’s Day. Around 70 years after Christ, the
apostle John recognized the Sabbath as the Lord’s Day and still binding; for if he didn’t, why would he say that he
was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day?
In Acts 13:14 we see that “when they (Paul and his company) departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in
Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down,” and that Paul continued to preach
thereafter, and that following the sermon, “when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought
that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.” (Parentheses added) Acts 13:42. Even the
Gentiles recognized that Paul and the others were keeping Sabbath and wanted them to come preach to them on
the next one.
Luke, speaking of himself and others on the Sabbath “went out of the city (Philippi) by a river side, where
prayer was wont to be made; and we sat down, and spake unto the women which resorted [thither].”
(Parentheses added) Acts 16:13.
We see, then, that surely all the disciples recognized the Sabbath as a holy day and kept it a holy day. Why
doesn’t the Christian world keep Saturday today then? Why is the truth about the Sabbath hidden from the world?
We will have to answer such questions.
Moving on we read that:

“For some time, groups of Christian believers continued to meet in the synagogues on the Sabbath day
with the Jews {The Catholic Encyclopedia, art. “Calendar.”}. This fact indicates that the apostolic church,
in its primitive organization, did not cast away everything connected with the synagogue. A
confirming indication of this is found in the decision of the Apostolic council recorded in the book of
P a g e | 25

Acts, where the assembled delegates voted that they would not pass any ordinances other than the four
which they had already sanctioned, because,

“Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues
every Sabbath day.” (Acts 15:21.)25

In simple terms, it is obvious that Jewish customs were a part of the Apostolic Church, and the fact that there was
no rebuke from the apostles towards keeping, but rather an acknowledgment to keep such customs shows that the
early primitive Church did not believe that the Law had been done away with and that they were no longer bound
to keeping the Ten Commandments, including, at the least, the Sabbath commandment. No, none of the apostles
believed that the Sabbath commandment was part of the Ceremonial Law and had been done away with.
Moreover, we discover that:

“In 109, about nine years after the death of the apostle John, the Roman emperor requested the scholarly
Pliny, governor of Bithynia, to make investigations concerning Christianity there because of the stories which
had come to his ears.
“The governor of Bithynia, in rendering his report to the emperor, revealed the irresistible advances
of the gospel. Pliny complains that the people are leaving the old gods and their heathen worship to go in
throngs to the worship of Christ. He laments because the sale of heathen sacrifices has fallen off. Paying
splendid tribute to the virtues of the Christians, he describes how they meet regularly once a week on
“a stated day” for worship, which was undoubtedly the seventh-day Sabbath.”26

First of all it should be noted that it is a secular authority taking not of the fact that the Judeo-Christians are
meeting on a set day once a week. Secondly, this is not here-say because it comes straight from a civil authority.
Thirdly, the early Christians were mainly Jewish Christians; therefore, their practices are going to be based off of
the Old Testament. Furthermore, if any day was kept at all, what day would that day be? Just as Wilkinson says,
undoubtedly it was the seventh day of the week; for just as it should be now, the Scriptures were the sole authority
of the Apostolic Church back then, and the Scriptures say to observe the seventh day of the week. We see then that
at this early date the Sabbath was being kept, and certainly was kept before it.
Wilkinson goes on to recall that:

“Since the majority of believers in the East were for a long time Jewish converts , it can easily be seen
that the custom was general in the eastern church of observing Saturday as the Sabbath {Cox, The
Literature of the Sabbath Question, vol. 1, p. 334}. It could hardly have been otherwise. The noble
Christianity of converted Jews was second to none. Centuries of training under the prophets had
endowed Jewish believers in Christ with ability to comprehend and to propagate the truths of the

Part of the truths of the Scriptures was incontestably the keeping holy of the seventh day. More to the point though
is that many of the early Christians were Jewish converts. I believe that is why Paul says in Romans 2:17-20, “Behold,
thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, and knowest [his] will, and approvest
the things that are more excellent, being structured out of the law; and art confident that thou thyself art a
guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast
the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.” Paul is here saying that the Jewish people were the ones,
just like Wilkinson points out, who knew the truths of Scriptures better than the other peoples. And would it be

Ibid. p. 39
Ibid. pp. 27-28
Ibid. p. 51
P a g e | 26

right for us to expect anything but this? For aren’t the Jews the ones who are responsible for giving us today what
we know as the Old Testament? And weren’t they the ones who for over two millennium complied and
familiarized themselves with the Scriptures of the Old Testament? Surely they knew the truths best.
I would like to take the time here to also point out some things about what Paul says as he continues on. He
says, “Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not
steal, doest thou steal? Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, doest thou commit adultery? thou that
abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law
dishonourest thou God? For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written. For
circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is
made uncircumcision. Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his
uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law,
judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? For he is not a Jew, which is one
outwardly; neither [is that] circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: but he [is] a Jew, which is one
inwardly; and circumcision [is that] of the heart, in the spirit, [and] not in the letter; whose praise [is] not of
men, but of God.” Romans 2:21-29.
First of all, which Law concerns adultery, theft, and idol worship? The Moral Law; so this passage’s primary
concern is the Moral Law, not the Ceremonial Law.
Secondly I ask, ‘What law did circumcision have to do with?’ The Ceremonial Law. So Paul cannot possibly
be talking about both laws at the same time here when he speaks about keeping the law. What Paul is doing here is
criticizing those Jewish converts who were demanding that the Christians be physically circumcised. His rebuke is
that circumcision is no longer an outward, but rather an inward sign of belonging to Abraham’s seed, and that
physical circumcision doesn’t profit anything; but, rather, the spiritual circumcision of the heart profits greatly.
And the way to be spiritually circumcised, he says, is by following the Moral Law. In other words, he is telling the
Jews of that day who were claiming that a Christian must physically be circumcised to be grafted into the tree of
salvation that circumcision is not of the flesh, but of the heart and spirit, and that to be counted as circumcised,
being uncircumcised, one has to obey the Law of God—which would include the fourth commandment. That is why
the apostles and disciples kept the Law, including the fourth commandment, after Christ’s ascension. “For as many
as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged
by the law; (For not the hearers of the law [are] just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the
law, are a law unto themselves: which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also
bearing witness, and [their] thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) in the day when God
shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.” Romans 2:12-16.
Thirdly, what is Paul doing to the Law here? Is he saying that we don’t need to worry about it anymore, it
has been done away with; or is Paul exalting and upholding the Law as binding? He is exalting the Law and
upholding it as binding upon men. He is asking the Jews, who make their boast of the Law, if they are breaking the
Law. He is pointing out that those who do so are dishonoring God. In like manner there is no difference between
Christians of today and those Jews of then who today claim to accept Christ as Savior, and yet deny Him as King,
tossing aside His commandments (particularly the fourth); for when the professing Christian does this, he does not
realize that he is dishonoring the work Christ has done to redeem him.
By the fourth century after Christ’s ministry:

“The churches of Rome and Alexandria had entered into an alliance (which will become important to
consider later). Alexandria had, for more than two centuries before Christ, been the real capital of the Jews
who were compromising with paganism. The church at Alexandria was in this atmosphere. The city of Rome
had been for seven hundred years, and was still to be for some time, the world capital of paganism. This
environment greatly influenced the church at Rome. …the original founders of the ecclesiastical college at
P a g e | 27

Alexandria strove to exalt tradition (remember this). Justin Martyr, as early as 150, had stood for this
{Schaff, History of the Christian Church, vol. 2, p. 720}. He was the spiritual father of Tatian, who in turn was,
in all probability, a teacher of Clement. Second, Clement, most famous of the Alexandrian college faculty and a
teacher of Origen, boasted that he would not teach Christianity unless it were mixed with pagan philosophy
{Mosheim, Commentaries, cent. 2, vol. 1, p. 341}. Third, Victor I, bishop of Rome, entered into a compact
with Clement, about 190, to carry on research around the Mediterranean basin to secure support to
help make Sunday the prominent day of worship in the church. Sunday was already a day exalted among
the heathen, being a day on which they worshiped the sun; yet Rome and Alexandria well knew that most
of the churches throughout the world sanctified Saturday as the Sabbath of the fourth
commandment.”28 (Parentheses added)

From an early stage Rome and Alexandrian Gnostic, occult philosophies were beginning to clasp hands.
Interestingly, the sanctification of Sunday was already becoming a prominent issue by the turn of the second
century. Nevertheless, Rome and Alexandria both knew that the majority of churches throughout the world
sanctified Saturday as the Sabbath day of the fourth commandment.
We also find that in 864 A.D. that:

“…the Sabbath question became prominent. The churches of the East from the earliest days had
sanctified Saturday as the Sabbath, and wherever Sunday had crept in, religious services were observed on
both days {Bower, This History of the Popes, vol. 2, p. 258}. Bulgaria in the early season of its evangelization
had been taught that no work should be performed on the Sabbath {Responsa Nicolai Papae I ad Consulta
Bulgarorum, Responsum 10, found in Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum Nova et Amplissima Collectio, vol. 15, p.
406; also to be found in Hefele, Conciliengeschicte, vol. 4, sec. 478}. Long before this time, migrations from the
Paulician church had reached Bulgaria. These Paulicians observed the Seventh-day Sabbath of the fourth

We have to now acknowledge that at least until 864 A.D. the Sabbath was still being kept by those churches with
Apostolic roots.
In 1054 there was a dispute between the Greek and Latin churches about the observance of Saturday. 30

“Treating of the Celtic Church, the historian A. C. Flick writes, “The Celts used a Latin Bible unlike the
[Jerome] Vulgate, and kept Saturday as a day of rest, with special religious services on Sunday.” {Flick, The
Rise of the Medieval Church, p. 237}
“T. Ratcliffe Barnett, in his book on the fervent Catholic queen of Scotland, who in 1060 was first to
attempt the ruin of Columba’s brethren, writes, “In this matter the Scots had perhaps kept up the
traditional usage of the ancient Irish Church which observed Saturday instead of Sunday as the day of
rest” {Barnett, Margaret of Scotland: Queen and Saint, p. 97}.”31

“…the Celtic Church [of Ireland] upheld the sacredness of the Ten Commandments. They accepted the
prophecy of Isaiah that Christ came to magnify the law and make in honorable [Chapter 42, specifically
42:21]. They preached, as Jeremiah [Jeremiah 31:31-33] and Paul [Romans 2:13-15] did, that the
purpose of the new covenant was to write God’s law in the heart [Hebrews 8:8-10]. God could be just
and justify the sinner who had fled to Christ. No wonder that the Celtic, the Gothic, the Waldensian,
the Armenian Churches, and the great Church of the East [This term, as used by the author, not only

Ibid. p. 42
Ibid. p. 233
Neale, A History of the Holy Eastern Church, General Introduction, vol. 1, p. 731
Wilkinson, Truth Triumphant, p. 88
P a g e | 28

includes the Syrian and Assyrian Churches, but is also the term applied to the development of apostolic
Christianity throughout the lands of the east32], as well as other bodies, differed profoundly from the
Papacy in its metaphysical conceptions of the Trinity and consequently in the importance of the Ten

Realize that, at the very least among the Celts, the Sabbath was kept at least as late as 1060 A.D. Moreover, not only
in regards to the Trinity, which is a whole other story completely, but in their views on the Ten Commandments
did the overwhelming majority of Churches with the apostolic roots of Syria and Antioch differ from the Papacy. As
we already saw, the prominent contention between the two parties concerning the Ten Commandments was which
day to be kept. Note that there was never a question about keeping a day holy, only about which day. But because
of this we can assume, and will surely prove, knowing that the teachings of the true Church were Bible based, that
the Church in the Wilderness at least differed from that of the Papacy regarding the importance of keeping the

“…one of the principal causes of separation [between the Catholic Church and the other churches] was the
observance of the Sabbath. …the Gothic, Waldensian, Armenian, and Syrian Churches, and the Church
of the East, as well as the church organization which Patrick founded, largely sanctified Saturday, the
seventh day of the week, as the sacred twenty-four-hour period on which God rested after creation.”34

What is the issue here between the Alexandrian ‘Christianity’ and the Apostolic Christianity? We are
starting to see that the big issue revolves around the Sabbath. Now what do original 7th Day Adventists preach
today? They preach that the final major events in world history will revolve around the Sabbath. We are starting
to see clearly that there has been a controversy encircling the Sabbath day since the second century. Should we
maybe perhaps consider the possibility of the Adventists today being right? I believe that, yes, perhaps we should
consider that maybe the 7th Day Adventists are right.
Even the Goths were Sabbath keepers.

“Since his ancestors were from Asia Minor (the provinces where the apostle Peter had been
especially instructed by God to plant the gospel), Ulfilas was undoubtedly influenced by the doctrines of the
apostle to the Jews; and he rejected the liberal and unscriptural teachings which had flooded many western
churches. He was a believer in the divine revelation of the Old Testament, as well as that of the New
Testament. He impressed upon the Gothic people a simple, democratic Christianity. Like Patrick and Columba,
he apparently kept the seventh day as the Sabbath. This may be seen in the following quotation concerning
the great Theodoric, a subsequent king of the Goths (A.D. 454-526), taken from the historian Sidonius
Apollinaris. Sidonius was not only a bishop of the church in France, but was also the son-in-law of the Roman
emperor. He was in France when the great invasions of the Goths took place. Therefore, he was well informed
on the practices of the Goths. He writes:

“It is a fact that formerly those who dwelt in the east were accustomed as a church to
sanctify the Sabbath in the same manner as the Lord’s day, and to hold sacred
assemblies; wherefore Asterius, bishop of Amasia in Pontus, in a homily on incompatibility
called Sabbath and Sunday a beautiful span, and Gregory of Nyssa in a certain sermon calls
these days brethren and therefore censures the luxury and the Sabbatarian pleasures; while
on the other hand, the people of the west, contending for the Lord’s day (sic), have
neglected the celebration of the Sabbath, as being peculiar to the Jews. Whence

Ibid. p. 5, Introduction
Ibid. pp.87-88
Ibid. p. 88
P a g e | 29

Tertullian in his Apology: ‘We are only next to those who see in the Sabbath a day only for
rest and relaxation.’ It is, therefore, possible for the Goths to have thought, as pupils of
the discipline of the Greeks, that they should sanctify the Sabbath after the manner of
the Greeks {Apollinaris, Espitolae, lib. 1, epistola 2, found in Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol.
58, p. 448}.” (Parentheses mine)

“From a scholar and traveler describing the Muscovite Russian Church (Christians still dwelling in
the region where tribes formerly had been affected by the teachings of Ulfilas) we learn that after their
conversion they “ever since continued of the Greeke Communion and Religion; ...reputing it unlawful to fast
on Saturdaies {Purchas, His Pilgrimes, vol. 1, pp. 355, 356}.”
“This same author, describing the doctrine of the Greek Orthodox Church, says:

“They admit Priests’ Marriages.... That they reject the religious use of Massie, Images, or
Statues, admitting yet Pictures or plaine Images in their Churches. That they solemnize
Saturday (the old Sabbath) festivally, and eat therein flesh, forbidding as unlawful, to
fast any Saturday in the year except Easter Eve {Ibid., vol. 1, p. 350}.””35

We can even move the date of Sabbath keepers up until as late as the 11 and 1600s:

“Peter de Bruys began his work about 1104. … For twenty years Peter de Bruys stirred southern France.
There was a deep spiritual movement among the masses. He brought them back to the Bible and to apostolic
Christianity. His message had the power to transform characters. He especially emphasized a day of
worship that was recognized at that time among the Celtic churches of the British Isles, among the
Paulicians, and in the great Church of the East; namely, that seventh day of the fourth commandment,
the weekly sacred day of Jehovah. Five centuries later, during heated debates on the Sabbath, a
learned bishop of the Church of England referred to Sabbathkeeping of the Petrobrusians {Whtie,
Bishop of Eli, A Treatise on the Sabbath Day, p. 8, found in Fisher, Tracts on the Sabbath}. For centuries
evangelical bodies, especially the Waldenses, were called Insabbati or Ensavates, that is, Insabbatati,
because of Sabbathkeeping {Gui, Manuel d’Inquisiteur, vol. 1, p. 37. …Bernard Gui drew up the processes of
condemning and of afflicting the victims [during the Inquisition]}. “Many took this position,” says Ussher
{Ussher, Gravissimae Quaestionis de Christianarum Ecclesiarum Successlone, ch. 8, par. 4}. The learned Jesuit,
Jacob Gretzer, about 1600, recognized that the Waldenses, the Albigenses, and the Insabbatati were
different names for the same people {Gretzer, Praeloquia in Triadem Scriptorum Contra Valdensium Sectam,
found in Maxima Bibliotheca Vetcrum Pantrum, vol. 24, pp. 1521, 1522}.”

Again I ask, if keeping the Sabbath was so prevalent for 1,500 years, why don’t all Christians keep the Sabbath and
hold to the teachings of the Apostolic Church and the Church of the Wilderness today?
Let’s also take a look at the Waldenses, part of the peoples that make up the Church of the Church in the
Wilderness of Revelation 12:

“For the study of the first four centuries [A.D.] it is more than fortunate that the eighty-one church resolutions
or canons passed by the council held at Elvira, Spain (c. A.D. 305), still exist. …Canon 26 of the Council of
Elvira reveals that the Church of Spain at that time kept Saturday, the seventh day. … Resolution 26 of the
Council of Elvira having revealed that the early church of Spain kept the Sabbath, and history having
proved that the Waldenses of north Spain existed at that time, these connections prove the keeping of
the seventh-day Sabbath by the early Waldenses in Spain.
“…The Waldenses were so thoroughly a Bible people that they kept the seventh-day Sabbath
as the sacred rest day for centuries. …a church council which disclosed the extent of Sabbathkeeping in

Ibid. p. 136
P a g e | 30

that peninsula was held at Friaul, northern Italy (c. A.D. 791). …This council, in its command to all Christians
to observe the Lord’s Day, testified to the wide observance of Saturday as follows: “Further when speaking of
that Sabbath which the Jews observe, the last day of the week, which also our peasants observe {Mansi,
Sacrorum Concilicorum Nova et Amplissima Collectio, vol. 13, p. 852}.””36

Even the peasants of Rome kept the Sabbath. There is also a record left concerning the persecutions that the
Waldenses faced for keeping sacred Saturday:

“As to the persecutions suffered by the Waldenses for Sabbathkeeping, the following is found in the
decree of Alphonso, published about 1194:

“Alphonse, king of Aragon etc., to all archbishops, bishops, and to all others:... We command
you in imitation of our ancestors and in obedience to the ordinances of the church, that
heretics, to wit, Waldenses, Insabbathi and those who call themselves the poor of Lyons and
all other heretics should be expelled away from the face of God and from all Catholics and
ordered to depart from our kingdom {Marianae, Praefatio in Lucam Tudensem, found in
Maxima Bibliotheca Veterum Patrum, vol. 25, p. 190}.””37

Do you mean to tell me that persecutions rang out because of people keeping the Sabbath? Yes, Reader,
persecutions, civil persecutions began because of people who stayed true to the Word of God. Do you, Reader, think
that perhaps it’s possible that persecutions can again be revived against those who stay true to the Word of God?
History has a real knack for repeating itself. Sabbath keepers were hated then; is it possible that they will be hated
Wilkinson goes on to recollect the result of the past persecutions by saying that:

“The blessing of Christ upon these, His persecuted children, was so great that they entered into many lands.
Mosheim declares that, prior to the age of Luther, there lay concealed in almost every country of
Europe especially in Bohemia, Moravia, Switzerland, and Germany — many persons in whose minds
were deeply rooted the principles of the Waldenses, the Wycliffites, and the Hussites {Mosheim,
Institutes of Ecclesiastical History, b. 4, cent. 16, sec. 3, pt. 2, ch. 3, par. 2}.
“The Sabbath of the fourth commandment was observed among these peoples in obedience to
the moral law. How high was the standing of Sabbatarians among lords and princes may be seen from the
following quotation of Lamy:

“All the counselors and great lords of the court, who were already fallen in with the
doctrines of Wittenburg, of Augsburg, Geneva, and Zurich, as Petrowitz, Jasper Cornis,
Christopher Famigall, John Gerendi, head of the Sabbatarians, a people who did not keep
Sunday, but Saturday, and whose disciples took the names of Genoldists. All these, and
others, declared for the opinions of Blandrat {Lamy, The History of Socianism, p. 60}.”

“There is an abundance of testimony to show the harmonious chain of doctrine extending from the
days of the apostles down to the Reformation and later, including the beliefs held by the believers of
northern Italy, the Albigenses, the Wycliffites, and the Hussites.”38

Traces of Sabbath keepers are to be found also in India:

Ibid. pp. 48-49, 50
Ibid. pp. 251-252
Ibid. p. 254
P a g e | 31

“Widespread and enduring was the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath among the believers of the
Church of the East and the St. Thomas Christians of India who never were connected with Rome. It also
was maintained among these bodies which broke off from Rome after the Council of Chalcedon; namely, the
Abyssinians, the Jacobites, the Maronites, and the Armenians. The numbers sanctifying the Sabbath
varied in these bodies; some endured longer than others.”39

“…as further testimony that other Christian bodies in India also sanctified Saturday, there is the authority
of trustworthy historians that the Armenians kept Saturday as the Sabbath: “The Armenians in
Hindustan...have preserved the Bible in its purity, and their doctrines are, as far as the author knows, the
doctrines of the Bible. Besides they maintain the solemn observance of Christian worship, throughout our
empire, on the seventh day {Buchanan, Christian Researches in Asia, p. 266}.”40

“…the opening of the year A.D. 500 discloses communities of Assyrian Christians throughout India. Faithful
in their evangelical missionary life, they assembled for worship on the Sabbath day [Mingana proves
that as early as A.D. 225 there existed large bishoprics or conferences of the Church of the East stretching
from Palestine to, and surrounding, India. In 370 Abyssinian Christianity (a Sabbathkeeping church) was so
popular that its famous director, Musaeus, traveled extensively in the East promoting the church in Arabia,
Persia, India, and China. In 410 Isaac, supreme director of the Church of the East, held a world council, —
stimulated, some think, by the trip of Musaeus, — attended by eastern delegates from forty grand
metropolitan divisions. In 411 he appointed a metropolitan director for China. These churches were
sanctifying the seventh day, as can be seen by the famous testimonies of Socrates and Sozomen, Roman
Catholic historians (c. A.D. 450), that all the churches throughout the world sanctified Saturday except
Rome and Alexandria, which two alone exalted Sunday. A century later (c. A.D. 540) Cosmas, the
celebrated world traveler, a member of the great Church of the East, testified to the multiplied number of
churches of his faith he had seen in India and central Asia and to those he had learned about in Scythia and
China. We wrote in previous pages of the Sabbathkeeping Irish, Scottish, Welsh, and English Churches in the
British Isles during these same centuries and down to 1200. We dwelt upon the Paulicians, Petrobrusians,
Passagians, Waldenses, Insabbatati, as great Sabbathkeeping bodies of Europe down to 1250. We wrote of the
sabbatarians in Bohemia, Transylvania, England, and Holland between 1250 and 1600, as authenticated by
Cox, Jones, Allix, and William of Neuburg. We have mentioned the innumerable Sabbath-keeping churches
among the Greeks, Abyssinians, Armenians, Maronites, Jacobites, Scythians, and the great Church of the East
(also from A.D. 1250 to 1600) with supporting evidence from competent authorities. The doctrines of all
these Sabbathkeeping bodies throughout the centuries were comparatively pure, and the lives of their
members were simple and holy. They were free from the unscriptural ceremonies which arose from the
following of tradition. They received the Old Testament, and the whole Bible was their authority].41

This is powerful news for the Christian world. The Sabbath was kept over the entire globe at one point in history or
another. That is the fact. Why does the Christian world now not keep the Sabbath? That is the question we still
have yet to answer. But it must have to do with the Roman Church and Alexandria, because they are the ones who
fought the Sabbath from the get go.
Finishing up, let’s go back in history:

“One more point will be presented as an outstanding evidence that the teachings of the Old Testament were
known and imitated throughout the Far East. The knowledge of creation’s seven days had been so deeply
impressed upon Oriental peoples that it wove itself into all religious life and customs of the Orient. Speaking
of the widespread influence of the Old Testament system of worship, Thomas M’Clatchie writes:

Ibid. p. 289
Ibid. p. 319
Ibid. p. 300 (That which is in brackets is found in a footnote of the quoted author and is his commentary)
P a g e | 32

“According to the Zend-Avesta, the God Ormuzd (Adam or Noah deified), created the world
at six different intervals, amounting in all to a whole year; man, in almost exact conformity
with the Mosaic account, being created in the sixth period. The Etrurians state that God
(Adam or Noah) created the world in six thousand years; man alone being created in the
sixth millenary. Eusebius mentions several of the ancient poets who attached a superior
degree of sanctity to the seventh day. Hesiod and Homer do so, and also Callimachus and
Linus. Porphyry says that the Phenicians dedicated one day in seven to their god Cronus
(Adam appearing in Noah). Aulus Gellius states that some of the heathen philosophers used
to frequent the temples on the seventh day; Lucian mentions the seventh day as a holiday.
The ancient Arabians observed a Sabbath before the era of Mohammed. The mode of
reckoning by “seven days,” prevailed alike amongst the Indians, the Egyptians, the Celts, the
Sclavonians, the Greeks and the Romans. Josephus then makes no groundless statement
when he says, ‘there is not any city of the Grecians, nor any of the barbarians, nor any
nation whatsoever, whither our custom of resting on the seventh day hath not come!’
Dion Cassius deduces this universal practice of computing by weeks from the Egyptians, but
he should have said from the primitive ancestors of the Egyptians, who were equally the
ancestors of all mankind. Theophilus of Antioch states as apalpable fact, that the seventh day
was everywhere considered sacred; and Philo (apud Grot. et Gale) declares the seventh day
to be a festival, not of this or of that city, but of the universe {M’Clatchie, Notes and Queries on
China and Japan (edited by Dennys), vol. 4, Nos. 7, 8, pp. 99, 100}.”

“Especially to be noted in the above citation is the reckoning by seven days not only in India, but also
among the Celts, Slavs, Greeks, and Romans. Homer and Hesiod, who lived about the ninth and eighth
centuries before Christ, are included in those believing in the sacredness of the seventh day. Such was the
powerful influence of the Old Testament in not only European, but also Oriental lands, even to the
determining of their division of time.
“Already mention has been made of the large number of Jews who dwelt in China after 400 B.C.
Throughout the centuries they observed the seventh day for the Sabbath, and one author, writing in recent
years of his investigations touching the small remnant of these Jews still remaining in China, says, “They
keep the Sabbath quite as strictly as do the Jews in Europe {Finn, The Jews in China, p. 23}.”

“If honoring the seventh day was true among the ancient inhabitants of the land of Chaldea,
from which it is asserted that the ancestors of the Chinese came, it was also prominently true
in ancient China. A passage from one of the classical works of Confucius, written about 500
B.C., is as follows: “The ancient kings on this culminating day (i.e., the seventh) closed their
gates, the merchants did not travel and the princes did not inspect their domains {M’Clatchie,
A Translation of the Confucian Classic of Change, p. 118}.” Charles de Harlez adds, “It was a
sort of a day of rest {Harlez, Le Yih-King: A French Translation of the Confucian Classic on
Change, p. 72}.” All the evidences therefore would seem to support the conclusion that
Confucius was influenced either directly or indirectly by the teachings of the Old Testament
in general and by the visions of Daniel in particular.” 42

Let’s go back even further than was just done here. What was Abraham? I can guarantee he was a Sabbath Keeper.
He obeyed God and kept his “charge…commandments…statutes, and…Laws.” (Genesis 26:5) The promise for the
Messiah was given in Eden (Genesis 3:15), so I bet that Abraham was awaiting the Messiah. That would make
Abraham a 7th Day Adventist: he kept the Sabbath and awaited the first Advent of the Messiah. What about Adam
and Eve? They transgressed God’s Moral Law, commandment number one. So the Law existed then. And God
blessed the Sabbath day on the seventh day after creation. Therefore the Sabbath and the Law must have been

Ibid. pp. 330-332
P a g e | 33

apparent to Adam and Eve. And the promise of the Messiah was told them. So I bet they were 7th Day Adventists
too: they must have kept the Sabbath and awaited the promised seed.
If there were a Remnant Church of the Apostolic Church, we must suspect it would have apostolic doctrine.
Part of that doctrine would be the magnification of the Law. Another part would be the sanctification of Saturday and
obedience to the fourth commandment along with the other nine. If we were to think about it, what group of
Christians throughout the entire world does this? Is there any?
There is one group of Christians who stands in the face of the whole Christian world, and their name alone
in itself is an open and standing rebuke to the rest of the world. The name ‘7th Day Adventist’ stands unique among
all the other Christian parties. By its nature it calls all the other Christians into question, the first question being,
‘Do you claim to hold the Bible and the Bible alone as your source of authority?’ If yes, the second question being,
‘Then why don’t you keep the fourth commandment?’ The truth is that the 7th Day Adventists are the only, single
Bible-alone-keeping people. There is no other denomination that is a truly Bible keeping people. That is the fact.
And I will prove it. Why is not the rest of the Christian world keeping the Sabbath? Why is only this small group of
people? Perhaps this small group of Christians sees something about the fourth commandment than the rest of the
world does. Perhaps they realize that the Sabbath is not just about a day. Perhaps they realize the Sabbath is about
much, much more than just sanctifying a day.
Why has the rest of the Christian world left its original apostolic roots? Why does she count the
commandments of God as naught now? Paul seems to have an answer for us in 2 Timothy 4:3-4 when he writes,
“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to
themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be
turned unto fables.” If these verses do have something to tell us about why the rest of the Christian world does
not keep the seventh day, it would do us good to identify the teachers. James says that the man who breaks one of
the commandments is guilty of all. So why, by breaking the Sabbath commandment, does most of the Christian
world trample upon the Law? We have seen that the Law was never, has not, and will never be removed. What’s
the deal here? Either we are going to follow the commandments of God or we are going to forsake them. Something
has got to give.

“[It is] time for [thee], LORD, to work; [for] they have made void thy law.” Psalm 119:126.

“Blessed [is] the man whom thou chastenest, O LORD, and teachest him out of thy law; that thou mayest give him
rest from the days of adversity, until the pit be digged for the wicked.” Psalm 94:12-13.
P a g e | 34

Part 6: The Mark of the Beast

“Blessed [are] the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the LORD. Blessed [are] they that keep his
testimonies, [and that] seek him with the whole heart. They also do no iniquity: they walk in his ways. Thou hast
commanded [us] to keep thy precepts diligently. O that my ways were directed to keep thy statutes! Then
shall I not be ashamed, when I have respect unto all thy commandments. I will praise thee with ugrightness
of heart, when I shall have learned thy righteous judgments. I will keep thy statues: O forsake me not utterly.”
Psalm 119:1-8.

“I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law [is] within my heart.” Psalm 40:8.

There are but a few interpretations about the Mark of the Beast in the world today. The most popular is
surely the idea that the Mark of the Beast will be a microchip implanted into the hand that will prevent people from
buying and selling. It is thought that only with this microchip, this supposed ‘Mark of the Beast’ that will be
required for people to have, the Beast will cause all people of every level of society to buy or sell only when it is
implanted into them. But we have a tiny problem here, in my opinion. If the mark is supposed to be in the hand or
in the forehead, how does a microchip really fit in? It is imaginable that it can be placed into the right hand as a
‘mark’; but what about the forehead? Is the Beast really going to go around putting microchips in peoples’
foreheads? That just seems unlikely to me. Plausible in the hand, yes, but in the forehead? Moreover, how does a
microchip fit into this scenario if there are many undeveloped nations who do not have the means to implant every
individual in the forehead or hand with a microchip? The Bible says that the Beast will cause “all, both small and
great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their fright hand, or in their foreheads”; so how will a
microchip fulfill this requirement in the nations which are not capable of microchipping their people?
The least popular interpretation of the Mark of the Beast is the idea that the mark will be an enforced
Sunday observance law. In other words, an international Sunday law. A newly passed legislative law requiring the
sanctity of Sunday can be enforced no problem upon people who are without the technological means to microchip
everybody. This is the interpretation that the 7th Day Adventists hold. And as we have just seen that the 7th Day
Adventist community is the only group of people in the Christian world that can qualify as the Remnant Church of
the Church in the Wilderness, and that the purpose of this paper is to defend the Remnant Church’s position, the
focus here will be on the 7th Day Adventist interpretation rather than those of the rest of the Christian world.
As we have seen already, there was early off tension between the apostolic churches and the Roman and
Alexandrian churches. The difference between the two sets of churches was their theological basis:

“The Gnostic theology of Alexandria which was followed by the Church of Rome, was hostile to anything
Jewish, even Jewish Christianity. Therefore it is safe to conclude from these historic developments that
primitive Syrian Christianity was not organized after the pattern of the Church of Rome, but followed
an evangelical Judean and Biblical type of church organization.”43

In time the differences between these two groups resulted in heated debate. The issue surrounding the
contentions between the two parties was, as it is now between so many Christians, the Moral Law of God:

“If any one part of the Ten Commandments is ceremonial, as [Roman Catholic] Thomas Aquinas
teaches, then the claim that they are all perfect, immutable, and eternal in their binding power upon all men
falls to the ground. The celebrated Reformer, Calvin, indignantly refuted the analysis of Thomas Aquinas
{Cox, The Literature of the Sabbath Question, vol. 1, pp. 128, 129}. The charge made by Thomas Aquinas

Ibid. p. 39
P a g e | 35

that the Sabbath commandment was ceremonial is not sustained by changing Saturday to Sunday, for,
if definitely naming one particular day of the week is ceremonial, Sunday would be as ceremonial as is
Saturday. Nor would the choice of any other succession of days, as one day in ten, or one day in twenty,
escape this condemnation. Since the New Testament teaches that the ceremonial law was nailed to the
cross, this attempt to make the fourth commandment partly ceremonial, placing it as a plaything in
the hands of the church, clearly taught the abolition of the moral law. …Cardinal Newman praised
Alexandria, the seat of Gnosticism, which powerful movement rejected the Old Testament and with it
the Ten Commandments. Lucian took his stand against such advocates of the “no-law” theory and taught
the binding obligation of the Ten Commandments. Therefore he was called a “Judaizer” by John Henry
Cardinal Newman {Newman, The Arians of the Fourth Century, vol. 1, pp. 370, 371}.
“Excessive in his denunciations against Lucian, and master of the use of English, Newman, in
founding the Oxford Movement, attempted to de-Protestantize the Western world. …He set out to defend
the Alexandrian theologians {Cadman, The Three Religious Leaders of Oxford, pp. 479, 481}. …Newman
resurrected against Lucian the old shibboleth of Judaizing. When a modernist is pressed for a weapon to
attack defenders of the Ten Commandments, he brings out again the old bogey of Judaizing. What are
the historical facts? Newman recognized that the Jews “became an influential political body in the
neighborhood of their ancient home, especially in the Syrian provinces which were at that time the chief
residence of the court {Newman, The Arians of the Fourth Century, pp. 7-11}.
“However, Newman failed to add the facts admitted by The Catholic Encyclopedia, that “for a long
time Jews must have formed the vast majority of members in the infant Church.” Since the majority of
believers in the East were for a long time Jewish converts , it can easily be seen that the custom was
general in the eastern church of observing Saturday as the Sabbath {Cox, The Literature of the Sabbath
Question, vol. 1, p. 334}. It could hardly have been otherwise. The noble Christianity of converted Jews
was second to none. Centuries of training under the prophets had endowed Jewish believers in Christ
with ability to comprehend and to propagate the truths of the Scriptures.
“…Lucian, though he was a Gentile, is belittled by Cardinal Newman as a Judaizer. Why? Those who
sanctified Saturday by abstaining from labor were stigmatized as Judaizers. Why should Lucian observe
Saturday as sacred? It was the general custom. The church historian Socrates writes a century after Lucian:
“For although almost all churches throughout the world celebrated the sacred mysteries on the
Sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient
tradition, have ceased to do this.” {Socrates, Ecclesiastical History, b. 5, ch. 22, found in Nicene and Post-
Nicene Fathers} Here we note the union between the church at Rome and at Alexandria, and their
common antagonism to the seventh-day Sabbath.
“At the Synod of Laodicea (C. A.D. 365) the Roman Catholics passed a decree that “Christians
must not Judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day…. But if any shall be found to be
Judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ.” {Council of Laodicea, Canon 29, Scribner’s Nicene and Post-
Nicene Fathers, 2d Series, vol. 14, p. 148} Thus this church law not only forbade its followers to sanctify
Saturday, but also stigmatized as Judaizers those who did.
“A long list of early church writers could be given to show that for centuries the Christian
churches generally observed Saturday for the Sabbath and rested from labor on that day. Many
churches also celebrated the day of Christ’s resurrection by having a religious meeting on Sunday, but
they did not recognize that day as the holy day of the fourth commandment {See Augustine, Ambrose,
Chrysostom, Gregory of Nyssa, Asterius, Gregory of Caesarea, Origen, Cassian, etc.}.
“The chuches throughout the world were almost universally patterned after the church of
Jerusalem in belief and practice. “It is true that the Antiochene liturgy describes Jerusalem ‘as the mother
of all churches.’” {O’Leary, The Syriac Church and Fathers, p. 27} Paul wrote,

“Ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judea are in Christ Jesus.” (1
Thessalonians 2:14.)
P a g e | 36

The apostle Paul, therefore, is the author of the Judean pattern. How long did this pattern continue? The
quotation given above from The Catholic Encyclopedia, article, “Calender,” reveals that vast numbers, not a
scattered few, of Christians were converts from the Jews, so that the Judean type of Christianity was
almost universal, and it so continued for a long time.
“Syria, the land of Lucian, possessed the Judean type of Christianity. “They [the books DeLacy
O’Leary was describing] certainly do prove the continued and vigorous existence of a Judaistic Christianity
within the province of Syria.” {O’Leary, The Syriac Church and Fathers, p. 28}.
“Judean Christianity prevailed so widely that it reached far into Africa, even into Abyssinia.
The church in Abyssinia was a great missionary church. Neither must we forget that the Abyssinian Church
[which is distinctively of Judaic-Christian type] became popular in the fourth century. In the last half of that
century St. Ambrose of Milan stated officially that the Abyssinian bishop, Museus, had “traveled almost
everywhere in the country of the Seres” [China] {Ambrose, De Moribus, Brachmanorim Opera Omnia, found in
Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 17, pp. 1131, 1132}. For more than seventeen centuries the Abyssinian
Church continued to sanctify Saturday as the holy day of the fourth commandment.”44

I know that this is a mouthful, but there are many important things we can note here regarding the controversy
between the united Roman-Alexandrian force and the Apostolic Church. For example, it is worthy to note that the
argument brought forth to the table by a host of the professing Christians of the world that the Sabbath
commandment is part of the Ceremonial Law comes from a Roman Catholic. This is interesting because you will
see how this is really no surprise as we begin to cover the Mark of the Beast a little further. Wilkinson too does
well in pointing out that this notion of the Sabbath being a Ceremonial Law nullifies the Moral Law and destroys it.
So it should again be made a point to the Christian world out there that to claim that the Sabbath is ceremonial, which
it clearly isn’t, destroys God’s holy standard of judgment.
Secondly, it is the Gnostic occult-land of Alexandria, Egypt which despised anything Jewish, and therefore
rejected the Old Testament and thus the Moral Law of God. The Gnostics’ twisted beliefs envisioned that the
mother goddess of creation out of frustration of not being able to find the ‘unknowable god of all that is’ spawned
this material, physical world. They believed that no matter what man did, because he was of this material, physical
world, he was evil and could never obey their One god. Therefore, they looked at the Jewish God, Jehovah, who the
Jews named as the one who created this world, as an evil God who wanted to enslave people with His Law. That is
why they despised the Moral Law. Therefore, the whole philosophy of the ‘No-Law’ theory comes from the real
cultists, from the Gnostics of occult-land Alexandria, which was supported by Catholic bishops.
Thirdly, when people back then upheld the Moral Law they were criticized as being “Judaizers”. What is the
difference between then and now? 7th Day Adventists are accused today of the same thing. We are labeled as
“Judaizers” who try to hold people to the Law. We are accused of forcing the Law upon others, as if we really think
we are in a position to do so. Well, it is not us who says to keep the commandments of God, but as we saw Jesus
Himself who said to keep His commandments if we love Him. But what is of note is that this same kind of thinking
comes from the true cultists of Alexandria and Rome. And Adventists are to be accused of being cultists?
Fourth, it is imperative to realize that only Alexandria and Rome were the ones to reject the Sabbath. The
Christians, we are informed, only held religious meetings on Sunday; they never sanctified it as the Sabbath of the
Lord. Do you, Reader, think that it might be possible that nothing has changed and today it is still Alexandria-
influenced Rome who is rejecting the Sabbath? They held an antagonism towards the Sabbath then, why wouldn’t
they now? Does Rome keep the seventh day today? They had animosity towards those Christians who kept the
seventh day then, why wouldn’t they now? Do Christians unawares actually push cultic doctrine that originated in
Gnostic Alexandria and Rome?
Fifthly, the Bible says that “The thing that hath been, it [is that] which shall be; and that which is done [is]
that which shall be done: and [there is] no new [thing] under the sun. Is there [any] thing whereof it may be

Ibid. pp. 49-53
P a g e | 37

said, See, this [is] new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.” Ecclesiastes 1:9-10. Of course this
does not refer to technology and such, but deals with morals and the ways of mankind. Sun worship was
prominent in ancient times before Christ. The day held was the first day of the week then, on their day of the sun.
That is what is meant by the ‘Christians’ of Alexandria and Rome rejecting the Sabbath based upon some ‘ancient
tradition.’ Is it possible that the same thing is happening in the so-called ‘evangelical’ world today?
Sixthly, it is interesting that the Roman Church passed a decree, a civil decree forbidding Christians from
resting on the seventh day. Is it possible history could repeat itself? The Bible tells us that, “That which has been
is now; and that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth that which is past.” Ecclesiastes 3:15.
Sounds possible.
Continuing on we read:

“The majority of the churches of Syria and the East continued to observe Saturday, the Sabbath of the
fourth commandment from the days of the apostles and throughout the centuries. Hence the attempt
to stigmatize them as Judaizers.
“The Papacy has always endeavored to substitute the observance of Sunday for the
sanctification of Saturday, the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. Pope Gregory I, in 603, declared
that when antichrist should come, he would keep Saturday as the Sabbath {Epistles of Gregory I, b. 13,
epistle 1, found in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers}”45

Gregory I did what? He declared antichrist would keep Saturday as the Sabbath? To me that sounds like
resentment towards the Sabbath at least until the 600’s. Wilkinson says that the Papacy has always tried
substituting the seventh day for the Sunday. Based upon what we’ve read so far, the Papacy has done so since at
least the 300s to 600’s A.D. But does she still? Why would the Papacy try to substitute the Sabbath with the
Sunday? What relevance does this have for our investigation here?
At the end of the fourth into the fifth centuries A.D. another curious chain of events took place regarding the
Sabbath and the Sunday:

“In his [Vigilantius’] day [late 3rd, early 4th centuries] another controversy existed which was to rock the
Christian world. Milan, center of northern Italy, as well as all the Eastern churches, was sanctifying the
seventh-day Sabbath, while Rome was requiring its followers to fast on that day in an effort to
discredit it. Interesting pictures of the conflict are given by an eminent scholar and writer, Dr. Peter Heylyn
{Heylyn, The History of the Sabbath, in Historical and Miscellaneous Tracts, p. 416}. Ambrose, the celebrated
bishop of Milan, and Augustine, the more celebrated bishop of Africa, both contemporaries of Vigilantins,
described the interesting situation. Ambrose said that when he was in Milan he observed Saturday, but when
in Rome he fasted on Saturday and observed Sunday. This gave rise to the proverb, “When you are in
Rome, do as Rome does.” Augustine deplored the fact that in two neighboring churches in Africa, one
observed the seventh-day Sabbath, another fasted on it.”46

Alexandrian-defending Rome was being so firm in her anti-Sabbath stand that individuals who would normally
sanctify the seventh day even began to keep and observe the Sunday when they would stay in Rome.
Continuing on through time we find that Rome has been persistent with her antagonism towards the
Sabbath day:

“The historian A. C. Flick says that the Celtic Church observed the seventh day as the Sabbath {Flick, The Rise
of the Medieval Church, p. 237}. The believers resented the effort to stigmatize them as Judaizers
because they conscientiously believed the seventh day of the fourth commandment to be still binding.

Ibid. p. 56
Ibid. pp. 69-70
P a g e | 38

Moreover, this same Pope Gregory had issued an official pronouncement against a section of the city of
Rome itself because the Christian believers there rested and worshiped on the Sabbath {Epistles of
Pope Gregory I, coll. 13, ep. 1, found in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2d Series, vol. 13}. When the facts
reveal that at this time, the seventh century, there were still more Christian churches throughout the
world sanctifying the seventh day, the day which God sanctified in the fourth commandment of the
Decalogue rather than Sunday, we can fully understand the apostolic churches that refused to
worship on another day.

“There is much evidence that the Sabbath prevailed in Wales universally until A.D. 1115,
when the first Roman bishop was seated at St. David’s.

“The old Welsh Sabbathkeeping churches did not even then altogether bow the knee to
Rome, but fled to their hiding places where the ordinances of the gospel to this day have
been administered in their primitive mode without being adulterated by the corrupt
Church of Rome” {Lewis, Seventh Day Baptists in Europe and America, vol. 1, p. 29}”47

What is worthy of note here is that up until at least around 1100 A.D. both parties of Christians (Saturday and
Sunday keepers) knew that there was a controversy surrounding which day to sanctify. I will also remind you,
Reader, that there has never been a question between either of the parties about a day having to be sanctified
according to the fourth commandment; it has simply been a controversy over which day to sanctify. Has the
controversy stopped unto this day? I think not; for us Adventists still argue against Rome that the Sunday should
not be kept as the holy day of the Lord, but rather Saturday the seventh day. And as back then, just as today, the
same argument was brought against the Sabbath keepers of the Celtic Church:

“Denouncing the Celtic Church on the Continet as heretical in many aspects, particularly because of
the seventh-day Sabbath observance, Rome charged it with Judaizing.”48

Non-Adventists should find these next few pieces of history interesting:

“Constantine, who was the first Christian ruler of the Roman Empire at the time when the church and the
state were coming together in perfect union, issued his now-famous Sunday law (A.D. 321). A comment
upon this by a leading Roman Catholic journal states the case clearly:

“The emperor Constantine after his conversion to Christianity, made the observance
of Sunday a civil duty, and the law which commanded it is found in the Roman code.
‘Let all judges and people of the town rest, and the trades of various kinds be suspended on
the venerable day of the sun. Those who live in the country may, however, freely and
without fault apply to agriculture, because it often happens that this day is the most
favorable for sowing wheat and planting the vine, lest an opportunity offered by divine
liberality be lost with the favorable moment.’ Now we can scarcely conceive that Constantine
would have excepted agricultural labor, if the church had from time immemorial strictly
forbidden among Christians that kind of work which it prohibited at a later period.... Hence it
has been the unanimous doctrine of divines, from time immemorial, that cessation from
servile work is not only a point of discipline liable to change but it can be dispensed with by
ecclesiastical authority whenever a reasonable cause presents itself (sic) {The United States
Catholic Magazine, Index to vol. 4, 1845, pp. 233, 234}.”49 (Parentheses added)

Ibid. p. 155
Ibid. p. 187
Ibid. p. 247
P a g e | 39

“Pope Nicholas I, in the ninth century, sent the ruling prince of Bulgaria a long document elucidating political,
territorial, and ecclesiastical question, and saying in it that one is to cease from work on Sunday, but not
on the Sabbath.”50

“When the Portuguese made a gesture of sending help to the Abyssinians, a number of Jesuits were included
in the mission, and they immediately began to win the Abyssinian Church to Roman Catholicism. In 1604 they
influenced the king to submit to the Papacy. One of their first efforts was to have a proclamation issued
by the king prohibiting all his subjects upon severe penalties to observe the seventh day any longer
{Geddes, The Church History of Ethiopia, pp. 311, 312}. Civil war followed. The Jesuits were expelled and their
laws were rescinded.”51

“…the wrath of the Jesuits was directed against the St. Thomas Christians because they observed
Saturday, the seventh day of the week, as the Sabbath…seen in this further quotation from Rae: “In the
remote parts of the diocese, as well towards the south as towards the north, the Christians that dwell in the
heaths are guilty of working and merchandizing on Sundays and holy days, especially in the evenings {Rae,
The Syrian Church in India, p. 238}.”52

This should be interesting to non-Adventists because it seems to be a foreshadowing of things to come, perhaps
things such as international Sunday legislations? The Papacy tried enforcing the Sunday in the fourth and ninth
centuries; what makes us think that she won’t try it again in the twenty-first? “That which hath been is now; and
that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth that which is past,” so perhaps we will see a reattempt
at the Sunday enforcement—just as Adventists preach.
Let’s now take a look at a piece of documentation concerning the penalties inflicted upon Sabbath keepers:

“Another of the cruel regulations was to single out for burning at the stake those Christians [in India]
whom the Roman Catholic Church chose to designate as apostate {Rae, The Syrian Church in India, p. 201}. As
has been noted before, the Christians whom they designated as apostate were generally called
Judaizers, or those who observed the seventh day as the Sabbath.”53

Sabbath keepers were literally burned at the stake for their faith. Is it possible that something similar can happen
again in the near future?
Thus far:

“…we have noted the rage of Rome against those who continued to believe that Saturday, the seventh
day of the week, was the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. It is recalled that the historian A. C. Flick
and other authorities claim that the Celtic Church observed Saturday as their sacred day of rest, and that
reputable scholarship has asserted that the Welsh sanctified it as such until the twelfth century. The same day
was observed by the Petrobrusians and Henricians, and Adeney, with others, attributes to the Paulicians the
observance of Saturday. There are reliable historians who say that the Waldenses and the Albigenses
fundamentally were Sabbathkeepers (all of which no doubt felt the wrath of the Papacy in some form or
another).”54 (Parentheses added)

Ibid. p. 223
Ibid. p. 290
Ibid. pp. 311-312
Ibid. p. 317
Ibid. p. 203
P a g e | 40

Now we will look more closely into the Book of Revelation, the Mark of the Beast, and how the Papacy fits into the
scheme of things.
Let’s lay some ground rules. First of all we must note a few things about the Book of Revelation. For those
who have studied the Book of Revelation closely enough, they will know that the whole book is full of parallel
contrasts that apply to God and His people and Satan and his followers. A few examples will suffice to prove this:
We have the trinity: Father, Son/Word, Holy Ghost (1 John 5:7) and false trinity: Dragon, Beast and False prophet;
wrath of the Lamb (6:16), wrath of the Devil (12:12); God’s Seal in the forehead (7:2-3), Mark of the Beast (13:16-
17); all power unto the Son (6:2), power unto the Beast (13:4); keys of death and hell (1:18), keys of bottomless pit
(9:1); who is like unto the Lord (Is. 40:18), who is like unto the Beast (13:4); a lamb as it had been slain (5:6), one
head as it were wounded to death (13:3); etc. etc. etc. There are many more, such as God which is, was, and is to
come (1:4) and the Beast which is, was and is to come (17:8), the armies of heaven (19:14) and the armies of earth
(19:19), and the tribes of Israel (7:4) and the tribes of the earth (1:7), but these prove that the book is indeed full of
such polar opposite contrasts.
These contrasts are important because they can help us decode some of the symbolism in the Book of
Revelation. If we can figure out what one of the symbols represents then we can automatically determine that the
other symbol contrasted by the first symbol will be exactly the same as the first symbol except in its polarity. Make
Secondly, we must keep in mind that we are dealing with a symbolic book. If we go around looking for a
literal beast, we will never understand what this book is trying to tell us. If we go around looking for literal objects
that are only symbols, we will be as lost as a blind man leading another blind man into a ditch, and then, because
we cannot discern the times we are living in, the coming of the Son of man will be an absolute and total surprise. A
literal beast is not concerned with worship and world events; he is more concerned with the grass of the field. We
cannot go around looking for a literal whore to fulfill this prophecy because a whore is also not concerned with
worship; she is concerned with money and her survival. Just as we cannot do this, we cannot likewise go around
looking for some kind of ‘mark’ that will be literally planted into the forehead or hand. If this were the case, it
seems that we would have to take the Beast as literal and go around looking for an animal implanting people in the
head with a microchip ‘mark’. And that… is stupid. Now that we have laid these two ground rules, let’s continue.
Some may look up the definition of the original Greek word for ‘mark’ and then say, ‘But hold on; wait a
tick. This says that it’s a stamp, or an imprinted mark, as a mark branded upon horses. Surely it’s a literal mark.’
You know what, Reader, if you’d like to believe that it’s literal, you go right on ahead—that’s your choice. However,
this means that we have to assume that the sign of God is also a literal banner, or distinguishing mark placed or
written literally in the inside of the heart and mind. Surely we will acknowledge that as ridiculous. So then are we
not going to acknowledge as ridiculous the idea of a literal Mark of the Beast implanted into our hand and/or
forehead? I should hope not. Besides we have to never leave out of our mind that we are dealing with a symbolic
book. And surely we will not be as so ignorant and flimsy in our beliefs to think that all of the symbols in the Book
of Revelation are symbolic, but only when it comes to this Mark of the Beast is it literal, are we? I should again
hope not.
As you’ll notice, one of the contrasts listed above is that of the Seal of God and the Mark of the Beast. If we
accept that the Mark of the Beast is a microchip to be literally planted into the forehead and hand, then that means
God is going to have a heavenly microchip to implant into His followers head. That, too, is a horribly stupid idea.
Now instead of finding out first what the Mark of the Beast is to determine what the Seal of God is, let’s do it in
reverse. We’ll find out what the Seal, or rather Mark of God is first, and once having done this, we will be able to
determine what the Mark of the Beast is for certain.
Concerning the Ten Commandments of God, the Lord says, “And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine
hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes.” Deuteronomy 6:8. Whoa, whoa, whoa… whoa! Wait a
minute...! The Moral Law of God is to be bound upon our hand and our forehead?! Now that sounds awfully
P a g e | 41

familiar to the Mark of the Beast. Hmmm… but I think I notice one small, tiny difference. “And he causeth all, both
small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads” says
Revelation 13:16. Or in their foreheads, it says. What’s the significance of this tiny difference? We’ll have to
continue on to find out.
As we saw early, the Hebrew word for sign here in the KJV is ‘owth. It is a sign, or signal, a distinguishing
mark, banner, remembrance, miraculous sign, omen, warning, token, ensign, standard, miracle, and proof.55 So let’s
reread Deuteronomy a little bit differently now as: ‘thou shalt bind them for a standard, as a distinguishing mark or
banner, upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes.’ Fair enough? So God requires us to
have His banner, His distinguishing mark upon our hand and forehead (“frontlets between thine eyes”). Should we
go one step further and imagine that this is a literal marking? Is God going to, or is He going to send His angels to
literally mark us with the Ten Commandments? No. Again, that’s dumb.
We also found out in part three of this work that the Sabbath is also something that distinguishes God’s
follows from the rest of the world. “Moreover also I gave them my Sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them,
that they might know that I [am] the LORD that sanctify them. …I [am] the LORD your God; walk in my
statutes, and keep my judgments, and do them; and hallow my Sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between me
and you, that ye may know that I [am] the LORD your God.” Ezekiel 20:12 and 19-20. We also saw that in
Exodus 31:13 that it is written, “Speak thou unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for
it [is] a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that [ye] may know that I [am] the LORD that
doth sanctify you.” I’ve noticed something as I’ve studied the Bible. God tends to mention things more than just a
handful of times when He’s serious and wants to make a very clear point to His people. Perhaps He has mentioned
this Sabbath-sanctifying issue not less than a few times to make sure that it is very clear to us that we should keep the
Sabbath so that we know that He is the one sanctifying us. Just a thought.
What am I trying to get at here, you ask? I’m trying to make it a point for us to see that the commandments
of God are to be bound as a distinguishing mark and banner upon our hand and forehead; that the Sabbath is to be
a distinguishing Mark of God and His people forever; and that one purpose of the Sabbath is to make sure that it is
the Lord God of heaven and earth that does sanctify us as His people. In other words, I’m trying to again show you
and make it clear what the Mark of God is. Do you, Reader, think that God was concerned with the people of Israel
going around writing the Ten Commandments and literally branding them upon their forehead and hand? That
would be a joke, right? No, God is not concerned with literal branding. He is concerned with symbolic branding of
His Ten Commandments in our forehead and hand. He would like us to think and act accordingly within the
guidelines of His perfect Law. That is what is meant by binding them up on our hand and as frontlets between our
eyes. What, then, could be the subtle difference between God’s command and the Beast’s—that little ‘or’ that I
spoke of?
Now most fortunately for us, we have discovered what the Seal of God is: His commandments. But might I
recall your attention to what we covered earlier. We saw earlier that it is the Sabbath commandment that gives the
entire Law of God its validity; without the Sabbath commandment, the Law could have been from Joe Blow—
anybody. Therefore it is the Sabbath that contains the governmental seal, or Mark of God’s authority which makes
the Law an official binding Law to be obeyed. Therefore, to be sealed by God, by His sanctifying mark of authority
over our lives, we will obey the Ten Commandments, especially the Sabbath commandment which marks us as a
distinct people of God, separate from the world.
To clarify on this issue, what exactly does it mean to be sealed? How do we know when we are sealed? We
read in Ephesians 4:26-32, “Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath: neither give place
to the devil. Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with [his] hands the thing which
is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth. Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your

Strong’s Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon, #0226 (http://www.apostolic-
P a g e | 42

mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers. And grieve not
the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. Let all bitterness, and wrath, and
anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: and be ye kind one to another,
tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you.” Simply put, to be sealed
we have to make a change in our life and start doing what is right. But what changes do we have to make in our
lives and what exactly does it mean to ‘do what is right’ or, in other words, ‘to live righteously’?
Well, Isaiah 51:7 clears it up the whole matter plainly when it says, “Hearken unto me, ye that know
righteousness, the people in whose heart [is] my law….” In other words, living righteously is abiding in God’s
Law. 2 Timothy 2:19 twice confirms this when it says: “Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having
this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from
iniquity.” If a person were to take a Strong’s Concordance and look up the word for iniquity here, they will find
that it means (1) injustice, of a judge, (2) unrighteousness of heart and life, and (3) a deed violating law and
justice, act of unrighteousness.56 To put it as simply as simple can get, to become sealed means to become Law
abiding. If we are to be sealed by God by living a righteous life, we will live within the guidelines and perimeters of His
Seal, and obtain His Mark of authority over our lives by abiding in those divine precepts. Clear enough? This is no
different than what we have considered regarding sanctification: to be sanctified is to be sealed and to be sealed is
to be sanctified, and to be sealed or sanctified one must live according to God’s holy Law. It’s not a complicated
issue at all.
Now what if there happened to be another power that we could identify in the book of Revelation that
demanded that we receive its mark of authority, that demanded that we obey its commandments rather than God’s?
What if there is another power that will try to force the world to observe its commandments or receive a severe
penalty, even possibly to the point of death? Do you, Reader, think it could be possible?
Because we have identified what the Mark of God’s authority is (the Sabbath), we can identify for certain
what the Mark of the Beast will be; for as many other parallels exist in the Book of Revelation, so will the Mark of
the Beast be identical to, yet directly opposite of God’s mark.
A light bulb should have just gone off in your head. ‘Aha!’ is what you should have just thought. Following
this principle, the Mark of the Beast must be a what? It must be... a day. Does this make sense? There is no other
choice. None. The Mark of the Beast is a day that will be a sign, a distinguishing mark and banner of the Beast’s
authority—not a microchip, or an ash-mark on our foreheads, or whatever; it must be a day.
Now we have to identify who or what the Beast is. I’m not going to go over what identifies her as such
because there are plenty of documented facts out there to prove that this is the case beyond a shadow of a doubt,
but the Roman Catholic Church is the Beast of Revelation, politically speaking.57 And why should this be any
surprise? We already covered how antagonistic the Roman Church has been towards the true body of Bible
keeping Christians right down through the centuries.
However, I’ll take the time to chisel out one key trait about this power. There is a certain characteristic
about this power that is very worthy of note. We find it in Daniel chapter seven. This power, identified in Daniel 7
as the little horn is the exact same power of the first Beast out of the sea in Revelation 13. We read that the Papacy
would “speak [great] words against the most High, and…wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change
times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.” Daniel 7:25.
Not only are there two key identifying marks of the Papacy here, like the persecution against Christians, and the

Strong’s Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon, #93 (http://www.apostolic-
This author suggests that you do your own independent research on this issue just to be certain that this is so. Simply Google
‘Papacy, Beast of Revelation,’ or something to that effect. There are also many movies that can be viewed on Google or Youtube
that document how the Papacy is prophetically the Beast. It is the recommendation of this author to obtain the book Truth Matters:
Escaping the Labyrinth of Error, by Walter J. Veith for identifying the Beast, and much more.
P a g e | 43

Pope claiming to be God on earth, capable of forgiving and absolving sin58 (read that, speaking against the Most
High); but there is in addition a very special identifying mark: he shall “think to change times and laws.”
Look in any Catholic Catechism and you’ll find that the Papacy has altered the Law of God. She has removed
the second commandment to justify her idol worship and has divided the tenth into two commandments to make
up for the one she chopped off. Thus the fourth commandment becomes the third, the fifth the fourth, etc. etc. etc.
There is an important time though that she changed. There is only one commandment that refers to a given time.
Can you, Reader, guess which one that is? That’s right, the fourth commandment. The Papacy became so bold that
she supposedly moved the Sabbath from Saturday to the Sunday. The whore says, “The Sunday…is purely a
creation of the Catholic Church”59 and that “It is a law of the Catholic Church alone….”60 Cardinal Gibbons writes
that “You may read your Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the
sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never
sanctify.”61 The Catholic Church and her representatives are very open about this issue. They continue thus:

“Sunday is a Catholic institution, and its claims to observance can be defended only on Catholic
principles…. From the beginning to the end of Scripture there is not a single passage which warrants the
transfer of weekly public worship from the last day of the week to the first.”62

“The Christian Sabbath is therefore to this day the acknowledged offspring of the Catholic church (sic),
as spouse of the Holy Ghost, without a word of remonstrance from the protestant world.”63 (Parentheses

“If Protestants would follow the Bible, they should worship God on the Sabbath Day. In keeping the
Sunday they are following a law of the Catholic Church.”64

Here we see a whole new set of commandments to be followed. Therefore we have identified the Beast’s seal.
But it’s the Sabbath that gives the Law of God its authority. It’s the Sabbath that assures us it’s God’s sanctifying
power over us when we obey His commandments. So, what then, would be the mark of the Beast’s seal, its stamp of
authority over its commandments and also over those who choose to follow those commandments? The Sunday of
course. When the Beast tries to take and alter the commandments of God, and then supposedly move the Sabbath
to the Sunday, what is he really trying to do? If God’s mark of authority is found in the Sabbath commandment, and
the whore tries to change the commandments, and move the Sabbath to the Sunday, what is she really doing? She
is trying to usurp the authority of God unto herself, and ultimately unto Satan who controls her (Revelation 13:2 and
12:9). But don’t just take my word for it…! Listen to what she says herself:

“Sunday is our mark of authority. The church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath
observance is proof of that fact.”65

The Catholic National, July 1895: “The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, but he is Jesus Christ, Himself, hidden
under the veil of flesh.” Dignity and Duty of the Priest, 1927, p. 27, ed. E. Grimm: “…God himself is obligated to abide by the
judgment of his priest, and either not to pardon or to pardon.”
American Catholic Quarterly Review, January 1883
American Sentinel (Catholic), June 1893
61 nd
Cardinal Gibbons, The Faith of our Fathers, 92 ed., Baltimore: John Murphy Company, p. 89
62 th
Catholic Press (Sydney, Australia), August 25 , 1900
63 rd
The Catholic Mirror, September 23 , 1893
64 th
Albert Smite, Chancellor of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, replying to a Cardinal in a letter dated February 10 , 1920
65 st
Catholic Record, London Ontario, September 1 , 1923
P a g e | 44

“Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act, and that act is a mark of her
ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters.”66

This power is so bold as to even refer to it as her mark! Can you believe the downright arrogance of this harlot?
You see, the Catholic Church knows a lot more about the Bible than most professing Christians do. That is why she
makes statements like these: she knows exactly what she is doing and how she is fulfilling prophecy. Professing
Christians don’t have to hear it from the 7th Day Adventists what the Mark of the Beast is; the Beast will do the
honor for us and come out forthright telling us what its mark is.
But it gets even worse. This power goes on to say:

“Not the Creator of the universe, in Gen 2:1-3, but the Catholic church can claim the honor of having
granted man a pause to his work every seven days.”67

Do you realize that she is saying she has more power than God here? The Catholic Church is telling us that she is
above God and His authority because the Catholic Church supposedly gives man a day of rest, and not God. One priest
went on to say:

“The Bible says remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day. The Catholic Church says ‘No. By my divine
power I abolish the Sabbath day and command you to keep holy the first day of the week.’ And lo! the
entire civilized world bows down in a reverent obedience to the command of the holy Catholic
Church.”68 (Italic emphasis in the original)

What are all the professing Protestant churches out there in the world doing? Every single one except the
Adventist Church keeps the Sunday. What, therefore, are they doing? They’re obeying the Papacy rather than
God—and the Papacy knows it! You see, she ultimately does not give a rat’s behind whether or not you know these
things and keep the Sunday. If she can get the mark into your hand and not in your forehead, that’s fine with her.
This is the subtle difference between the Mark of God and the Mark of the Beast: this Beast doesn’t care one iota if
you only obey her out of ignorance, or whether you obey her willingly; she doesn’t care if you act (that’s in the
hand) based upon your willful obedience (that’s in the forehead) or out of ignorance or force, so long as it’s her that
you’re obeying. And guess what. The whole Christian world, except the Adventists, is bowing the knee to the Papacy,
and they don’t even know it.
This same controversy over the Sabbath of the Lord and the Sunday has been going on since the fourth
century A.D. Why doesn’t this mean anything to the professing Christian world…!? It is absolutely astonishing to me.
Persecutions rang out against the Christians back then for holding to the truths of the Bible. Isn’t it possible that it
will happen again? That which has been is now, and that which shall be has already been says the Bible.
I don’t believe that the issue could possibly be any clearer than it has been presented. If you, Reader,
cannot see that the issue between the Roman Catholic Church and God is about authority, and if you can’t see that
the Seal of the Beast is a new set of commandments and that the Mark of the Beast’s authority is the Sunday-sanctity
commandment, then I don’t know what hope there is for you to see the truth. As the Lord says, come now, and let
us reason together, friend. “Take heed lest any [man] deceive you.” Mark 13:5.
Furthermore, following what I call the typical-anti-typical-principle of Bible prophecy, we can look to Egypt
to be assured that the final issue in the world will revolve around the Sabbath. Egypt in the Book of Exodus is a
type of what will happen at the end of time. Just as the seven last plagues of Egypt hit only the Egyptians, so will
the final plagues found in the Book of Revelation be the final plagues and will hit only those with the Beast’s mark.

66 th
Letter, Oct. 28 , 1895, from C. F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons
Storia Dena Dominica, 1969, pp. 366-367
68 th
Father T. Enright, American Sentinel, June 1893, in a lecture at Hartford, Kansas, February 18 , 1884
P a g e | 45

Study Revelation and Exodus if you don’t believe me. Now ask yourself, ‘When did the plagues befall the
Egyptians? What incident was the final straw that led to God smiting the people?’ Well, if you turn back to Exodus
you will find that the plagues fell when Pharaoh made the people work on the Sabbath. You go and read, see that it
is so.69
It is imperative to remember this, because just as literal Babylon is a literal type of an antitypical, spiritual
Babylon in Revelation, so are there other types found throughout the Bible anti-typified in the Book of Revelation,
such as the one concerning Egypt that I just mentioned. Hence, because of this typical-anti-typical-principle, we
have even more proof that the Mark of the Beast is principally tied to the Sabbath—not a silly computer chip or a
God forsaken ash mark on the forehead. That is ridiculous—especially after all that we have covered heretofore.
The people of God are nearly jeopardizing themselves in these last days for being “destroyed for lack of
knowledge.” Hosea 4:6. Come now, brothers and sisters, and let us reason together. “If thou put the brethren in
remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of
faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained.” 1 Timothy 4:6. The people of God are not dumb! This
is proven by the fact that they recognize and accept Jesus as Savior! The problem is lack of knowledge. This lack of
knowledge is causing the people to reject Jesus as King, but to accept Him as Savior. We can’t stand on one leg! It’s
either all or nothing. You must make a decision: are you going to accept Christ, too, as your King, and abide in His
Law and receive His mark of authority? As the proverb goes, “Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee: rebuke a
wise man, and he will love thee. Give [instruction] to a wise [man], and he will be yet wiser: teach a just [man], and
he will increase in learning.” Proverbs 9:8-9. This work is my rebuke to those Christians who are stuck between
two opinions. “Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision: for the day of the LORD [is] near in the valley of
decision.” Joel 3:14. “How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD [be] God, follow him: but if Baal, [then]
follow him.” 1 Kings 18:21. “And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will
serve; …but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.” Joshua 24:15. Where will your loyalty and
allegiance be, Reader?
Walter Veith puts it well again when he says that “This is the hardest message in the world to give. And it
is righteousness by faith, in verity. Because if you acknowledge God as King and acknowledge His
government and acknowledge His laws you are saying, ‘I want to be subject to the sanctifying power of
God.’ This is not works; this is gratefulness—“If you love me, keep my commandments”. If we love God with all
of our hearts and all of our minds we will be thankful; sinners… saved by grace.”70 (Italics his emphasis)

“...Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it [is] a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that [ye]
may know that I [am] the LORD that doth sanctify you.” Exodus 31:13.

“Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples. …To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not
according to this word, [it is] because [there is] no light in them.” Isaiah 8:16, 20.

“Then spake Jesus…saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall
have the light of life.” John 8:12

This also shows that the Sabbath and the rest of the Ten Commandments did not ‘come into being’ when Moses received the
commandments, as some would like to believe, otherwise sanctifying the Sabbath would not have been an issue to God.
Video: Walter J. Veith, The Final Conflict
P a g e | 46

Part 7: What Rome is Saying Today

In part five we saw what Rome was saying back in the first few centuries up until the late 1600s. But what
is she saying today? Should we fool ourselves into thinking that Rome changes? Why don’t we just cut open our
heads and yank out our brains? There’s no difference between that and thinking Rome has changed. Does Satan’s
desire change? So would his church’s desires change? Would the harlot’s message therefore change, and her
hatred for Bible keeping Christians, and her resentment towards the Sabbath?
Veith asks us, “Are we headed for those final events which we [7th Day Adventists] have been talking
about? …I want to show you something that might surprise you. We have been preaching this message for over a
hundred and fifty years often with scorn attached to it, and ridicule, and incredulity. But I want to show you the
message as it evolved in Roman Catholicism, because Rome has exactly the same message, just from a
different perspective. And let us see if these two will dove-tail and eventually there will only be two groups:
those that align themselves with this system and those that keep the commandments of God.” 71 (Italics his
Rome challenges Christians by saying that “…the Protestant says: How can I receive the teachings of an
apostate Church? How, we ask, have you managed to receive her teachings all your life, in direct opposition
to your recognized teacher, the Bible, on the Sabbath question.”72 What is Rome actually saying here? Think
about it. Rome is saying ‘you do not follow the Bible and the Bible alone if you keep our Sunday holy, neither do
you accept God’s authority because by accepting our teachings you are obeying us and thus accepting our
authority.’ She’s right isn’t she?
But notice this smashing wakeup call to the Christian world. She says that “…those who follow the Bible as
their guide, the Israelites and the Seventh-day Adventists have the exclusive weight of evidence on their
side…. The Adventists are the only body of Christians with the Bible as their teacher, who can find no
warrant in its pages for the change of the seventh to the first. Hence their appellation, “Seventh-day
Adventists.””73 Even Rome admits that the Adventists are the only body of Christians who hold to the Bible and
the Bible alone! Even Rome acknowledges that we are the only truly Bible-based people out of all the other
Christian bodies! So why aren’t all Christians Adventists?!
Think not that the Roman Church is dumb, because she is not! (She is and she isn’t, if you know what I
mean; she is earthly smart.) When she says that the Adventists are the only, single body of Christians alone who
stand solely upon the Bible, she knows exactly what she is talking about. So my advice to you, Reader, would to
logically become a 7th Day Adventists; because, as we’ll see, by her own words, it’s either her, or the Adventists, and
that’s it.74 And whomever Rome points the finger at as her ecclesiastical enemy, I would recommend siding
immediately with the group that the finger is aimed at.
She continues by saying:

“The (Catholic) Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by right of the divine, infallible
authority given to her by her Founder, Jesus Christ. The Protestant claiming the Bible to be the only guide
of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday.”75

Video: Walter J. Veith, The Final Conflict
72 nd
The Christian Sabbath (2 Ed: Baltimore; The Catholic Mirror, 1893) pp. 29-30
74 th
But I would first admonish you to study the early Adventists, because the current 7 Day Adventist churches are beginning to
submit to the ideologies of the Papacy little by little. I believe that the word ‘infiltration’ sums it up nicely; perhaps the phrase
‘corruption from the inside’ works just as well too, though.
“The Question Box,” The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942
P a g e | 47

In her arrogance she boasts of trying to usurp God’s authority by changing the Sabbath to the Sunday, and then
admits that there is absolutely no warrant in the Bible for doing so. I ask: if the Sabbath was done away with and is
no longer an issue, why is Rome making a stink about it even today?
And perhaps there is another issue that we should consider. Do most Christians today even know what the
word ‘Protestant’ implies? Is there even such a thing amongst the other bodies of Christians nowadays? Besides
the 7th Day Adventists, what is the so-called ‘Protestant’ world protesting!? Have people forgotten, or have they
never learned the history of the Reformation? I’m sure that most people don’t even know what caused the fall of
the Reformation.
The main issue in the Council of Trent was tradition versus the Bible—whether or not tradition was valid
as shaping doctrine and practice, or if the Bible should be the sole source for doctrine and practice.

“Finally, after a long and intensive mental strain, the Archbishop of Reggio came into the council with
substantially the following argument to the party who held for Scripture alone:

“The Protestants claim to stand upon the written word only. They profess to hold the
Scripture alone as the standard of faith. They justify their revolt by the plea that the
[Catholic] Church has apostatized from the written word and follows tradition. Now the
Protestants claim, that they stand upon the written word only, is not true. Their profession
of holding the Scripture alone as the standard of faith, is false. PROOF: The written word
explicitly enjoins the observance of the seventh day as the Sabbath. They do not
observe the seventh day, but reject it. If they do truly hold the Scripture alone as their
standard, they would be observing the seventh day as is enjoined in the Scripture
throughout. Yet they not only reject the observance of the Sabbath enjoined in the
written word, but they have adopted and do practice the observance of Sunday, for
which they have only the tradition of the Church. Consequently the claim of ‘Scripture
alone as the standard,’ fails, and the doctrine of ‘Scripture and tradition’ as essential,
is fully established, the Protestants themselves being judges.” {Archbishop Reggio made
his speech at the last opening session of Trent, on the 15 th of January, 1562. – J. H. Holtzman,
Cannon and Tradition, published in Ludwigsburg, Germany, in 1860, p. 253.}76

In other words, the entire Reformation fell apart because of the Sabbath-Sunday issue. That’s why John Gilmary Shea
could write that “Protestantism, in discarding the authority of the Roman [Catholic] Church, has no good reasons
for its Sunday theory, and ought logically to keep Saturday as the Sabbath.”77 Had the Reformers not submitted
to the Sunday, and instead kept Saturday, the Reformation would have succeeded. This also illustrates the
importance of the Sabbath. As we’ll see Wilkinson point out later, surely the Reformation is not the remnant seed
of the Church in the Wilderness, for if it was the Reformation would have upheld the seventh day as holy to the
Lord. So who did God raise up as the Remnant of the Church in the Wilderness, whom the dragon is wroth and
makes war with (Revelation 12:17)? We already know: the 7th Day Adventists. Perhaps if the rest of the professing
Christian world out there knew this bit of history they’d join the ranks of the Remnant Church.
Notice what else she has gone on record as saying. She says that “the Seventh-day Adventist is the only
consistent Protestant.”78 In a nutshell what is the Beast saying? In a nutshell the Beast is saying that if we as Christians
claim to follow the Bible and the Bible alone as our sole authority in religious doctrine and spiritual matters, we will keep
the Sabbath day. But don’t take my word for it, take the whore’s word for it yourself:

This comes from the answer to a challenge that the Adventists submitted to Rome about tradition and Scripture, so this is Rome’s
writing here. The full answer was published in a series of four editorials which appeared in the Catholic Mirror of Baltimore,
Maryland on September, 2, 9, 16, and 23, 1893.
John Gilmary Shea, quoted in the American Catholic Quarterly Review, January 1883
“The Question Box,” The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942
P a g e | 48

“People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority should logically become 7th Day
Adventists, and keep Saturday holy.”79

In other words, if you are a Christian who does not observe God’s holy day, but yet claim to stand upon the Bible all
by itself, Rome is calling you a stupid idiot. That’s the bottom line. In the eyes of Rome we are stupid idiots—
ignorant morons, if you like, if we claim to stand upon the Bible only but don’t keep the Sabbath. WOW... That
should be a hard slap in the face to the Christian world out there. Are we feeling the sting out there yet…!?
The way I see it is that Rome is mocking Christians who claim to stand upon the Bible alone. To me she is
saying that if you hold as your standard of Truth the Bible and the Bible only, you have to become a 7th Day
Adventist. I don’t see two ways about this. It’s very clear this is the case. There are only two reasons why
professing Christians are not 7th Day Adventists: (1) they are simply “destroyed for lack of knowledge” or (2) they
have heaped “to themselves teachers, having itching ears” and have turned “away [their] ears from the truth,” and
have been “turned unto fables” which has resulted in them being “destroyed for lack of knowledge”. I really don’t
see any other alternatives.
There is an organization out there called the Jesuit Order which is very powerful and very good at
educating the minds of the people in the direction they want80. This same order of the Catholic Church is also very
good at infiltrating churches and educating the people from their own pulpits. Are we to be so naïve as to not
suspect satanic deception in all of this controversy? The Jesuit Order was started to overthrow the work of the
Reformation and Protestantism. I don’t think the Order thinks it has finished its work until it destroys Adventism
completely. She hasn’t been able to do that, so the best she can do is preach from the pulpits and mislead the
minds of the rest of the Christian world into believing fables—including unlearned Adventists. Can’t people see
that the whore, her perfidious Jesuits (of the highest order) and Satan rejoice when we don’t keep the Sabbath?
The Beast further says that “…the observance of Sunday by Protestants is an homage they pay, in spite
of themselves, to the authority of the Catholic Church.”81 And again, “They [the Protestants] deem it their duty
to keep the Sunday holy. Why? Because the Catholic Church tells them to do so. They have no other
reason….”82 Just who do you think is in control of the ‘Protestant’ churches today? To drive this home one last
time: if we blow off the Law of God by blowing off the fourth commandment to keep Saturday the seventh day holy,
we are forsaking Christ’s authority and sanctifying power and are leaving the door wide open for another power to
rule over us; “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all. For he
that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art
become a transgressor of the law. So speak ye, and so do….” James 2:10-13. God is not concerned with
microchips or ash-marks on our foreheads. God is concerned with those who stomp upon His Law and try to exert
power over those who obey Him. That ‘other authority’ which will try to exert its power over the multitudes,
peoples, nations, and tongues, as will be seen shortly, will be the Catholic Church with an international Sunday
law—the Mark of the Beast’s authority over its seal of new perverted commandments.
Rome gives one more stern warning to the Christian world out there. She says:

“Reason and common sense demand the acceptance of One or the other of those alternatives: either
Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday, or Catholicity and the keeping holy of Sunday.
Compromise is impossible.”83

Saint Catherine Catholic Church Sentinel, May 1995
To learn more about this order, I recommend the book The Secret History of the Jesuit Order, by Edmond Paris, or Vatican
Assassins, by Eric John Phelps for starters.
Monsignor Louis Segar, Plain Talk about the Protestantism of Today, p. 213
Ecclesiastical Review, Feb 1914
83 rd
The Catholic Mirror, December 23 , 1893
P a g e | 49

This Protestantism she speaks of is not Reformation Protestantism—no, no, no, even based upon the Catholic
Church’s own words because the Reformation still kept Sunday; this quote is referring to true Protestant, Remnant
Church theology, 7th Day Adventist theology. As Wilkinson remarks:

“Only when the church emerged from the wilderness to become the Remnant Church was complete
apostolic truth to be restored. The church would preach again with power not only the
substitutionary death of Christ, but also the sacredness of the Ten Commandments, which were to be
magnified by the death of Christ — especially the fourth, sanctifying the seventh day. Can we not say
that in “the time of the end” the Sabbath would become a test? Thus, it is written by the revelator,

“The dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed,
which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.”(Revelation

So really what the Catholic Church is doing here is pointing out who her only enemy is. She is in other words
saying, ‘It’s either us, or the 7th Day Adventists; there is no other choice, compromise is impossible.’ So Rome’s
attention is on the Adventists, and the Adventists attention is on Rome. Will the Sabbath controversy be the issue?
Do you, Reader, think that it is perhaps possible that the 7th Day Adventists have been preaching right on the
button this whole time?

“…we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that
are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but
which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the
things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are
spiritually discerned.” 1 Corinthians 2:12-14.

Wilkinson, Truth Triumphant, p. 381
P a g e | 50

Part 8: The International Sunday Law: The Mark of the Beast’s Authority

“…yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.” John 16:2.

Satan always works through the political powers of the day to try and persecute God’s people. The Bible illustrates
that this is Satan’s favorite way of attacking. In the book of Esther we read that “all the king’s servants, that [were]
in the king’s gate, bowed, and reverenced Haman: for the king had so commanded concerning him. But Mordecai
bowed not, nor did [him] reverence.” Esther 3:2. Rather than bow down and reverence this man, Mordecai chose
to die on the gallows rather than break the second commandment.
In the Book of Daniel, Satan again through the political power of Nebuchadnezzar tried to force Shadrach,
Meshach, and Abednego to worship the golden statue that he had erected. They would not do as they were told
and were threatened to be burned alive in a fiery furnace. But to the king’s face “Shadrach, Meshach, and
Abednego, answered and said to the king, O Nebuchadnezzar, we [are] not careful to answer thee in this matter. If
it be [so], our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver [us] out of
thine hand, O king. But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the
golden image which thou hast set up.” Daniel 3:16-18. Rather than break commandment number two, Shadrach,
Meshach and Abednego chose death in the furnace.
Again Satan did the same thing against Daniel. A handful of men went to find king Darius to get him to sign
a decree that no man should make a petition to any God or man, but only to Darius. Knowing the decree had been
signed, Daniel nevertheless went into his house and three times a day prayed and gave thanks to God. The same
men were aware of this and took the matter up with the king. Because the king had already signed the decree, and
“that the law of the Medes and Persians [is], That no decree nor statute which the king establisheth may be
changed” (Daniel 6:15), the only option the king had was to follow the decree which bade that the man who broke
the law would be thrown into a den of lions. So Daniel chose death in a den of lions rather than break
commandment number one.
In each case God protected His faithful and delivered them from certain death. Mordecai was honored
(Esther 6:11; 8:2 and 15), he became “next unto the king (Esther 9:4 and 10:2-3) and his enemy was hanged
instead (Esther 7:9-10). In the furnace which was heated seven times over its normal heat, Shadrach, Meshach and
Abednego were joined by one described as “the Son of God” (Daniel 3:25) and the fire caused them no harm. On
the other hand, the men that were responsible for actually throwing them into the fire were killed by the fire
(Daniel 3:22). While in the den, Daniel was protected by an angel and the lions didn’t touch him. Yet the host of
men, those that tried to deceptively get Daniel to sin, were thrown into the den along with their families and
consumed by the lions.
Later in time, Roman law demanded the worship of Roman rulers. Acts 12:21-22 illustrates how this was
so. We read that “upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto
them (the people). And the people gave a shout, [saying, It is] the voice of a god, and not of a man.” (Parentheses
added) History records that scores of Christians died in the coliseums refusing to break the first commandment.
Then, pagan Rome became Papal Rome. Historically it has been recorded that “superior papal authority
and dominion is derived from the law of the Caesars.”85 For refusing to break the first commandment, history
records that anywhere from 50 to 68, to 100, to 120, to 150 and upwards to as high as 500 million Christians were

Lucius Ferraris in Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica, Juridica, Moralis, Theologica, Ascetica, Polemica, Rubristica, Historica, vol. 5,
article on “Papa, Article II”, titled “Concerning the extent of Papal dignity, authority, or dominion and infallibility”, #19, published in
Petit-Montrouge (Paris) by J. P. Migne, 1858 edition.
P a g e | 51

slain by the Papacy from 538-1798 A.D.86 And this doesn’t even consider the work of the Roman Church in the U.S.
(with the Civil War, for example), in WWI and WWII, and now with the Islamic forces in the Eastern part of the
world. Is it possible that Satan will continue to try and force people through this Beast system to break God’s Law
and try slaying those who fail to capitulate?
Priest J. Cornell has been quoted as saying that “The final object of ecumenism, as Catholics conceive it, is
unity in Faith, worship, and the acknowledgement of supreme spiritual authority of the Bishop of Rome”—
(not of God’s Word).87 Will, or perhaps does, the whole of the world look to Rome for its spiritual guidance? “…all
the world wondered after the beast” is what Revelation 13:3 says. What kind of impact will the world wondering
after the Beast have on our day-to-day lives?
In a 1998 headline we read: “Pope launches crusade to save Sunday”.88 Can it be that the Pope is really
going to try and uplift this heresy? The Beast has been for all this time. Will it now be at global proportions? John
Paul II has said that “A person who violates the sanctity of Sunday is to be punished as a heretic.” Excuse
me…? Did he really say that? Yes, yes he did in Detroit News on July 7th, 1998 on page A1. That’s a joke right?
Punishment for not sanctifying Sunday, the false sabbath of the Biblical antichrist, as a heretic? What kind of
punishment do you, Reader, think that he and the church have in mind? Could it be civil punishment? Are we to be
considered heretics if we fail to observe the Sunday? When was the last time the Papacy spoke like this? Wasn’t it
during the Middle Ages? Yes, I believe it was. And what was the penalty of a heretic back in those times?
Practically everybody and their grandmother know this: death; death was the appropriate penalty for a heretic back
then. Could it be the same in these times? The Bible says there is nothing new under the sun, and that which is to
come has already been. So what then?
Seeing that prophecy tells us the world at one time or another will be wondering after the Beast, is it
possible, then, to go a step further and speculate that the Catholic Church will decide to push for international
Sunday observance through civil legislation? Satan has tried similar means in the past, I’m sure he’ll try them again
in the present.
On July 30th, 1998, John Paul II promulgated an Apostolic Letter called Dies Domini (The Lord’s Day). On
page 112, section 67 it says, “Christians will naturally strive to ensure that civil legislation respects their
duty to keep Sunday holy.” In one other headline we read: “VATICAN CITY, JUNE 13, 2005 (Zenit) – We Can’t Live
Without It [Sunday], He [Benedict XVI] Tells Crowd at Angelus.”89 And again, in another article, we read: “Church
groups push EU [European Union] to approve Sunday law. (AROUND THE WORLD) – Protestant, Catholic and
Orthodox religious leaders have urged the European Union to approve legislation mandating Sunday as a
weekly day of rest. According to Ecumenical News International, the Church and Society Commission of the
Conference of European Churches said in a March 16 statement that it wanted Sunday protected in order to
enhance both the protection of workers’ health (as if that really matters to the Pope; it matters as much as it
mattered in the Dark Ages) and a balance between work and family life (even though the Papacy supports
communism which takes the stand that the state should raise the children, not the parents).”90 (Last two sets of
parentheses added) Can we see that the Sunday is becoming an issue? If the EU is getting involved then it is not
only an issue, but a predominant issue.

See John Foxe, Fox’s Book of Martyrs Or A History of the Lives, Sufferings, and Triumphant Deaths of the Primitive Protestant
Martyrs, David A. Plaisted, Estimates of the Number Killed by the Papacy in the Middle Ages and later, and Charles T. Gorham, The
Medieval Inquisition: A Study in Religious Persecutions
Priest J. Cornell, Saturday May 10, 1997, as quoted in Charlene R. Fortsch, Daniel: Understanding the Dreams and Visions, (British
Columbia: Prophecy Song 2006)
88 th
Sunday Times, May 7 , 1998
Church & State, May 1, 2009 (
P a g e | 52

“The Pope is calling for global Sunday observance” rings another article.91 Two years later after this
publication another Catholic letter cried that “The European Union has set up the policy that every member-
state must have one day of rest during the week. But the policy explicitly states that the designated day
needs to be Sunday….”92 Can’t we see that the Beast is working hard? It is clasping hands with civil, political
powers. That is scary, and it should be a wakeup call to the entire world! The last time the civil power and the
Roman Church officially clasped hands (WWII), millions of lives were lost because of her iron teeth devouring
away the lives of men, women and children. Are we ready for it to happen again? Some of us say we stand for God
now, thick and thin, but what will happen when the time comes when we may possibly have to endure torture such
as never was? What then? Are we really ready for what is to come upon the world? The Bible says the Beast’s
deadly wound will be healed (Revelation 13:12). Are we sure enough in our faith to handle the results of that?
What will we do when we face death right on in the face? Where will our loyalty and allegiance really be?
In an almost prophetic voice, Wilkinson remarks:

“Nothing so quickly leads to persecution as Sunday laws. In a land like Scotland there could be the Anglo-
Saxon sect observing Sunday, the Celtic Church consecrating Saturday from the days of the apostles, Moslems
observing Friday, and unbelievers celebrating no day. A law which would single out any one certain day of
the week and exalt it to sacredness would be sectarian legislation. Soon the favored sect would
indulge in feelings of superiority and point the finger of scorn at those conscientiously observing
another day. Bitterness would set in speedily, followed by persecution. In this way the Culdees were
ordered to conform or to depart. When King David, the son of Margaret, had confiscated their Loch Leven
lands, he ordered them to conform to the rites of the Sunday-keeping monks, on whom he had conferred the
dispossessed property, or to be expelled {Maclauchlan, Early Scottish Church, pp. 400-403}. Needless to say,
they were expelled. This was in the year 1130.”93

It would be wise on our part to beg the Lord as never before to have mercy on us and help us through these times
that we are facing.
We must bear in mind that “The author of the Sunday law…is the Catholic Church”94; so when we see
political powers, like the reviving Roman Empire European Union pushing for a Sunday law, we should recognize
the ruling and driving force behind the EU and any other political bodies pushing this heresy.
One Sara Maitland has said that “If we believe that religion is true, we should be reintroducing a criminal
penalty for those who fail to attend church on Sunday.”95 A criminal penalty? She sounds just like the Pope.
On April 24, 2005, Jesuit Joseph Fessio said that “Those who rebel against the Church’s authentic teachings
are rebelling against God.”96 The Detroit Free Press positively assures us that “It is so dangerous when people are
divided over language, ethnicity, and religion…. People need this world Sabbath, the whole world needs it.”97
Is it now to be a ‘moral’ issue to the world? Does the Papacy really give a hoot about morals? Is she moral by any
means? Is she not the most immoral power that has ever existed on this planet?
Slowly, little by little the Mark of the Beast is being implemented and people don’t even realize it.
“…Germany’s Constitutional Court has now upheld a complaint made by the country’s Catholic and
Protestant churches, based on a clause in the German constitution that Sunday should be a day of rest and
“spiritual elevation.””98 “The EU Must Keep Sunday, Says Catholic Church,” boldly proclaims another online

From the Brook, July-Sept 1998, Vol. 4, No. 3
The Catholic World Report, Feb 2000
Wilkinson, Truth Triumphant, p. 107
Ecclesiastical Review (Catholic), Feb 1914
Sara Maitland, Daily Independent, April 11, 1998, “On the issues of belief”
96 th
NBC’s “Meet the Press”, April 24 , 2005
Detroit Free Press, Jan 25, 2001
P a g e | 53

article. It continues, “The Catholic Church wants Sunday observance enshrined in EU law. The European
Parliament is debating changes to its Working Time Directive. The Vatican wants a clause in this law that
would force every citizen in the European Union to rest on Sunday. …The bill is being revised. During the
second reading, in October, seven Members of the European Parliament tabled an amendment saying that the
minimum rest period “shall in principle include Sunday.” The Brussels-based Commission of the Bishops’
Conferences of the European Community (COMECE) agrees, recommending the directive should say “the minimal
weekly rest must include Sunday.”” And again, it turns out to supposedly be about moral issues, in this case looking
out for others’ health: “The amendment said, “The likelihood of sickness in companies that require staff to work on
Sundays is greater than in companies that do not require staff to work on Sundays. The health of workers depends,
among other factors, on their opportunities to reconcile work and family life, to establish and maintain social ties
and to pursue the spiritual needs. Sunday, as the traditional weekly rest day, contributes to these objectives more
than any other day of the week.””99 This is unbelievable…. Am I dreaming!? This has got to be a joke…! It has now
become a moral issue to keep the Sunday, just like it has supposedly become a moral issue to create a one world
The moral stress put on this Sunday rest goes on yet further. Just last year a report came out that read:
“Brussels, Belgium, Feb 16, 2009 (CNA).- The secretariat of the Commission of the Bishops' Conferences of the
European Community has welcomed a proposed EU law that would safeguard Sunday as a day of rest from
work. According to L’Osservatore Romano, the secretariat issued a statement praising the measure proposed by
five EU parliamentarians to recognize the value of “Sunday rest as part of the ‘cultural patrimony’ and
‘European social model’.” “The current economic and financial crisis has made it even more evident that not
every aspect of human life can be subject to the laws of the market,” the bishops stressed. “In fact, consumerism is
not a model either for a sustainable economy or for healthy human development.” Sunday work, they continued,
“puts those who work on Sunday into a socially disadvantageous position, affecting everything from family life
to their own personal health.” The proposed measure, which would need 394 votes to pass in the EU parliament,
would call on member states and EU institutions to “protect Sunday as the weekly day of rest” in order “to improve
the protection of workers’ health and the balancing of work and family life.”100 This is the new cry for a better
world—keeping the Sunday! Absolutely unbelievable…
You see, the problem is ultimately not only about stripping the authority away from God, but also about
making the whole Sabbath issue one of a man-centeredness. The Sabbath was made by God for the people as a
timeless bond between man and God. However, man is now trying to make his own sabbath for the people without
God actually being in the picture at all. If you have noticed, the shift of the Sabbath from the seventh day to the first
day is also about shifting the center of the Sabbath from a God-centeredness to a man-centered day of rest, where
the world is supposed to need the Sabbath for their own problems rather than need it for their relationship with
Almighty God. To us this is wrong and we believe that it takes the whole intended meaning away from the Sabbath
Think not either that America is free from the hand of Rome. Nay, but quite the contrary she is the one
exercising power here, as prophecy also assures us (Revelation 13:11-12). Observe the following quote from 1913
that says, “This organization [then called the American Sabbath Union] proposes in every possible way to aid in
preserving Sunday as a civil institution. Our national security requires the active support of all good citizens
in the maintenance of our American Sabbath. Sunday must be enforced.”101
Many people can see how an international Sunday law could be used for attacking the Sabbath day as a day
of rest and as a false sabbath for refraining from labor. But many people wonder still how it can be used to fulfill
Revelation 13:16-17 which says that the Beast will cause “all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to

The, Nov 18, 2008 (
Catholic News Agency, February 17, 2009
“Principles contained in the Constitution”, The Lord’s Day Alliance, Twenty fifth Report (1913), p. 6.
P a g e | 54

receive a mark in their fright hand, or in their foreheads: that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the
mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.” Well, we see in Nehemiah 13:15-20 that when we
keep the Sabbath, we are not to buy, neither are we to sell. We read: “In those days saw I in Judah [some] treading
wine presses on the sabbath, and bringing in sheaves, and lading asses; as also wine, grapes, and figs, and all
[manner of] burdens, which they brought into Jerusalem on the sabbath day: and I testified [against them] in the
day wherein they sold victuals. There dwelt men of Tyre also therein, which brought fish, and all manner of
ware, and sold on the sabbath unto the children of Judah, and in Jerusalem. Then I contended with the nobles
of Judah, and said unto them, What evil thing [is] this that ye do, and profane the sabbath day? Did not your
fathers thus, and did not our God bring all this evil upon us, and upon this city? yet ye bring more wrath upon
Israel by profaning the sabbath. And it came to pass, that when the gates of Jerusalem began to be dark before the
sabbath, I commanded that the gates should be shut, and charged that they should not be opened till after the
sabbath: and [some] of my servants set I at the gates, [that] there should no burden be brought in on the sabbath
day. So the merchants and sellers of all kind of ware lodged without Jerusalem once or twice.”
Because Satan wants to be like the Most High (Isaiah 14:14), the institution of which Satan controls, the
Roman Catholic Church, will not want the people to either buy or sell on the counterfeit sabbath. In France, “Most
retailers have been banned from trading on Sunday since 1906, when a law enshrined it as a day of rest.”102
“Five supermarkets from Deventer…[were brought] to court for illegally opening on Sundays.”103 “Jacob Rice…was
fined by the Mayor of Cincinnati, [Ohio] for trading on Sunday. The ordinance under which this fine was imposed,
is contained in the 2nd volume of the City Ordinances, page 58, and is in these words:

“Any person of the age of fifteen years and upwards, who shall be found on the first day of the week
commonly called Sunday, sporting, rioting, quarrelling, hunting, fishing, shooting, trading, bartering,
or selling, or buying any goods, wares, or merchandise, or at any common labour, (works of necessity
and charity excepted,) shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $20.” 104

So, case and point is that there are measures being taken to prevent individuals from buying and selling on Sunday.
Some individuals have already been taken to court and fined for not following the law. Surely next will be frozen
bank accounts, imprisonment and then at the extreme end, torture and/or death?
Israel instated civil laws in accordance with the Law of God. In Exodus 31:14-15 we find that the penalty
they created for breaking the Sabbath, including many other commandments, such as dishonoring parents, was to
be treated with the stoning of that person to death. Satan’s followers will undoubtedly do the same with Satan’s
perverted set of commandments. I don’t think it would be unreasonable to figure that possibly civil laws, even to
the point of death, will be instated in accordance with the Sunday law; only this time, death will ironically be the
penalty for keeping the Sabbath. Is it possible? It happened in the past; why not now, on a much larger, grandiose
Search online and you will find that all over Europe this Sunday Law is first being imposed—in Europe, the
heart of the ghost of the deceased Roman Empire. Soon it will make its way around the entire globe. When this
happens the entire world will be put at a crossroad of whether to obey the Beast system and receive its mark, or to
obey God and be sealed with His mark. And we already know that “We ought to obey God rather than men.” Acts
5:29. So what shall the Christian world do?
Now I don’t personally mind a Sunday law that says we should all take Sunday off. Hey, you know that’s
fine, great; I’ll take a day off. If they were to pass a ‘don’t work all week’ law, then yeah, that’s fine too; I’ll just give
up all that I’ve got and learn to live off the land, no big deal, right? But, when it comes to civil legislation that legally

P a g e | 55

punishes others and me with civil penalties for keeping the true Sabbath of the Lord, for not working on the
Sabbath day—for ‘Judaizing’, just as it happened in the past, then I mind. All who claim to follow Christ should
mind. When that day comes there will no longer be such a thing as freedom of conscience and freedom of choice;
there will be freedom to do what the authority says or else. And I would suggest to us all that we go with the ‘or
One author writes that “The thought of a revived Holy Office of the Inquisition would pacify some and
offend others. Nevertheless, the “Holy Office” still exists. Only its name has been changed [to the Congregation for
the Doctrine of the Faith]. Pope John Paul II has been instrumental in its revival. One may argue that this Ratzinger
run agency is merely an attempt by the Catholic Church to root out communism or backslidden priests and their
practices. However, with John Paul II’s objective to implement “God’s mandate” by creating a global church-state
which will administer from traditional Roman Catholic theology, is enough cause for alarm. Malachi Martin
has already stated in his book, “The Keys of this Blood,” that the pope will not tolerate any belief systems that
oppose his, not on a civil or church level.”105 The fact is unknown to most people, but the Inquisition can be
revived real quickly. And if it were to, and seeing that the sanctification of the Sunday is a law—religiously and
civilly of the Catholic Church, is it possible that the machinations of the Inquisition and its implements of torture
could be brought back to life and then used against those that fail or refuse to go along with this false sabbath?
We all know that John Paul II is now dead; but Ratzinger is following in the footsteps of John Paul II quite
well. Ratzinger was the head of the Office of the Inquisition, or the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and is
now the current Pope. What does that mean for the world? Well, consider for a moment “That the Church of
Rome has shed more innocent blood than any other institution that has ever existed among mankind, [and
of this fact it] will be questioned by no Protestant (or anyone else for that matter) who has a competent
knowledge of history. …It is impossible to form a complete conception of the multitude of her victims, and
it is quite certain that no powers of imagination can adequately realize their sufferings.”106 (Parentheses
added) Is it possible that such power of her former revival can be reawakened today? The Bible says the Beast’s
wound will be healed (Revelation 13:3). That which has been is now, that which shall be hath already been….
Reader, you put the pieces together and tell me.
‘But over a Sunday law?’ people will surely wonder. Certainly; why not over a Sunday law? As Wilkinson
pointed out for us, nothing leads so quickly to persecution as a Sunday law because it will ultimately lead to the
abuse of the power of the institution that is in control of enforcing the Sunday law.
To borrow the words of Veith once more, “Brothers and sisters, I’m not trying to invoke fear in you. This is the
moment we’ve been waiting for. This is not a time to be afraid; this is a time to stand for Jesus. This is a time when we
say, ‘Lord, they are trampling upon your righteousness, they are counting your cloak of righteousness for which
you paid such a heavy price for naught—they’re throwing it aside, they are usurping your authority and saying,
‘Away with it. We want no such thing….’ And may the Lord help us as we ponder these things.”107
As Ellen White foretold and foretells in various statements:

“The dignitaries of church and State will unite to bribe, persuade, or compel all classes to honor the
Sunday. The lack of divine authority will be supplied by oppressive enactments. Political corruption
is destroying love of justice and regard for truth; and even in free America, rulers and legislators, in
order to secure public favor, will yield to the popular demand for a law enforcing Sunday

Kathleen R. Hayes, February 1991, NRI Trumpet, p. 3
W. E. H. Lecky, History of the Rise and Influence of the Spirit of Rationalism in Europe, vol. 2, p. 32, 1910 edition. Also see The
Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 12, p. 266.
Video: Walter J. Veith, The Final Conflict
Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 592
P a g e | 56

“There are many, even of those engaged in this movement for Sunday enforcement, who are blinded
to the results which will follow this action. They do not see that they are striking directly against
religious liberty. There are many who have never understood the claims of the Bible Sabbath and the false
foundation upon which the Sunday institution rests.”109

“The decree enforcing the worship of this day is to go forth to all the world. In a limited degree, it has
already gone forth. In several places the civil power is speaking with the voice of a dragon, just as the
heathen king [Nebuchadnezzar] spoke to the Hebrew captives.” 110

“Trial and persecution will come to all who, in obedience to the Word of God, refuse to worship this
false sabbath. Force is the last resort of every false religion. At first it tries attraction, as the king of
Babylon tried the power of music and outward show. If these attractions, invented by men inspired by Satan,
failed to make men worship the image, the hungry flames of the furnace were ready to consume them. So it
will be now. The papacy has exercised her power to compel men to obey her, and she will continue to
do so. We need the same spirit that was manifested by God’s servants in the conflict with

“The Sabbath will be the greatest test of loyalty; for it is the point of truth especially controverted.
When the final test shall be brought to bear upon men, then the line of distinction will be drawn between
those who serve God and those who serve Him not. While the observance of the false sabbath in
compliance with the law of the State, contrary to the fourth commandment, will be an avowal of
allegiance to a power that is in opposition to God, the keeping of the truth Sabbath, in obedience to
God’s law, is an evidence of loyalty to the Creator. While one class, by accepting the sign of submission to
earthly powers, receive the mark of the beast, the other, choosing the token of allegiance to divine authority,
receive the seal of God.”112

“The time is coming when God’s people will feel the hand of persecution because they keep holy the
seventh day.”113

“Those who honour the Bible Sabbath will be denounced as enemies of law and order, as breaking
down the moral restraints of society, causing anarchy and corruption and calling down the judgments
of God upon the earth. Their conscientious scruples will be pronounced obstinacy, stubbornness, and
contempt of authority. They will be accused of disaffection toward the government. Ministers who
deny the obligation of the divine law will present from the pulpit the duty of yielding obedience to the
civil authorities as ordained of God. In legislative halls and courts of justice, commandment-keepers
will be misrepresented and condemned. A false coloring will be given to their words; the worst
construction will be put upon their motives.”114

“The love of Christ, the love of our brethren, will testify to the world that we have been with Jesus and
learned of Him. Then will the message of the third angel swell to a loud cry, and the whole earth will be
lightened with the glory of the Lord.”115

Ellen G. White, Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 711
Ellen G. White, Signs of the Times, May 6, 1897
Ellen G. White, 7BC 976.9
Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 605
Ellen G. White, Testimonies, vol. 9, p. 29
Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 592
Ellen G. White, Testimonies, vol. 6, p. 401
P a g e | 57

“Not having received the love of the truth, they [Christians who reject the Sabbath commandment and the
three angels’ messages] will be taken in delusions of the enemy; they will give heed to seducing spirits
and doctrines of devils, and will depart from the faith. But, on the other hand, when the storm of
persecution really breaks upon us, the true sheep will hear the true Shepherd’s voice. Self-denying efforts
will be put forth to save the lost, and many who have strayed from the fold will come back to follow
the great Shepherd. The people of God will draw together and present to the enemy a united front. In
view of the common peril, strife for supremacy will cease; there will be no disputing as to who shall be
accounted greatest.”116

After what we’ve covered, is it possible that Ellen White is preaching right on the money?
Now why does Satan keep trying to get God’s people to break His Law? It’s really quite simple. You see,
through the authorities of the day, Satan urges people to break the commandments of God because he knows that
Christians that keep the Law will not receive the Mark of the Beast. If we go back to the third angel’s message, we
read of those people who do get the Mark of the Beast. It says that “the third angel followed them (the first two
angels), saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive [his] mark in his
forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture
into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy
angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: and the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they
have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.”
(Parentheses added) Revelation 14:9-11. And who are they that don’t receive the mark? The very next verse
says, “Here is the patience of the saints: here [are] they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of
Jesus.” Revelation 14:12.
Here we have the two polarities again of equal opposites. We have those who have made a choice to obey
the Beast, either willingly or against their will, and those who have made the choice, willingly, to obey God. Those
who obey God by keeping His commandments will not be marked with the Mark of the Beast. The Mark of the Beast
is about a choice. It’s no different than the choice Mordecai, Shadrach, Meshach, Abednego, Daniel or the millions of
other Christians that were before us made. Are you, Reader, going to follow God’s Law or man’s law? Bear in mind
that “whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel’s, the
same shall save it.” Luke 9:24.
Mrs. White has a great word of caution for us when the Mark of the Beast shall be implemented: “A daily,
earnest striving to know God, and Jesus Christ whom He has sent, would bring power and efficiency to the soul.
The knowledge obtained by diligent searching of the Scriptures would be flashed into the memory at the
right time. But if any had neglected to acquaint themselves with the words of Christ, if they had never
tested the power of His grace in trial, they could not expect that the Holy Spirit would bring His words to
their remembrance. They were to serve God daily with undivided affection, and then trust Him.”117 Personally, I
believe her, and will take her advice; for the time is coming when “they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the
synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my (Jesus’) sake, for a
testimony against them.” (Parentheses added) Mark 13:9.
To borrow the words of Veith one more time, “There is nothing, brothers and sisters, to be afraid of. This
world is heading for the very calamity which we [7th Day Adventists] have been preaching under so much ridicule
for over a hundred and fifty years. All I can say is, ‘Come, Lord Jesus, come’.” And so He shall.

“I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, [that] I have set before you life and death, blessing and
cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: that thou mayest love the LORD thy God,

Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages, p. 355
P a g e | 58

[and] that thou mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him: for he [is] thy life, and the
length of thy days: that thou mayest dwell in the land which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac,
and to Jacob, to give them.” Deuteronomy 30:19-20.

“He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. The grace of our
Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen.” Revelation 22:20-21.
P a g e | 59

Part 9: The Significance of the Sabbath Keeping People

“And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove [them].” Ephesians 5:11.

We’ve already gotten a perspective for why the Sabbath Keepers in the very last days will become
significant. Let’s just go over it to be certain of this people’s significance.
The bottom line is that 7th Day Adventists “have preached that the Mark of the Beast will be implemented,
that Sabbath will be the final issue around which all of [the prophetic] things [in Revelation] will revolve. [Some
may say to keeping the Sabbath] ‘Isn’t that salvation by works?’—No, it’s righteousness by faith; because I
believe that God’s righteousness is a gift…. I also believe that if God’s character of love is a transcript of the
Law, then that is the character that he would like us to develop through His grace. …We have been preaching
for over a hundred and fifty years that God’s people will become prominent and that amongst all the peoples of the
world the final attention will be upon this people. And nobody can seem to understand how it will all come
together. ”118 How will it all come together?
The people of the Sabbath, those who “keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus” (Rev. 14:12),
are a distinct people with a message of separation that proclaim the conclusion of the third angel’s message, to
“Come out of her (Babylon), my (God’s) people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her
plagues.” (Parentheses added) Revelation 18:4. And why should we not? For the Word says to “come out from
among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I (the Lord) will
receive you.” (Parentheses added) 2 Corinthians 6:17. This people will stand out amongst all others because they
will refuse to say, ‘It does not matter which day one sanctifies as holy’, and will keep all ten commandments of
God’s Ten Commandments—including the 4th one, in spite of the rest of the world supporting and civilly enforcing
the Sunday as a day of rest. This people will be obedient to the first angel’s message and will heed the second’s.
The first angel’s message reads: “And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting
gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship
him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.” Revelation 14:6-7. This is a
three-part message to (1) fear God, to (2) give Him glory and to (3) worship Him that made heaven, and earth, and
the sea, and the fountains of waters.
To fear God means to seek wisdom and understanding, and to obey God’s commandments. How do we know?
Proverbs 2:1-5 says, “My son, if thou wilt receive my words, and hide my commandments with thee; so that thou
incline thine ear unto wisdom, [and] apply thine heart to understanding; yea, if thou criest after knowledge, [and]
liftest up thy voice for understanding; if thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as [for] hid treasures; then
shalt thou understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God.” Ecclesiastes 12:13 says, “Let us
hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this [is] the whole [duty] of
man.” So there are our two scriptural proofs for our definition of what it means to fear God.
To give God glory is to accept Jesus into our hearts: “...I (Paul) am made a minister, according to the
dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God; [even] the mystery which hath been hid
from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: to whom God would make known what
[is] the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory....”
Colossians 1:25-27.
Lastly, to worship the Creator is to return to keeping the Sabbath day. The words from Revelation 14:7 “him
that made heaven, and earth, and the sea” are exactly what we find in Exodus 20:11: “For [in] six days the LORD
made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them [is]”. The fourth commandment is the only commandment

Video: Veith, The Final Conflict
P a g e | 60

that begins with the word ‘remember’. This word alone is a rebuke to the people of God and a standing
admonishment that (1) we would forget the Creator’s Sabbath day, (2) that we would forget the meaning of it, and
(3) that we need to remember to keep it and the significance behind it. And as we saw, the significance of the
Sabbath day is that it is the sign between us and God that it is really Him, the God of gods, and Lord of lords that we
are sanctified by and worshiping. It is also the only commandment that calls God the true God; it is a perpetual
covenant that acknowledges God as the only Creator God. So by returning to the Sabbath we are acknowledging the
significance behind the Sabbath, that it is a perpetual covenant and memorial between our Creator and us, and that
we are without doubt praising the actual Creator God, for the Sabbath is a symbol also of His work during creation
and stands as an everlasting bond that it is Him, the real living God that we are coming into communion with
The second angel’s message reads: “And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen,
that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.” Revelation 14:8.
First of all, Babylon has a twofold meaning. Not only does it refer to the Roman Church and the spiritual nature of
the world at the end of time that she and Satan are responsible for, but it also means ‘confusion’.119 Secondly, wine
in the Bible is a symbol of doctrine (Jeremiah 25:15-18 and John 15:5). Thirdly, fornication is a symbol in the Bible
for compromising Christian beliefs and doctrines with the beliefs and doctrines of the world (Psalm 106:35-37 and
Ezekiel 16:15 and 26). So in other words, the second angel is telling the world that the confusion surrounding the
teachings of apostate Christianity have been cleared up and there is no longer confusion surrounding the issues
pertaining to doctrine. What confusion about which issues pertaining to doctrine am I talking about exactly?
About teachings such as that the Law of God being done away with, and that we no longer need to obey His
commandments, or at the least His Sabbath commandment; Marian doctrines and the doctrines of an everlasting,
burning abode of torment called ‘hell’, for instance. How do we know that the confusion was cleared up? Because
the first angels message of the everlasting gospel was proclaimed to the world. And by whom was it proclaimed
exactly? Naturally, the Remnant Church. The 7th Day Adventist teachings have cleared up the confusion pertaining
to doctrine.
Briefly stated was that the third angel’s message is a message of separation. The third angel’s message
reads: “And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image,
and receive [his] mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is
poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in
the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: and the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for
ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth
the mark of his name.” Revelation 14:9-11. In simple terms this means don’t accept the Mark of the Beast because
those who do will all have to answer to God for it in ways that they may not want to answer to Him!
In summary the three angels’ messages are telling us to return to the pure doctrines of the Bible, to
acknowledge and keep those doctrines, and to avoid and stay separated from the Beast and its image and to not
accept its mark. Anybody with an inch of common sense can see that this is an issue of works, and an issue of
obedience and loyalty to the Creator, God Almighty. It is the final test brought forth to the entire world. “A Distinct
People With a Testing Message.—The Lord has been pleased to give His people the third angel’s message as a
testing message to bear to the world. John beholds a people distinct and separate from the world, who
refuse to worship the beast or his image, who bear God’s sign, keeping holy His Sabbath—the seventh day to be
kept holy as a memorial of the living God, the Creator of heaven and earth. Of them the apostle writes, “Here are
they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.””120
What exactly will it look like to the world when they see a tiny group of people who are not going to go
along to get along? What will the world think? How will the world react? What kind of feelings will they have

Strong’s Concordance with Greek and Hebrew Lexicon, #897, (http://www.apostolic-
Ellen G. White, Letter 98, 1900 {Evangelism 233.3)
P a g e | 61

towards this group of people who stand out separate amongst all others? Can professing Christians even be
provoked to stand in opposition against this handful of individuals? Let’s consider a few things and then you,
Reader, can answer for yourself.
I will remind you here that on April 24, 2005 Jesuit Joseph Fessio said that “Those who rebel against the
[Catholic] Church’s authentic teachings are rebelling against God.”121 Now that’s interesting. If the world is to
begin enforcing the Catholic Church’s teachings, which the ‘Protestant’ world is also following, through civil
legislation, is it possible that the Adventists are going to be looked at as those ‘rebelling against God’? Most of the
professing Christian world already believes this! because we are apparently trying to save ourselves by our own
works. Certainly the whole world will not look at us as rebelling against God, because a vast portion of the world
denies even the existence of God.122 So how will those parts of the world view this people as? They will probably
view us as ‘radicals,’ ‘outrageous extremists’ rebelling against law and order, just like Ellen White says.
Consider carefully for a moment the events of September 11th in light of the no-buy-and-sell decree of
Revelation 13:17; there are a good deal of possible future events that can be seen in light of the New York
On September 24th of the same year, former president Bush gave a speech in which he spoke of an
Executive Order regarding freezing the assets—that’s no buying, no selling—of certain organizations that were
deemed potentially dangerous terrorist organizations. The purpose of the Executive Order was to establish global
networks for searching out and destroying supposed terrorist organizations.
Bush made it a point to urge other nations around the world in this effort to eradicate these organizations.
He made it clear that the method in which the U.S. along with the other nations would use to achieve this goal
would be to have any banks with assets from such organizations freeze their accounts—again, that’s no buying, no
selling—and to stop any U.S. banks from doing business with them or any other individuals connected to such
apparent terrorist groups. He also went on to make it clear that other banks doing business with the U.S., who fail
to inform the U.S. of holding assets from such groups, could have their accounts and assets frozen by the U.S.,
preventing them from doing business with us any longer, via newly granted powers of the Department of the
Treasury. He also informed the people that a Foreign Terrorist Asset Tracking Center was established at the
Department of the Treasury for identifying the infrastructures of terrorist organizations internationally.
The U.S. government will naturally look at ‘apparent terrorists’ as threats to the nation, to peace and
security, and to law and order. What if 7th Day Adventists in time became looked at as ‘terrorists’ because of our
highly nonconformist beliefs? What if these beliefs somehow disrupted law and order and national peace and
security in due time, say, as a result of a national Sunday law? Isn’t it possible that the government could do as
they did to the organizations of 9/11, and stop any U.S. banks from doing business with us? Isn’t it possible that
they could have any U.S. banks holding our assets freeze our accounts? It is no big job now with the terrorist asset
tracking center to search out and identify such members.
The 9/11 incident provided a perfect pretext for establishing international systems and mechanisms that can
eventually be used to enforce similar mandates against God’s people in the final days of this earth’s history. Such a
global no-buy-and-sell decree was not possible before an intricate complex of international systems and
mechanisms were in place. These terrorists seem to have provided a genuine excuse to strip the liberties of
American citizens, and indeed now all of the globe’s citizens, from the people—with popular support, as a prelude
to destroying the religious liberties of God’s people, and indeed of all people. The idea of chaos, whether real or
imagined, such as the idea of more possible destruction as was seen on 9/11, will keep the people willingly
obedient to a now tyrannical system (the U.S. government, or second beast out of the earth and image of the Beast)
and willing to accept more and more stripped liberties until eventually any unconstitutional action, whether small
or great, will be openly acceptable.

121 th
Joseph Fessio, April 24 , 2005, NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’
See Psalms 14:1
P a g e | 62

The no-buy-and-sell decree on a global scale could not have been possible any time before September 11th.
What first needed to happen was to get the people thinking differently about their civil freedoms. And as has
happened extremely rapidly, surely out of almost unbelievable ignorance on the part of the citizens, the people
have begun to think differently about their civil freedoms, thinking of them as of a much lesser value than the
implementation of more national security measures.
This same no-buy-and-sell decree couldn’t have been possible on a global scale without also having an
international economic and criminal infrastructure to regulate, control, and enforce it. Since the 9/11 incident,
international law enforcement operations are developing and working together. An international justice system is
being developed, based in the Netherlands; but being controlled by the United Nations, the U.N. demanded an
international criminal court (the ICC) as an extension to the justice system. The ICC is now regulatory, and is ready
to supersede the court systems of the world.
What makes the ICC scary is two things: firstly it is founded on a system of a secret tribunals, rather than on
a jury of peers. If a person is convicted of a crime, that person can be sent anywhere to prison, not necessarily in
their home country. Appeals are first made to that body that originally convicted the person. Think about that.
How easy could it be to extradite and arraign people before the ICC for violating blasphemy laws in Great Britain,
Europe, or the Vatican, though the crime was committed in America? Secondly, the ICC is also interestingly enough
being modeled on almost the same principles as was the Inquisition.
Also secret are military tribunals. Military tribunals do not have the same restrictions as do civil courts.
These courts are being restructured to be used whenever prisoners are deemed to be part of a military operation. On
the surface, the original intention is to arraign those involved in international terrorism. But what makes a person
a terrorist? Government definitions of all sorts are being expanded dramatically, and it is not hard to imagine that
some of God’s people could be tried in some of these courts under the accredited title of ‘military combatant’ or
possibly even ‘terrorist.’
For example, suppose that national security interests began to include church activities. Certain church
groups and their members could potentially be defined as ‘military combatants’, even though they are merely church
members. Does this sound farfetched to you, Reader? It might have twenty years ago; but not in the wake of the
events of September of 2001, with all the attention that Islam has been receiving. It is not so unthinkable in light of
mosques being used to organize terrorist cells world-wide. Attention can easily be moved to churches and other
religious organizations as potential threats to so-called peace and security that the world clamors for constantly.
When laws and crime definitions are expanded, making certain religious ideas or practices illegal, these tribunals are
likely to be used in ways originally thought to be impossible. The system being established can be easily manipulated
and eventually transformed and used against God’s faithful people.
Also currently available to the government is the technology to create national identification cards and a
national identification coordinated driver’s license program that are capable of storing and tracking every inch of
information pertaining to our lives, such as our address, social security number, bank account, occupation, birth
date, blood type, car insurance, and even our religion. George Bush has already proposed such an obligatory
system. The ID could be easily used to authorize or even deny any and all banking transactions, including minimal
transactions such as supermarket and gasoline transactions, much quicker than it traditionally takes. With the
national ID card, freezing an account does not have to take seventy-two hours, but can happen instantly. It is only a
matter of getting people to accept the idea of implementing such national standards. And with the posed threat of
terrorism, both within and without our nation’s borders, people could easily be coaxed into accepting such a
proposal in the name of peace and security, because it will naturally provide an easily accessible means for the
government to keep track of the intimate details of every individual within the country, thus keeping check on
potential terrorists. But again, when the definition of terrorism, and thus the ‘threat’, whether real or imagined, of
supposed ‘terrorists’ is expanded to potentially include the average every-day individual, then what is in the
P a g e | 63

government’s power to do to such people is greatly expanded—perhaps even to the point of preventing people from
buying and selling.
Can we see yet how this terrorist no buy, no sell mandate can be used in unison with the national Sunday
law? People who go against the decree(s) of this ‘moral lifesaver’ called the Sunday law will be deemed as
disruptive to the nation. With the expansion of ‘terrorist’ definitions, this group can in time easily be labeled as
‘terrorists’ because of being viewed as disruptive to the nation’s ‘peace’. As ‘terrorists’ supposedly not submitting
to law and order our accounts and assets can be frozen instantaneously which would prevent us from buying and
selling. The only way, then, to again be able to buy and sell is by accepting the Beast’s mark by submitting to its
‘holy’ day and respecting the decree(s) of the Sunday law. With the Sunday laws of the past, people were not only
allowed to buy and sell on the Sunday, but also could not rest on the Sabbath. Most likely with this new
international Sunday law, the same circumstances will apply and people will in due time not be able to observe the
Sabbath and will be tried and persecuted for it if they do, even possibly to the point of death. So for those who do
decide to accept the Beast’s mark to again be able to buy and sell, it will also mean forsaking the commandments of
God and thereby forfeiting the sanctification and Seal of God. But this we should already know is foolishness to do,
for Jesus Himself says that “whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake
and the gospel’s, the same shall save it.” Luke 9:24.
There has also been talk about the vulnerability of food sources not only here in America, but also globally
(at least on the surface). Is it then possible to go one step further and speculate that perhaps food might become so
controlled that selected individuals or groups will be prevented from obtaining it? It can certainly be made
difficult for us to obtain food from the usual sources like the grocery store and such in times of chaos and conflict.
Would it be so hard as to imagine selected individuals and groups being prevented from obtaining food in light of
the chaos and conflict that will no doubt both prelude and follow the coming Sunday law?
Have you, Reader, noticed how that most of the military action in the Middle East since September 11 th has
been focused on a few isolated, religious ‘extremists’? The Taliban is considered to be ‘extreme’; Osama bin Laden is
considered to be an ‘extremist’; Hamas is considered to be an ‘extremist’ organization (in addition to others).
Despite the fact that the Qur’an and the Hadiths (traditional sayings of Muhammad) advocate the violent
extermination of anyone who doesn’t accept Allah and Islam and doesn’t become Muslim123, a media distinction is
being made between tolerant moderates, and ‘extremists’. Could perhaps the same be used against a particular
group of Christians? Such as, say, Sabbath Keepers?
Islam, we are told, is ‘peaceful’ except for these handfuls of so-called ‘extremists’. In the midst of this so-
called ‘extremism’, the military is developing and practicing ways to search out these religious ‘extremists’ from
cave to cave. If and when we have to flee to the rocks and mountains the military will now have the skills and
equipment necessary to rat us out. Whether they realize it or not, those in the military are currently developing
systems that can, and most probably will, be used against God’s people. You and I will be many times more
helpless than those in the Middle East if we do not have the protection from the angels of God to make us invisible
to the eyes of military devices124.
At first there shall surely be attempts to curtail the operation of ‘extremist’ groups, operating under the
cover of religion. Do you, Reader, think that it’s possible that Adventists will be divided into mainline and ‘extreme’
groups? Mainline Adventists will be considered balanced and acceptable, like most Muslims. However, those that
are faithful to Christ, love the Truth so much that they are willing to die for it, who have high standards and are
unwilling to compromise with the world, are the kind of people that will be profiled and painted as ‘extreme’. If you
are faithful to Christ, you will be painted with the ‘extremist’ brush and will be treated very differently than
mainline Adventists.

See Sura 47:4, 4:89, 4:74 and 77, 2:216, 9:29 and 123, etc.; the Hadith of Al-Bukhari, vol. 5, #261 and 630; vol. 9, #10-11, 26, 45-
50, and 341-342; and the Hadith of Kanz Al-Muttaqi vol. II, pp. 252-286, etc.
See Psalm 91:7-11
P a g e | 64

Is the picture becoming clear now? Notice also how Taliban captives are treated. They have been given a
unique legal description. They are not POWs, but are ‘detainees’. Under the Geneva Convention POWs have certain
rights; but detainees have no rights. American leaders are trying to assure the people that these detainees are being
treated with rights compatible with the Geneva Convention; however, under the definition of ‘detainee’, there is no
legal reason why they can’t be treated in unconstitutional ways or be tortured. No civilian observers are permitted
at Guantanamo Bay, thus nobody outside the military actually knows for certain how the detainees are being
treated. Think how faithful souls, detained on one pretext or another, are likely to be treated. The thing is that this
special classification of Taliban captives as detainees is making the American public become accustomed to the new
quarantining. Never would have such a thing have been acceptable, at least to the American public, before 9/11.
What kind of effect could a Sunday law have in this scenario in light of God’s people? What would the
world care, after already having been conditioned to such sights in the media, if literally before their eyes a tiny
group of individuals was thrown into such detainee camps for apparently ‘disrupting law and order’ in the country
by not compromising their day of rest with that of the world’s? We’ve already seen that morality is going to be the
driving force of this supposed Sunday-sacredness issue. When the matter becomes a matter of the betterment of
family life, and a positive contribution to societies’ life, and is supposedly a lifesaver to the world’s environment,
(and not to mention a beneficial compromise to the pagan beliefs of the other religions,) then the vast multitudes in
the world will hardly care at all about what happens to these ‘extremists’. What will happen with these Sabbath
Keepers when the first day of the week becomes a day where certain laws are past, and are eventually expanded to
prevent individuals from having the religious freedom to observe the day they have been commanded to observe
as a day of rest by their God? How much will the world really care about this people who insist on obeying Him by
resting on the seventh day?
The world wouldn’t react a smidgeon to such a site any longer thanks to the conditioning they have been
receiving; if anything, though such actions break all natural morals and stand in opposition against every principle
that this country was first founded on, the majority of people would end up clamoring for them to remain
imprisoned and detained rather than clamor for their release. That, Reader, is how taken away by the media,
religious and otherwise, the world has become. To the world out there who would witness the events, they would
be quick to label us Sabbath Keepers as ‘extremists’ and thus as potentially dangerous to themselves and others.
Perhaps history will repeat itself and even “the brother shall betray the brother to death, and the father the son;
and children shall rise up against [their] parents, and shall cause them to be put to death.” Mark 13:12. Perhaps
family will even betray family over this Sunday law, members not wanting to recognize their own relatives for fear
of what might come upon them for being related to the ‘dangerous extremist’ Sabbath Keeper.
But what exactly is an extremist? Isn’t an ‘extremist’ someone who has beliefs outside the normal,
mainstream beliefs of their religion or society? Right now the public is being cultivated to be weary of and to fear
such people labeled religious ‘extremists’, and those with deep religious convictions. The role that these apparent
terrorists play in the mind of the public is in shaping the worldview of the people. The Taliban and other Islamic
‘extremists’ are giving the U.S. and the world plenty of opportunities to develop hostility towards religious
‘extremism’ whether people are unaware of this or not.
As the U.S. continues to expand the definitions of terrorists and continues to build up supposed terrorist
profiles, what can we imagine would be on a 7th Day Adventists profile? Perhaps things like homeschooled
children, belief that the end of the world is at hand, beliefs in ‘extreme’ religious views, such as the Papacy as the
Biblical antichrist, willingness to be martyred over keeping the Sabbath and so forth. The definition of a 7 th Day
Adventists might read something like, ‘SDA extremist knows his Bible very well; he subscribes to certain kinds
magazines and literature; he goes to certain types of places; and buys certain types of food.’ Such profiling mixed
with various surveillance and control systems would make it very easy for faithful Adventists and others to be
tracked and eventually hunted down.
P a g e | 65

Can we see how in light of the aftermath of 9/11 it can in due time all of a sudden become very easy to track
certain individuals very intimately, and even to freeze bank accounts and assets to prevent others from buying and
selling as a form of civil punishment—without a remonstrance from the people at large? Can we see how easy it
will be for the Beast to implement the no-buy-and-sell decree now? The Bible makes it clear in Revelation 13:7
that “power was given him (the Beast) over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.” (Parentheses added) Is it
possible that with the Papacy in charge of the whole bit that the world will fall at the feet of Catholicism and subject
the global order to her inquisitional and papist ideologies? Is it possible that once this were to happen, a revival of
her former persecutions would begin? The Bible assures us that the Beast’s “deadly wound” is “healed”
(Revelation 13:3) at some point in history. That healing is taking place right now and has been healing since
Mussolini reinstated the Vatican as an official political state in 1929. Is it therefore possible that the revival of her
persecution and her hatred will be aimed at her former enemies, who she even to this day still identifies as her
enemies, the Sabbath Keepers? The Bible says in Revelation 13:2 that the Dragon, “that old serpent, called the
Devil, and Satan” (Revelation 12:9) gives power to this system; and that the dragon makes war with the remnant of
the Church in the Wilderness’ seed (Revelation 12:17). Based upon Biblical prophecy, can we speculate and
suspect that it is indeed possible that she will by all means try to destroy this tiny group of individuals?
The Bible says that “all the world” will wonder “after the beast” at some point or another (Revelation 13:3).
With the Papacy making war with the Sabbath Keepers and the world following right behind the footsteps of the
Papacy, is it thus possible to realistically imagine that this tiny group of individuals will have the attention of the
whole world? It sure is possible—and more than likely, too.
So I ask you now, what exactly will it look like to the world when they see a tiny group of people who are
not going to go along to get along? What will the world think? How will the world react? What kind of feelings will
they have towards this group of people who stand out separate amongst all others? Can professing Christians even
be provoked to stand in opposition against this handful of individuals?
We get a glimpse of the coming worldwide animosity growing already in 1986 when an ecumenical
gathering was held in Assisi. Concerning this meeting and its adopted resolutions we read:

“The Pontiff told the assembled Buddhist monks, Zoroastrian priests, Catholic cardinals, Hindu gurus,
American Indian shamen, Jewish rabbis, and ecumenical clergy that all must join in condemning the
Christian fundamentalists who ‘abuse speech’ and whose efforts at converting others ‘incite hatred
and violence.’ All present were in accord on two key points: (1) Pope John Paul II was endorsed by
consensus as the planet’s chief spiritual guide and overseer; and (2) Religious fundamentalists who refuse
to go along with the global ecumenical movement are to be silenced. They must be denounced as
‘dangerous extremists’ full of hate.”125

For one, this is the largest hypocrisy known to mankind; if anybody is dangerous it’s the one they want as chief
spiritual guide and leader of the planet, not us. But secondly, and more to the point, there’s the new slogan of the
day—‘dangerous extremists’; already we can see the manifestation of the ‘extremist’ cry being brought to the center
stage even as early as 1986.
And who are we to suspect that the people that this conference is referring to are? Well obviously Rome is
in charge of the whole bit, because the Pope is placed far above all the others as leader of this world religious
initiative. And who did the Papacy identify as their enemy? 7th Day Adventists. So who are these ‘dangerous
extremists’? Obviously, the 7th Day Adventists. For who else calls the Pope the Biblical antichrist, and teaches that
Satan sits inside the Vatican, etc.? Are we really to be condemned as a group who incites hatred and violence,
simply because we are the minority who nobody agrees with? Is it now going to be wrong in this ‘New Age’ to have
the freedom to believe and speak how we want? Aren’t all people accountable only to God? So, then, let us speak

“True Bible believers denounced at Papal Conference,” Power of Prophecy Newsletter, March 2000, Vol. 2000-03, p. 3
P a g e | 66

how we will, and let others not judge; for God will be the judge over us. Possibly in the eyes of the world we might
be viewed as dangerous because we preach a message that might chap their high, if you know what I mean; but
should we be looked at as such for any other reason? God forbid.
We should be able to see now that, not only are the warnings of Ellen White coming to pass, and very
rapidly at that, but the reasons to be used against the Sabbath keepers are here made crystal clear. In a time when
the entire world will be clamoring for unity in both politics and religion, the act of separation by all means is not
going to be looked favorably upon by any means. Why? Because this tiny group of people will be looked at as the
sole cause of preventing ‘true’ unity and thus will be seen as the source of all the problems—interestingly just like
it was back with the Sabbath Keeping Christians in ancient Rome. Nothing has changed. All is the same under the

“...for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and
with all your soul.” Deuteronomy 13:3.
P a g e | 67

Part 10: The Conclusion of the Whole Matter

If we take it as Truth that the Bible (i.e., the Received Text) is the Word and words of God, then Ecclesiastes
12:13 is true which says that ultimately “the conclusion of the whole matter (is): (to) Fear God, and keep his
commandments: for this [is] the whole [duty] of man.” (Parentheses added) Some might say, though, ‘That is
Old Testament writing, things have changed.’ Oh? Is that so? It has already been shown that that isn’t the case.
Ecclesiastes 12:14 reads, “For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing,
whether [it be] good, or whether [it be] evil.” Certainly it means nothing that this was Old Testament writing
because, as Solomon makes it clear, this duty of fearing God and keeping His commandments will endure at the
very least until the great day of judgment (and, surely, beyond that into eternity). And last time I checked, the
executive judgment has not come yet. Maybe I’m just a little bit slow or something though and didn’t notice it…
Besides, if keeping the commandments of God was not our whole duty, why in Revelation 22:14 do we read,
“Blessed [are] they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in
through the gates into the city”? The whole Book of Ecclesiastes makes it blatantly clear that there is no meaning
to our works beyond obedience to God. He writes that “all the works that are done under the sun...(are) vanity and
vexation of spirit.” (Parentheses added) Ecclesiastes 1:14. And of course, after this dragged out discourse we’ve
gone through it must surely be said that absolutely nothing has changed; we must continue to obey all of God’s
commandments—which includes the fourth commandment, for clearly “this is the whole duty of man.” “The thing
that hath been, it [is that] which shall be; and that which is done [is] that which shall be done: and [there is] no
new [thing] under the sun.” Ecclesiastes 1:9. Concerning the duties of man, things have not changed, in other
Through this paper I have endeavored to show that the theology of the rest of the professing Christian
world out there, save the 7th Day Adventists, teaches and ‘evangelizes’ occult doctrine, bringing the Christian minds
into harmony with Gnostic, occult-land Alexandria and pagan Rome philosophy and ways of thinking. The idea that
man has no longer to keep the Sabbath day holy destroys the whole Law, and when people teach that the Sabbath
has been done away with, they preach that the whole Law of God has been done away with. This is no different
than what the Luciferian Gnostics believed. That is the fact.
Isaiah 8:20 states that all of our standard of Truth should be based according “To the law and to the
testimony,” or otherwise we are already to be found in error from the get-go. The whole of the Christian world out
there, except the ‘extremist’ 7th Day Adventists does not stand up to the challenge. All of the other Christian bodies
out there—Lutheran, Baptist, Catholic, and non-denomination professing Christians, etc. all miss the mark. That,
too, is the fact.
What does Isaiah 8:20 mean? What are the “law” and the “testimony”? In various places throughout the
Bible, such as in Psalm 81:5 and onward we find that the testimony is God basically telling the people, ‘If you keep
my word, all will go well with you; keep My word, and I will keep you.’ So the testimony is simply the Word of God.
For us that is the Bible. And as for the “law”, we already know what that is: the Moral Law of God.
The two go hand in hand together—the Law and the testimony. Isaiah is basically saying, ‘If the people
who claim to be speaking of the Truth come to you telling you that they know the Truth, if they do not preach what
is found in the Bible, and do not themselves keep the commandments of God, they are liars and have not the Truth,’
the light, ‘in them.’ This is the same message that is found in 2 John that says, “I beseech thee...not as though I
wrote a new commandment unto thee, but that which we had from the beginning, that we love one another.
And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard
from the beginning, ye should walk in it. ...Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of
Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come
any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into [your] house, neither bid him God speed: for
he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.” 2 John 1:5-6, 9-11. If we claim to know the Truth,
P a g e | 68

we will keep the commandments and live by and preach Biblical doctrine. Isaiah 8:20 is also no different than John
in 1 John 2:4 which says, “He that saith, I know him (Jesus, the Truth), and keepeth not his commandments, is
a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoso keepeth his word (His testimony), in him verily is the love of God
perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even
as he walked.” (Parentheses added) If nothing has changed between the time of Isaiah and the time of John, what
in the world would make us believe that things have suddenly changed?
The answer is found in those teachers who have “itching ears,” the ones Paul says Christians would heap
unto themselves so they can walk after their own lusts, rather than have to obey God. Ellen White puts it thus:
“And as the claims of the fourth commandment are urged upon the people, it is found that the observance of the
seventh-day Sabbath is enjoined; and as the only way to free themselves from a duty which they are unwilling
to perform, popular teachers declare that the law of God is no longer binding. Thus they cast away the law
and the Sabbath together. As the work of Sabbath reform extends, this rejection of the divine law to avoid the
claims of the fourth commandment will become well-nigh universal (and indeed it really has). The teachings of
religious leaders have opened the door to infidelity, to Spiritualism, and to contempt for God’s holy law,
and upon these leaders rests a fearful responsibility for the iniquity that exists in the Christian world.”126
(Parentheses added) If Ellen White is correct, who does seem to be in perfect harmony with what Paul says would
happen in 2 Timothy 4:3-4, then the reason people fail to observe the Sabbath is because of people who do not
want to be bound to observing this one specific day.
The problem is that Satan has been working amongst church leaders unbeknownst to them to use them as a
means of coaxing the people into forgetting the fourth commandment. For nearly 2,000 years professing Christians
have been taught to forget the one commandment God said to remember. Not only is that a catastrophe but it is
such an ironic turn of events. People do not realize that from the time of the Gnostics from the early second
century onward, coupled with the pagan power of Rome, church leaders have moved the people in the direction of
a whole other gospel, which Paul says of, “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto
you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” Galatians 1:8.
Nevertheless, Jesus, Paul and all the apostles kept the Sabbath and did well in not forgetting it. We have
seen how the Judeo-Christians’ teachings swept the world over, and within the first few centuries after Christ the
entire Christian world was keeping the seventh day holy, except for Alexandria and Rome alone. We have seen that
it is because of this enjoined body of so-called ‘Christians’ that the Christian world now preaches what they preach.
Thus in truth the doctrines of professing bodies of Christians—save the Adventists alone, are preaching a devilish
doctrine that is really no different at its core than the Roman Church and the Gnostic occultists. That is the fact.
Yet regardless of this fact, Adventists are today still to be accused of being a cult. That is hypocrisy of such
gigantic proportions that it’s not even worth taking seriously. The fact remains to this day that the whole of the
Christian world is following true cult theology that comes from the real Kingdom of the Cults.
Through this paper I have endeavored to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, using Biblical text upon
Biblical text—“line upon line, precept upon precept”—and outside sources from the Roman Catholic Church and
secular history to show you, Reader, that it is simply an unfounded claim and a blatant lie that the Moral Law of
God, which includes the fourth commandment, has been done away with. I have proven to you that there is only one
law that has been done away with, and that is the Ceremonial Law, which does not include the fourth commandment
to keep the Sabbath day holy.
I have showed how the notion that the Sabbath commandment is in any way, shape, or form a part of the
Ceremonial Law is false, and in itself comes from the Roman Church.
I have covered the main covenants regarding the laws in the Bible and have proven that two of them will be
fulfilled, but a third one, wherein the heart of it lies in the Sabbath commandment, will endure throughout the

Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 624
P a g e | 69

ceaseless ages of eternity. When the day is done, the truth is that the professing Christian world is without excuse
to their errors.
The fact remains that the truth about the Sabbath has been kept form us because of the Roman Catholic
Church. You have been shown that she knows exactly what she is doing, and she knows exactly what she is talking
about concerning matters of the Sabbath versus the Sunday. She is keeping the truth away from the world because
she wants to take the heat off of herself. By doing so, Satan understands that he takes the heat off of himself. The
problem for the Roman Church is that, once the truth regarding the Sabbath is brought to the forefront, not only
will she be exposed as the Beast of Revelation 13, the whore of Revelation 17, and the little horn power of Daniel 7,
but the truth about her Sunday law as the Mark of the Beast will also be brought to the forefront with it. She knows
that the ignorant masses will begin to see her ungodly push for power in the political arena as she begins to
persuade and influence the nations into accepting and enforcing this Sunday sabbath that she is ultimately in
control of.
I have shown that the stigmatism against the Adventist people is due to the old accusations that were first
started by the Alexandrian and Roman churches in the first three centuries. The same attack of Judaizing is thrown
at the Adventists today just as it was thrown at the Sabbath Keepers then; nothing has changed. …Nothing, has
changed. Unbeknownst to the Christian world out there, those who point the finger at the Adventists are not only
trampling upon the truths of Christ and the same doctrine which Christ defended, but are pushing occult,
Luciferian Roman and Alexandrian accusations upon us.
It is still yet argued in the world out there that when Jesus died, it would then be necessary to keep a
different day holy in remembrance of His resurrection. But, according to the apostle Paul, this is done by baptism:

“Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead
by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted
together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also [in the likeness] of [his] resurrection….” Romans

In other words, when a person goes underwater, they symbolize His death and burial; when they come up out of
the water, they symbolize His resurrection. Merely stepping into a church on the day He arose each week simply
cannot do this. If His resurrection were really the reason why the Christian world keeps Sunday, why isn’t it that
people don’t go to church each and every Friday? Isn’t that the day He died?
The message that has been presented may cause some to question, if it is so truly as serious a matter to
keep the Sabbath day holy as has been presented, ‘Is he saying that I’m going to miss out on my salvation simply
because I didn’t observe the Sabbath day?’ Jesus does say, “All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him
that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out” (John 6:37); but He also said to keep His commandments if we truly
love Him and want to honor Him for what He has done for us. And He also says that not everyone that say, ‘Lord,
Lord’ will enter into the kingdom of heaven, except those that do God’s will.
This message may also cause some to fear wrath of God for sins committed in times past, or worse yet, to
fear that one of their loved ones, who went to the grave truly believing that a different day of the week was the
Sabbath of God, and are not going to enter thereupon into the kingdom of God. However, the crux of the matter is
this: the Word says that in “the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every
where to repent: because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by [that]
man whom he hath ordained; [whereof] he hath given assurance unto all [men], in that he hath raised him from the
dead.” Acts 17:30. Therefore, because we know what the truth is now, God is calling us to repentance to live up to
those truths (to the Law and to the testimony). But God is not going to hold us accountable for things we never
really knew. However, if we know what is right, and continue not therein, it be sin for us, and “there remaineth no
more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for the judgment and fiery indignation, which shall
P a g e | 70

devour the adversaries.” Hebrews 10:26-27. For it is plainly written that “if thou wilt enter into life, keep the
commandments.” Matthew 19:17.
Regardless of such massive testimony for keeping the Sabbath day, as a binding commandment upon men
today, I would in all honesty not be surprised if a large host of individuals who do hear this message and such
testimony reject it based upon, perhaps, a single Biblical passage, or their own accustomed tradition. But Jesus
warned that man tends to make “the commandment of God of none effect by…tradition” and that “in vain they
do worship me (God), teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men.” (Parentheses added) Matthew
15:6 and 9.
Christians have been taught for many, many years that all the other nine commandments of the Decalogue
are not acceptable to break. However, when it comes to the fourth commandment they somehow feel it is okay to
discard. Surely one of the reasons for this kind of thinking is also that the enemy of souls has taught church leaders
that the people would be seeking heaven by their own abilities or works. They know that it is “Not of works, lest
any [man] should boast.” Ephesians 2:9. Thus people fall for the lie that to obey the Law is man’s desire to create
his own path to heaven. But again, the Lord who never changes has given us “the conclusion of the whole matter:
Fear God, and keep his commandments: for [this is] the whole [duty] of man.” Ecclesiastes 12:13.
Again, some have stated effectively for a host of years and years that all they need to do is believe in Jesus
Christ and they will achieve heaven. Well, the Gnostics also had a similar doctrine, believing that all one had to do
was change their beliefs, accept a new way of thinking, experience the power of the gnosis, and they would then be
saved. The so-called ‘evangelical’ world preaches the same thing, as if believing alone will save a man, when in fact
James says that that is not the case, nor does Isaiah: for works without faith is dead, and those who do not live by
the Law and the testimony are liars and the Truth (Jesus, His word, and commandments) is not in them. For one,
not only is this also a salvation by works as much as keeping the commandments to be saved would be, but this also
means that Satan and the devils would attain heaven, for “the devils also believe, and tremble.” James 2:19.
Anyone can believe in Jesus; but faith without works is dead.
Yet some feel still that so long as we keep any one day in seven out of the week as holy unto the Lord that
will somehow be sufficient and satisfactory to God. Unfortunately, though, as we saw, this happens to be an
extremely common deception among Christians today because the significance about the Sabbath is not just
keeping a day, but is about authority. Their presumption becomes their undoing because the Word plainly says that
“There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof [are] the ways of death.” Proverbs 16:25.
If man tries to put aside his own day for himself and God that is rejecting the work that God has done to put aside a
specific day for us. This issue is about coming into line with His ways, not about adjusting them to fit our own
Even though they continue to go through life claiming Christ as Lord they ignore the fact that, once this
truth is brought to them, and they reject it, all their preaching, all their praising, and all their testifying of the Lord
throughout the world won’t change a thing in regards to their eternal destination. For, again, Jesus Himself said
that “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the
will of my Father which is in heaven.” Matthew 7:21. Even those who pray without ceasing, if they ignore the
simple truth of keeping the seventh day holy as the divine command decrees, they will find their prayers falling on
deaf ears, because the Lord God already declared long ago that “He that turneth away his ear from hearing the
law, even his prayer [shall be] abomination.” Proverbs 28:9. It is time for a change to be made in the Christian
heart, and most definitely also in the hearts of all people.
The Devil has not only made it convenient to work of the seventh day, but to even make it appear as a
necessity at times if the Christian is to keep their job and take care of their families. But we must remember to ask
ourselves, “What shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” Mark 8:36. The
truth is, “your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. But seek ye first the kingdom of
God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.” Matthew 6:32-33. Regardless of
P a g e | 71

what the world out there teaches, it is a well known Biblical fact that man has “not seen the righteous forsaken, nor
his seed begging bread.” Psalm 37:25.
Tribulation happened against Sabbath Keepers in the past for obeying the divine precept; surely it will
happen again after the coming Sunday law is enforced. God’s people, as in the past, will stand now for the very
same truths that were once so tenaciously clung to and fought and died over. Whether we or anybody else likes it
or not, the Truth is the Truth, and will always be the Truth. I would suggest that we all study the Word of God
(found in the Textus Receptus) and become familiar with. If any doubts remain in your mind, Reader, I would
suggest praying upon the commandments issues that we have been covering and ask God to show you in some way
whether or not these things are really so. I would suggest to you, Reader, that you stand upon the truths of God’s
Word regardless of any persecutions that may come. I would also suggest, as a final word of advice, to please obey
the Lord, so that upon walking towards Him on that first day of eternity, you may hear Him saying, “Well done,
[thou] good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler of many
things: enter thou into the joy of the lord.” Matthew 25:21.

“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” John 8:32.
P a g e | 72

Appendix: A Brief Examination of Ellen G. White

“God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.” Acts 3:21.

“Believe in the LORD your God, so shall ye be established; believe his prophets, so shall ye prosper.” 2 Chronicles

It is beforehand imperative that we ought “Despise not prophesying” and surely “Prove all things” and
“hold fast that which is good.” 1 Thessalonians 5:21. And I don’t believe that there’s a single Christian who would
despise prophesying if they had enough evidence to support that the prophesying is true nor do I believe that they
would not hold fast to that which is good after having proved it to be good. Secondly, according to 1 John 4:1, it
would be wise to obviously “believe not every spirit, but try the spirits” to see “whether they are of God: because
many false prophets are gone out into the world.” Have people really tried the spirit of Ellen G. White as closely as
can be done?
Enumerated are going to be the credentials that are required of a prophet for him or her to be a true
prophet of Almighty God. If the person does not fit each of these criterion—even just one, then that person is
immediately disqualified as being a prophet. After all criteria are set forth and iterated, looking at the life of Ellen
White will be the next phase in deciding if she was a true prophet of Almighty God or if she was one of those that,
“if [it were] possible, …shall deceive the very elect”. Matthew 24:24 and Mark 13:22.
“If there be a prophet among you, [I] the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, [and] will
speak unto him in a dream,” says Numbers 12:6. This is the first criteria: a true prophet will be spoken to in either
a vision or in a dream. The only exceptions to this according to the Bible, as far as I know, are Moses, who spoke
face to face with God, and Jesus, who was told directly by His heavenly Father what to say.127
In Daniel 2:28 it is in part written, “…there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets, and maketh known…what shall
be in the latter days.” We find that God will reveal to His prophets what shall be in the future.
Speaking of John the Baptist, Zacharias, John’s dad, said, “And thou, child, shalt be the prophet of the
Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways; to give knowledge of salvation unto
his people by the remission of their sins, through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the dayspring from on
high hath visited us, to give light to them that sit in darkness and [in] the shadow of death, to guide our feet into
the way of peace.” This describes what a prophet should declare: (1) a prophet is to go to the people and prepare
the coming of the Lord and His judgments, (2) to touch upon the issue of the remission of sins, and (3) to give the
truth to them who do not have it and walk in their sins, and (4) to guide them into the way of peace and
righteousness. These are the things that the prophet declares, next are the guidelines to testing the prophets.
First, a true prophet’s message must be in harmony with the Word of God and the law of God: “To the law
and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, [it is] because [there is] no light in them.” Isaiah 8:20.
Therefore, if a so-called prophet speaks anything contrary to the Law of God and/or anything contrary to what we
find in the Bible, i.e., anything contrary to the Word of God, they are not a true prophet of the Most High. To this we
might also add that a true prophet will reflect the Law of God in his or her life and testify of God’s commandments
and for those things which are written in His book. We find various examples of this principle stated throughout

“…(where) the law [is] no [more]; her prophets also find no vision from the LORD.” (Parentheses added)
Lamentations 2:9.

127 See Numbers 12:7-8 and John 12:49

P a g e | 73

“Where [there is] no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy [is] he.” Proverbs

“Hear ye, and testify in the house of Jacob, saith the Lord God, the God of hosts, that in the day that I shall visit
the transgressions of Israel upon him I will also visit the altars of Bethel: and the horns of the altar shall be
cut off, and fall to the ground.” Amos 3:13.

“Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.” John

Each above passage illustrates the point that each prophet will speak against the people for their increasing
transgressions and that the Law of God must be upheld and followed both in word and deed, or otherwise true
prophets will no more rise up.
There is one example, though, that comes immediately to mind, King David, who at one point did gravely
cross the Law of God and later repented of his wrong-doings. Thus, it can be gather that, if a prophet does
transgress the law of God (which all have),128 genuine repentance will be a must.
Second, a true prophet’s predictions must come to pass: “When a prophet speaketh in the name of the
LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that [is] the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, [but] the
prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.” Deuteronomy 18:22. The catch is this:
prophecy is conditional. A false prophet can predict things that come to pass, but if he or she is not aligned with the
rest of the criterion that prophet cannot be from God. What is even more is that a true prophet can speak something
that does not come to pass and still be a true prophet. In the Book of Jonah, Jonah was commanded to go and testify
to the Ninevites about their sin and coming judgment from God. He went into Nineveh crying that Nineveh would
be overthrown and destroyed. Yet this did not come to pass because the Ninevites repented in sackcloth and ashes
and pleaded with the Lord not to destroy them, and because of this the Ninevites were spared their impending
Third, a true prophet edifies God’s people: “But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men [to] edification,
and exhortation, and comfort. …he that prophesieth edifieth the church.” 1 Corinthians 14:3-4. An example that
illustrates this principle is when Saul, in the Book of Acts, became Paul. Paul, upon his conversion, was first sent to
the church to find out what his tasks were to be; he was not sent to tell the church what to do; that is, he was
edified by the church. According to the Bible, Jesus, to stabilize His church, “gave gifts unto men. …he gave some,
apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the
saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the
faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of
Christ.” Ephesians 4:8 and 11-13. Also, “God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets,
thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.” 1
Corinthians 12:28. Why? “That we [henceforth] be no more children tossed to and fro, and carried about with
every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, [and] cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive….”
Ephesians 4:14.
Fourth, a true prophet will also exalt Christ as the Son of God: “Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the
Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.” 1 John 4:15. Even Jesus was not excluded from this criterion:
“And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he (Jesus) expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things
concerning himself.” (Parentheses added) Luke 24:7.

128 See Romans 3:23

P a g e | 74

Fifth, a true prophet speaks with authority: “For he (Jesus) taught them as [one] having authority, and not
as the scribes.” (Parentheses added) Matthew 7:29. Elijah and John the Baptist are both two other examples who
spoke with authority.
Sixth, according to Matthew 7:20, a true prophet will bear good fruit: “Wherefore by their fruits ye shall
know them.”
Seventh, a true prophet will exhibit definite physical signs when in vision. Firstly, the prophet’s eyes are
open during vision: “He hath said, which heard the words of God, which saw the vision of the Almighty, falling
[into a trance], but having his eyes open….” This above verse is Numbers 24:4. Take notice, though, that “into a
trance” is not present in the original manuscripts that the King James Version was translated from; the italics (read
that, words in the brackets ‘[ ]’) are actually an English interpretation of clarifying what is happening or appears to
be happening in the verse. The New King James Version (for once) actually renders a more accurate translation of
the same verse: “The utterance of him who hears the words of God, who sees the vision of the Almighty, who falls
down, with eyes wide open.” The image described, then, is the prophet falling when in vision with his or her eyes
wide open.
Secondly, the prophet first falls down without strength, is then strengthened, but lastly has no breath, even
while speaking, while he or she is in vision. In Daniel chapter ten, Daniel first tells us that he alone saw a vision,
and then proceeds to tell us the sequence of its happenings:

“And I, Daniel, alone saw the vision: …I was left alone, and saw this great vision, and there remained no
strength in me…I retained no strength. …when I heard the voice of his words, then was I in a deep sleep on
my face, and my face toward the ground.” Daniel 10:7-9.

“And, behold, [one] like the similitude of the sons of men touched my lips: then I opened my mouth, and
spake and said unto him that stood before me, O my lord, by reason of the vision my sorrows are turned upon
me, and I retain no strength. For how can the servant of this my lord talk with this my lord? for as for me,
straightway there remained no strength in me, neither was there breath left in me.” Daniel 10:16-17.

“Then there came again and touched me [one] like the appearance of a man, and he strengthened me,
and said, O man greatly beloved, fear not: peace [be] unto thee, be strong, yea, be strong. And when he had
spoken unto me, I was strengthened, and said, Let my lord speak; for thou hast strengthened me.” Daniel

To recap, the sequence is as follows: (1) the prophet falls down weak without any strength, (2) he or she is
raised up and strengthened by the power of God, (3) he or she has their eyes wide open during vision when in
vision, and (4) the prophet does not breathe during vision, but is yet able to speak. All the other criteria are
manageable even for a false prophet; but, this last one, this… this is a tough act to follow.
The question is, did or did not Ellen White fit the Biblical criteria? Before answering this question, let me
provide you with a few other details.
There are four classifications of prophets in the Bible: there are (1) prophets who themselves actually
wrote some of the Bible, prophets who (2) are in the Bible but did not actually write a part, prophets who (3) gave
oral testimonies not preserved in the Bible129, and those prophets who (4) wrote books not preserved in the
Besides men, God also used women as His prophets. The following women were used as prophetesses:
Miriam (Exodus 15:20-21), Deborah (Judges 4:4), Huldah (2 Kings 22:14), Isaiah’s wife (Isaiah 8:3), and Anna
(Luke 2:6).

See Numbers 11:24-25, 1 Samuel 10:5-6 and 10, and Acts 21:9.
See 1 Chronicles 29:29 (Nathan and Gad), 2 Chronicles 20:34 (Jehu), and Jude 14 (Enoch).
P a g e | 75

Lastly, there are two prophecies we should deal with before going further on. The first one is found in Joel
2:28-31 which says that “it shall come to pass afterward, [that] I (the Lord) will pour out my spirit upon all flesh;
and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men
shall see visions: and also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my
spirit. And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke. The sun
shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of the LORD come.”
(Parentheses added) The book of Joel is full of hardly anything but symbolism, so what ‘afterward’ is God referring
to here?
The part that refers to ‘the day of the LORD’ is always in reference to the day of the executive judgment;
every single place that the exact phrase ‘day of the Lord’ appears (in the KJV) it refers to the executive judgment
which we know Christ will be judge of.131 So, in other words, this ‘afterward’ time period, because it concerns us
with a time period stretching up until the Day of Judgment, should deal with sometime after the first coming of
Christ because we know that Christ will be the Great Judge on the Day of Judgment, and we know that the Day of
Judgment is to come only after Christ’s first coming; so the ‘afterward’ time period must of all necessity be speaking
of a time after Jesus’ first coming.
In addition, Mark 13:24-25 thrice confirms that these signs are speaking of the time after the coming of
Christ for Christ spoke the words found in Mark 13 while here during His first coming. We read that “in those
days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars of
heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.” In Revelation 6:12-13 we also get the
same parallels making a fourth confirmation: “And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a
great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; and the stars
of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.” All
this gives us some additional prophetic clues to the length of time that this pouring out of God’s Spirit shoudl at the
least last until.
We find, then, that this outpouring will at least last until the breaking of the sixth seal because Revelation 6
lets us know that the celestial signs occur only after the unsealing of the sixth seal. Now it becomes a task of finding
out the roundabout date that the sixth seal was opened. If we follow the template in Mark 13:24-25, which tells us
exactly which ‘afterward’ Joel 2 is talking about, the unsealing of the sixth seal should be at a roundabout date
following a tribulation period which occurs after the first coming of Jesus.
From the years 538 A.D. to 1798 A.D., following the Justinian Decree onward, the Papacy reigned supreme.
During this time she massacred millions upon millions of Christians. As I’ll show as we continue, the deadly wound
to the Beast which occurred in 1798 marked the roundabout time that the sixth seal was to be opened. So in other
words, this pouring out of God’s Spirit will last at the very least until around 1798, and until all the celestial signs
are fulfilled in the above verses of Joel, Mark, and Revelation. The question is, did these events already take place,
and if yes, from what time to what time?
Observe the following chain of events:

“Lisbon, Portugal, was struck by a great earthquake on 1 November 1755. ...The Lisbon earthquake struck in
mid-morning.... Only the 1906 San Francisco earthquake is comparable in its economic and [physical] impact.
...Tsunamis struck countries as far away as England and were detected across the Atlantic Ocean. The Lisbon
earthquake destroyed a major cultural center of Europe, dealing a severe blow to the nation of Portugal.
...Today the quake is thought to have had a magnitude well above 8.5 and an epicenter some 200 kilometers
off the southwestern corner of Portugal.”132

See Revelation 6:16-17
P a g e | 76

“Though commonly known as the earthquake of Lisbon, it extended to the greater part of Europe, Africa, and
America. It was felt in Greenland, in the West Indies, in the island of Madeira, in Norway and Sweden, Great
Britain and Ireland. It pervaded an extent of not less than four million square miles. In Africa the shock was
almost as severe as in Europe. A great part of Algiers was destroyed; and a short distance from Morocco, a
village containing eight or ten thousand inhabitants was swallowed up. A vast wave swept over the coast of
Spain and Africa, engulfing cities, and causing great destruction.” 133

“The dark day of New England, so familiar to old and young, came May 19, 1780.... Near eleven o’clock [a.m.],
it began to grow dark, as if night were coming. Men ceased their work; the lowing cattle came to the barns,
the bleating sheep huddled by the fences, the wild birds screamed and flew to their nests, the fowls went into
their roosts.... At night it was so inky dark that a person could not see his hand when held up, nor even a
white sheet of paper....”134

“During the whole time, a sickly melancholy gloom overcast the face of nature:--Nor was the darkness of the
night less uncommon and terrifying than that of the day; notwithstanding there was almost a full moon, no
object was discernible, but the help of some artificial light, which, when seen from the neighboring houses
and other places at a distance, appeared thro’ a kind of Egyptian darkness, which seem impervious to the

“The 19th of May, 1780, was a remarkable dark day. ...A very general opinion prevailed, that the day of
judgment was at hand.”136

After the darkness began to fade, Milo Bostick, in Stone’s History of Massachusetts, says that “The Moon which was
at its full, had the appearance of blood.” On November 13, 1833 the stars fell from heaven. Though the times
vary, we have the following documentation. One writer says that “For nearly four hours the sky was literally

“On the night of November 12-13, 1833, a tempest of falling stars broke over the Earth.... The sky was
scored in every direction with shining tracks and illuminated with majestic fireballs. At Boston, the frequency
of meteors was estimated to be about half that of flakes of snow in an average snowstorm. Their
numbers...were quite beyond counting; but as it waned, a reckoning was attempted, from which it was
computed, on the basis of that much-diminished rate, that 240,000 must have been visible during the nine
hours they continued to fall.”138

“...on November 13, 1833, the greatest meteoric shower on record occurred. It lasted for 4 to 6 hours over
most of North America.”139

We notice, then, that all the events as predicted in the Bible happen exactly on cue with prophecy, and exactly in
the order predicted.
Is all this mere chance? We can see, then, that the pouring out of God’s Spirit should have lasted at the very
least up until around the time period of 1833. Is it therefore probable that we can expect a prophet of God to arise

Boston Public Library, History of Weare, New Hampshire, 1735-1888
The Independent Chronicle (Boston), June 8, 1780, p. 4
136 nd
Connecticut Historical Collections, compiled by John Warner Barber (2 ed.; New Haven: Durrie & Peck and J.W. Barber), 1836, p.
Peter A. Millman, “The Falling of the Stars”, The Telescope 7, (May-June, 1940)
Agnes Clerke, Victorian Astronomy Writer (
P a g e | 77

around this time period as His Spirit was still being poured out? Yes, it is indeed probable. The question is did it
Some people would like to use the Book of Acts to support the claim that the outpouring of God’s Spirit
could not have lasted up until such a late date, for it was apparently solely fulfilled in the Book of Acts at the day of
Pentecost when the disciples were speaking in tongues: “But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And
it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your
daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: and on my
servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy....” Acts 2:16-
18. Yes, this may appear that this was the only time that that prophecy was fulfilled. However, Jesus’ ministry and
ascension into heaven simply further marked the time of the end when such an outpouring would begin; for Jesus
Himself also said that “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand”, thereby confirming that His
ministry would bring in the time of the end.
Regardless, notice that the Book of Acts continues to record: “And I will shew wonders in heaven above,
and signs in the earth beneath; blood and fire, and vapour of smoke: the sun shall be turned into darkness, and
the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come....” Acts 2:19-20. This connects this
same time period with that of the celestial signs that we just went over. And nowhere in the Bible are these signs
recorded, nor in history, in the consecutive orders of events as they’re given, neither with such great magnitude, until
the time periods just given above. Moreover, if they had been fulfilled, it would be pointless for the celestial warnings
to be given in the Book of Revelation. Therefore, yes, this time in the Book of Acts did present an example of the
beginnings of the outpouring of God’s Spirit; however, it clearly didn’t end there.
Something also was to happen with the light of the Gospel at around this same time period. Looking at the
fourth church in Revelation 2, we find a spiritually dead church. This same church corresponds with the fourth
seal and pale horse of Revelation 6 which is named Death and has Hell following behind him. This is a time period
during the 1,260 years of Papal supremacy when the Word of God would be dead amongst the people. It is a time
when the church was to persecute and murder millions of Bible-believing, and Bible-alone standing Christians. It is
during this time of the Middle Ages that the Bible was outlawed. So God had to do something to bring the people of
God out of their deep compromise with paganism and to supply food to supplant the famine and hunger for the
It was at this time that the fifth seal was opened and the fifth church brought to the forefront, which history
now attests to and knows as the Reformation. Jesus says of this church, “I know thy works, that thou hast a name
that thou livest, and art dead. Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die: for
I have not found thy works perfect before God. Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold
fast, and repent.” Revelation 3:1-3. What this group of people did, what the Reformation did, was strengthen Biblical
teachings that were ready to die. In 1370 Wycliff uplifted the authority of the Bible, 1400 Huss cried that man was
to be obedient to God and not man, 1517 Luther preached the salvation by grace message, Calvin in 1555 declared
man was to be accountable only to God and was given the right to exercise freedom of conscience, 1650 Williams
rediscovered baptism by immersion and in 1705 Wesley thrust the Lordship of Jesus Christ to the heights of
heaven. Thus the Truth of Scripture was nearly restored.
But there was an issue that we discussed already that sounded the death knell for the Reformation. Jesus
made it a point to tell this church that “I have not found thy works perfect before God.” Do you know what He
meant? Well, what did the Council of Trent fail on, what principle? What teaching? The whole controversy
surrounding the Council was tradition versus sola Scriptura—tradition verses the Bible alone. We saw that the one
teaching that destroyed the Reformation was the Sabbath issue. Because the Reformers did not keep the Sabbath,
the council called them out and condemned them as nothing more than loudmouthed rebellions that did not even
follow their own precepts by keeping the Sunday over the seventh day. Hence Jesus’ words, “I have not found thy
P a g e | 78

works perfect before God.” They were not keeping the Sabbath day, nor was the importance of the Sabbath and
the Law restored.
Nevertheless, it’s when we get to the sixth seal and the sixth church that the whole Truth of Scripture was
to be restored; by no means was God going to revive His truths on half a leg. We read: “These things saith he that is
holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no
man openeth; I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou
hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name.” Revelation 3:7-8. We find that a
door is opening and a door is closing.
In 1793 a world mission began. God opened the door for evangelism which began to spread to India, China,
and Africa. The British Bible Society was founded (1804) and so was the American Bible Society (1816). As for the
door that was shutting around this same time period, the door that was shut was the door in the heavenly
sanctuary to the Most Holy chamber from the Holy. But that is another issue that is simply worth noting for
interest’s sake.
We see that this is also a small group of people; for it is a group with “little strength.” This is also a group
which restores the Truth of the Bible to the world; for it is a group that has kept Jesus’ word, that is, His
commandments and teachings. This group was to be a group that restored the Apostolic Church’s teachings; for as
even Jesus commanded them to “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you:
and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world,” so this people would replace the Truth back upon
its proper pedestal.
But you know what else, Reader? This also connects us with the Remnant Church found in Revelation 12
and draws us to the second prophecy for us to consider. We read: “And the dragon was wroth with the woman,
and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the
testimony of Jesus Christ.” Revelation 12:17. First let us back up in the stream of things so we can draw some
connections with this passage.
Revelation 12:13 reads, “And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the
woman which brought forth the man [child].” In Revelation 12:5 we get a clue to who this man child is. We read:
“And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto
God, and [to] his throne.” Who was “caught up into heaven”, back “to his throne”? Who is “to rule all nations with a
rod of iron”? Obviously this is none other than Jesus. So let’s break this symbolism down piece by piece.
A woman in the Bible is a church (Jeremiah 6:2 and Revelation 19:7-8). The church of Christ is His body
(Colossians 1:24). The people in Christ make up the body of Christ, that is, His church (1 Corinthians 12:12-27). So
in other words, this is the meaning of Revelation 12:5 and 12:13: out of God’s people would come the Messiah.
We know that the Dragon is Satan (Revelation 12:9). We also know that the system which Satan gives
power to for the persecuting of God’s people is the Beast (Revelation 13:3), which has been identified as the
Papacy. So when we read in Revelation 12:13 about the Dragon persecuting the woman, it really is describing the
Papacy persecuting God’s people.
We also find a link to the previous prophecies of the 4th and 5th church and seal in verse 14. We read: “And
to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where
she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time (3 ½ years), from the face of the serpent.” (Parentheses
In Exodus 19:4 we get the symbolism of eagle’s wings. Eagle’s wings represent the guidance and direction
of God. The wilderness is symbolic for obscurity and seclusion. We find the key to the wilderness symbolism in the
whole of Exodus through Deuteronomy when the Israelites were separated from the nations and brought into the
obscurity and seclusion of the wilderness to be consecrated as a specific chosen people of God. The times, time and
P a g e | 79

half a time (3 ½ years) is our major clue which connects us with the same time period of Papal rule from 538 A.D.
to 1798 A.D. The serpent we also know is Satan (Revelation 12:9). In simple terms: God’s people were led by the
Spirit of God into a place of obscurity and seclusion, separated from the other nations, to be a peculiar people under
God during Papal supremacy. Simple.
Revelation 12:15 reads, “And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he
might cause her to be carried away of the flood.” In prophecy, waters are most often representative of nations and
heavily populated areas (Revelation 17:15). Thus: Satan, through the Papacy, would use the nations to persecute
God’s people in the wilderness in an attempt to rid them from the earth.
Revelation 12:16 reads, “And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed
up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.” The earth is opposite of the water; so, if the waters represent
heavily populated areas, the earth represents little to non-populated areas. In this context, the earth is the
wilderness to where the people fled. So in other words: in the obscurity and seclusion of which the people were
enjoined, they were protected enough to preserve themselves through the Papal persecutions.
Out of this time period the Reformation sprang up. Hence, we are simply tracing over the same period of
time that we just previous went over with the churches and seals. Which brings us back to Revelation 12:17...
The sixth church is to restore the whole Truth of Scripture which the Reformation did not complete. This
Remnant Church of Revelation 12:17 is the same group of people. They keep the word of Jesus, namely, His
commandments and teachings, and have the testimony of Jesus. What is the testimony of Jesus? Revelation 19:10
gives us the answer: “...the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” Now, at this point in time, that the truths
of God have been put back up into the face of the world, and the Law was to be restored, doesn’t that mean there is a
chance of prophets again arising? Yes, it does; because, as Lamentations 2:9 tells us, when people abide in the Law
and the Law abides in them, visions should necessarily cease no longer. This links us back to the outpouring time
period of around 1833 because it is during this same roundabout time period that the truths were to be powerfully
revived. And according to Revelation 12:17, this Remnant Church should be restored with what? What is it that
they have? They have the testimony of Jesus. So in other words, this Remnant Church is to be restored with the
spirit of prophecy.
Now please recall the first angel’s message. The first angel, or messenger, was to proclaim to the world to
fear God, to give Him glory and to worship Him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of
waters, or, in other words, to return to keeping the Sabbath. This first angel goes hand in hand with the sixth church,
or Remnant Church, that was to emerge around the time of the celestial signs of the sixth seal. This church keeps
Jesus’ word because they are the ones which proclaim the everlasting gospel found in the first angel’s message.
And if you might recall from earlier on, the 7th Day Adventists are that group of people. Therefore, the 7th Day
Adventist church is the sixth church that would be responsible for the final restoring of the truth which would
thereby restore the church with the testimony of Jesus, which is the spirit of prophecy. Which now finally brings us
back to Ellen White...
Again, we read in Lamentations 2:9 that when the Law of God is removed from the minds, hearts and
actions of men prophets cease to arise. What happened during the Papal supremacy (not to mention what is
happening now with the restoration of Papal supremacy)? Daniel said that this power would “think to change
times and laws.” So what does that do with the Law of God? It removes it from the hearts and the minds of the
people. What therefore happened as a result? Visions stopped; no longer did prophets rise. However, again I ask
you to consider: doesn’t it make sense that we can expect that visions would begin again once the second angel’s
message had been proclaimed, and confusion regarding the Scriptures had been clarified, and the everlasting
gospel restored? Yes, we can expect this, and we have the prophecies just covered to support it. Nor is this
expectation out of line with the prophetic timeline; for even up until when the 7th Day Adventists movement began
the outpouring of God’s Spirit should still be applicable to the time, regardless of a prolonged period of where
P a g e | 80

visions had ceased. Therefore, it is not at all unreasonable to suspect that once the Law would be brought back to its
full stature the world could expect prophets again.
As Ellen White herself penned, “…the fact that God has revealed His will to men through His Word, has not
rendered needless the continued presence and guiding of the Holy Spirit. On the contrary, the Spirit was
promised by our Saviour to open the Word to His servants, to illuminate and apply its teachings.”140 Simply
because the Word is our sole standard of which all other writings and beliefs must be judged and to which they
must be subject does not mean that God would allow the world to second guess what all of His Word meant amidst
the confusion that was pervasive in the Christian world before the proclamation of the first and second angels’
Ellen White continues saying, “The Spirit was not given—nor can it ever be bestowed—to supersede
the Bible; for the Scriptures explicitly state that the Word of God is the standard by which all teaching and
experience must be tested. …Great reproach has been cast upon the work of the Holy Spirit, by the errors of a class
that, claiming its enlightenment, profess to have no further need of guidance from the Word of God. They are
governed by impressions which they regard as the voice of God in the soul. But the spirit that controls them is not
the Spirit of God. …Since the ministry of the Holy Spirit is of vital importance to the church of Christ, it is one of the
devices of Satan, through the errors of extremists and fanatics to cast contempt upon the work of the Spirit, and
cause the people of God to neglect this source of strength which our Lord himself has provided.”141 As Amos
even recorded long ago, “Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants
the prophets.” Before the final events that are to rock this planet occur, it’s not unreasonable to believe that God
would call people to be his mouthpiece for clearing up vital doctrinal and prophetic teachings.
In the early 1800’s when the Remnant Church was to be founded a whole host of prophets began to arise.
For example, in 1851 Helena Petrovna Blavatsky (1831-1891) was called into her ‘prophetic’ career. Her being a
hardcore Luciferian, who exalts Lucifer as the son of God, is by no means a true prophet.
Around 1870 Charles Russell (1873-1912), the man accredited with founding the Jehovah’s Witnesses,
claimed that he had prophetic visions. He demoted Jesus Christ, though, rather than exalt Him. Therefore he fails
the test.
Around 1825 Joseph Smith (1805-1844) began the Mormon movement. Until his death in 1844 he
continued service in the Mormon Church. Joseph Smith certainly did not live up to the Law and to the testimony
because he had a serious problem of contradicting the Scriptures from all angles.
Edgar Cayce (1877-1945) became a prominent so-called ‘prophet’ near the turn of the century. His
teachings basically taught that we are gods. He also taught reincarnation, which definitely does not live up to the
Word (Hebrews 9:27).
Pope Pius X (1835-1914) in like manner came onto the scenes around the same time, claiming to have
received visions. He exalted himself as the ‘Holy Father’ and claimed to be invested with supreme authority.
Obviously this supposedly replaces Jesus Christ as ruler.
Aleister Crowley (1875-1947) also became popular near the turn of the century as a modern spokesman of
the New Age Movement. He, too, being a hardcore Satanist, who advocated child sacrifice, certainly does not
qualify as a true prophet of God.
Then on the other side of the playing field a man by the name of William E. Foy (1818-1893) claimed to
have received visions in 1842. Needless to say, Foy shirked from the visions that were apparently of God because
he was a black man and feared the prejudices of the day.
Another man named Hazen (Hasen) Foss (1818-1893) also claimed to have received visions from God, but
determined not to accept his supposed calling because of the consequences that would come which were
apparently made known to him.

Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 25
Ibid. p. 25-26
P a g e | 81

Then finally a young girl named Ellen G. Harmon (1827-1915), later known as Ellen G. White, said that she,
too, had received visions. According to her own testimony she writes, “After I had the vision and God gave me light,
He bade me deliver it...but I shrank from it. I was young, and I thought they would not receive it from me.”142
Some time after her apparent commission, the same Hazen Foss came to hear her speak of a vision she had.
He is quoted as having stated, “The Lord gave me a message to bear to His people and I refused after being told the
consequences.... I heard you (Ellen) talk last night. I believe the visions are taken from me, and given to you. Do
not refuse to obey God, for it will be at the peril of your soul. I am a lost man, you are chosen of God: Be faithful in
doing your work, and the crown I might have had, you will receive.”143 (Parentheses added) An interesting story
this is. Could Mr. Foss have been correct?
To simply provide some background to her early years I have inserted the following:

“During her childhood Ellen assisted about the home and helped her father in the manufacture of hats. At the
age of nine, while returning home from school one afternoon, she was severely injured in the face by a stone
thrown by a classmate. For three weeks she was unconscious, and in the years that followed she suffered
greatly as a result of the serious injury to her nose. Ellen’s formal education ended abruptly [in the 3 rd grade],
and it seemed to all that the formerly promising little girl could not live long. In the year 1840, Ellen, with her
parents, attended a Methodist camp meeting at Buxton, Maine, and there, at the age of 12, she gave her heart
to God. On June 26, 1842, at her request she was baptized by immersion in Casco Bay, Portland. That same
day she was received as a member of the Methodist Church. ...In 1840 and 1842 Ellen, with other members of
the family, attended Adventist meetings in Portland, accepted the views presented by William Miller and his
associates, and confidently looked for Christ’s imminent return. ...The keenness of the Great Disappointment
that Jesus did not return to earth on October 22, 1844 was not lessened by Ellen’s youth.... When many were
wavering or were abandoning their Adventist experience, Ellen Harmon, one morning late in December,
joined four other women in family worship at the home of a fellow believer in South Portland. the power
of God rested on Ellen she witnessed in vision the travels of the Advent people to the city of God. (Early
Writings, pp. 13-20.) As the 17-year-old girl reluctantly and trembling related this vision to the Adventist
group...they accepted it as light from God.”144

One contention put against her is her educational background. Some individuals wonder if God would
really use somebody so physically weak and who only has three years of schooling to deliver a message. If God is
able to use a donkey (Numbers 22), I’m quite sure God can use a young 17-year-old girl who only had three years
of education. Paul recalls to our attention “how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many
noble, [are called]: but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen
the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and
things which are despised, hath God chosen, [yea,] and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: that
no flesh should glory in his presence.” 1 Corinthians 1:26-29. I actually find this an argument that works for Ellen
White, rather than against her; because, when a person reads her writing, they are certainly not apt to believe it
comes from the hand of one who only had three years of schooling. In fact, her writing appears as if it came from
the hand of a greatly learned scholar of years upon years of education.
One statistics about Mrs. White reads:

“From the time she was 17 years old until she died 70 years later, God gave her approximately 2,000 visions
and dreams.”145

Ellen G. White, Letter 3, 1847
Ellen G. White, Letter 37, 1890
P a g e | 82

The question we now have to answer is whether or not, amongst all the other supposed prophets of her time which
began to arise, these visions and dreams she received were from God. We already saw earlier that the Remnant
Church was to be consecrated with the spirit of prophecy. Do the writings of Ellen White measure up to the
testimony of Jesus?
Criteria one: to the Law and to the testimony. She writes in various places concerning the Law and
Scriptures thus:

“The Holy Scriptures are to be accepted as an authoritative, infallible revelation of His will. They are the
standard of character, the revealer of doctrines, and the test of experience.” 146

“Cling to your Bible as it reads and stop your criticism in regard to its validity and obey the word, and
not one of you will be lost.”147

“...present to them the prophecies; show them in the purity and binding claims of the law of God. Not
one jot or tittle of this law is to lose its force, but hold its binding claims upon every soul to the end of

“Cannot men see that to belittle the law of God is to dishonour Christ? Why did He come to this world to
suffer and die, if the law is not binding upon human beings?”149

“In the very time in which we live the Lord has called His people and has given them a message to bear. He
has called them to expose the wickedness of the man of sin who has made the Sunday law a distinctive power,
who has thought to change times and laws, and to oppress the people of God who stand firmly to honor Him
by keeping the only true Sabbath, the Sabbath of creation, as holy unto the Lord.” 150

“The Bible and the Bible alone is to be our creed, the sole bond of union.... God’s word is infallible ...lift
up the banner on which is inscribed the Bible, our rule of faith and discipline.”151

Clearly Mrs. White did speak according to the Law and to the testimony.
Walter Veith here considers what most people I’m sure would consider. He says, “If she wrote so much,
and the Bible is to be our only creed, then why bother to write so much? Isn’t the Bible enough? Well, aren’t the
people confusing the Bible today everywhere left, right and center? (Yes.) ...she cannot add anything [and]
she cannot subtract anything; she can just...put light upon what there is already present. That’s all that she
could do.”152 (Parentheses added) As Ellen White says herself, “The Lord designs to warn you, to reprove, to
counsel, through the testimonies given, and to impress your minds with the importance of the truth of His word.
The written testimonies are not to give new light, but to impress vividly upon the heart the truths of
inspiration already revealed. Man’s duty to God and to his fellow man has been distinctly specified in God’s
word, yet but few of you are obedient to the light given. Additional truth is not brought out; but God has
through the Testimonies simplified the great truths already given and in His own chosen way brought
them before the people to awaken and impress the mind with them, that all may be left without excuse.”153

Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, vol. 2, p. 48
Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 18
Ellen G. White, 15 Manuscript Release, p. 351
Ellen G. White, Selected Testimonies, 01-25-05
Ellen G. White, Testimonies to Ministers, p. 118 (1903) {Evangelism 233.2}
Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 416
Video: Walter Veith, God’s Guiding Gift
Ellen G. White, Testimonies, vol. 6 {665.1}
P a g e | 83

The point of her work is not to add or subtract anything, but to simply bring out the truths already present within
the Scriptures.
Did her predictions come to pass? There are a few that have certainly come to pass. For example, we read
that “In the world gigantic monopolies will be formed. Men will bind themselves together in unions that will wrap
them in the fold of the enemy. A few men will combine to grasp all the means to be obtained in certain lines of
business. Trade unions will be formed, and those who refuse to join these unions will be marked men.”154 Has this
come to pass? This was written between a hundred and a hundred and fifty years ago before nearly the likes of
such things were imaginable. Today there are hardly anything but gigantic monopolies. Trade unions have been
formed, and history is already reddened with blood from unions gone berserk.
Some feel that through one vision she had that she was able to foresee the two world wars. The following
was originally published in the Second Advent Review and Sabbath Herald of August 21, 1861. We read:

“I was shown the inhabitants of the earth in the utmost confusion. There was war, bloodshed, want,
privation, famine and pestilence, in the land; and as these things were without, God’s people began to press
together, and cast aside their little difficulties. Self-dignity no longer controlled them. Deep humility took its
place. Suffering, perplexity and privation, caused reason to resume its throne, and the passionate and
unreasonable man became sane, and acted without discretion and wisdom.

“My attention was then called from the scene. There seemed to be a little time of peace. Then the
inhabitants of the earth were again presented before me, and everything was in the utmost confusion
again. Strife, war and bloodshed, with famine and pestilence, raged everywhere. Other nations were
engaged in this confusion and war. War caused famine. Want and bloodshed caused pestilence.”155

Based specifically upon the parts in bold above, some people believe that WWI and WWII fulfilled this particular
There are many people involved in this scenario. A first world war seems to be described, then following
with a little time of peace, and proceeded by what seems to be described as another world war with even more
people involved. And as history records, there was a first world war (1914-1918), a second world war (1939-
1945), and a short time of peace between the two (1918-1939). At least 28 nations fought in the first, and at least
58 nations in the second world war. Famine is also made prominent in the visions, and we know based off of
historical testimony that famine was a great cause of death: “Civilian death from land battles,” says the
Encyclopedia Britannica, “aerial bombardment, political and racial executions, war-induced disease and famine,
and the sinking of ships probably exceeded battle casualties.”156
One of her predictions pertains to the Sunday. She writes that “The dignitaries of church and state will
unite to bribe, persuade, or compel all classes to honor the Sunday. The lack of divine authority will be supplied by
oppressive enactments. Political corruption is destroying love of justice and regard for truth; and even in free
America, rulers and legislators, in order to secure public favor, will yield to the popular demand for a law enforcing
Sunday observance. Liberty of conscience, which has cost so great a sacrifice, will no longer be respected. In
the soon-coming conflict we shall see exemplified the prophet’s words: “The dragon was wroth with the woman,
and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the
testimony of Jesus Christ.” Revelation 12:17.”157
Whether or not we are told the exact reasons for which people are doing what to push the Sunday
observance upon the people, it is of no controversy that it is indeed becoming an issue and the civil powers are

Ellen G. White, Manuscript Release, vol. 4, {75.1}
Ellen G. White, Testimonies for the Church, vol. 1, p. 286.
“The World Wars,” 1999 Encyclopedia Britannica CD
Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 592
P a g e | 84

starting to compel the classes of Europe to honor it. Though we don’t yet see fully the “oppressive enactments” for
not observing the Sunday, we already saw earlier that they are indeed planned. And though the manifestations
have not occurred openly in America, it can scarcely be doubted that rulers and legislators will “yield to the
popular demand for a law enforcing Sunday observance,” for the United States has already received the Beast on
numerous occasions. Ronald Regan appointed a political ambassador to the Vatican, Bill Clinton during his
presidential term accredited John Paul II with the fall of communism, and George W. Bush Jr. has stated that
America would do well in enforcing John Paul II’s teachings in America. In addition, Bill Clinton with both George
Bush Senior and Junior already paid homage to the Beast system at the time of John Paul II’s death by attending his
funeral. As for liberty of conscience, isn’t the second beast out of the earth already beginning to rid destroy this
prized foundation of America? Since 9/11, haven’t the people’s rights been stripped from them little by little?
Absolutely. So is it farfetched to go a step further and say that liberty of conscience will in time no longer be
respected? Not at all. Therefore, though this prophecy has not been completely fulfilled, certainly it is being
fulfilled and has already been fulfilled in a few ways.
Aside from political predictions, Ellen White also spoke out upon dietary problems. She wrote in numerous
places the following:

“...the time will soon come when there will be no safety in using eggs, milk, cream, or butter, because disease
in animals is increasing in proportion to the increase of wickedness among men. 158

“Soon butter will never be recommended, and after a time, milk will be entirely discarded, for disease in
animals is increasing in proportion to the increase of wickedness among men. The time will come when there
will be no safety in using eggs, milk, cream or butter.” 159

“If milk is used, it should be thoroughly sterilized; with this precaution, there is less danger of contradicting
disease from its use. Butter is less harmful when eaten on cold bread than when used in cooking; but, as a
rule, it is better to dispense with it altogether.”160

In the 1980’s there was butter frenzy in America to switch from butter to margarine. Eggs have become a
problematic food worldwide. I quote Walter Veith regarding this issue: “How could she know that when butter is
heated it forms free radicals which are carcinogenic, number one, and which cause a clogging of the arteries?
Nobody knew that in her day. This was way ahead of time. So [it’s] very simple, [if] you take butter and you do the
tests and you’ll find out what happens and you’ll see [that] this is correct.”161 (Italic emphasis his) In a time when
most of the medical world was unaware of the problems of these foods, Ellen White was able to see into the
deterioration of the animal creation, problems entailed with it, and a simple solution to it.
“Someone may attempt to explain this remarkable fact by saying: ‘Mrs. White simply borrowed her ideas
from others.’ But how would she know which ideas to borrow and which to reject out of the bewildering array of
theories and health teachings current in the nineteenth century?”162
There are a number of other writings that can be examined but this is what will be used to support the
claim that she did give prophecies that have come and are coming to pass and that she was ahead of her time in the
messages she gave.
Did she edify the people of God? Some don’t believe so. Based upon her own words this was her purpose:
“I said that I did not claim to be a prophetess. I have not stood before the people claiming this title, though many

Ellen G. White, Testimonies for the Church, vol. 7, p. 135
Ellen G. White, Manuscript Release, vol. 8, letter 14, 1901, p. 3
Ellen G. White, The Ministry of Healing, {302.1}
Video: Walter Veith, God’s Guiding Gift
Review and Herald, February 12, 1959
P a g e | 85

called me thus. I have been instructed to say, “I am God’s messenger, sent to bear a message of reproof to the
erring and of encouragement to the meek and lowly.” With pen and with voice I am to bear the messages given me.
The word given me is, “You are faithfully to reprove those who would mar the faith of the people of God. Write out
the things which I shall give you, that they may stand as a witness to the truth till the end of time.” 163 All of her
writing is certainly there for the edification and reproof of professing Christians; but whether her messages bear
the truth and are to be deemed as worthy and beneficial edification will have to be left up to the reader to read her
works and determine the answer for him or herself.
Did she exalt Christ as the Son of God? The whole book Desire of Ages exalts Jesus like no other work does.
The following sums up her awe of Christ quite nicely when she says that “The world’s Redeemer was treated as we
deserve to be treated, in order that we might be treated as he deserved to be treated. He came to our world and
took our sins upon his own divine soul, that we might receive his imputed righteousness. He was condemned for
our sins, in which he had no share, that we might be justified by his righteousness, in which we had no share. The
world’s Redeemer gave himself for us. Who was he?—The Majesty of heaven, pouring out his blood upon the altar
of justice for the sins of guilty man. We should know our relationship to Christ and his relationship to us.”164
Did she speak with authority? She wrote: “I am instructed to say to those who endeavor to tear down the
foundation that has made us Seventh-day Adventists: We are God’s commandment keeping people. For the past
fifty years every phase of heresy has been brought to bear upon us, to becloud our minds regarding the teaching of
the word.... He calls upon us to hold firmly with the grip of faith, to the fundamental principles that are based upon
unquestionable authority.”165 Yes, she was bold and spoke without leaning to the left or the right on doctrinal
Did she bear good fruit? To use the words of Walter Veith again, “wherever she went there are hospitals,
there are teaching institutions—everywhere the work has been built up.”166 It’s truthfully preposterous to believe
that she didn’t bear good fruit after one examines her life.
Now... the main crux of the matter: did Ellen White exhibit the physical signs of a true prophet? Walter
Veith gives us some background before we consider: “Ellen White went into visions publicly with thousands of
people and skeptics all around. And publicly, in front of all those people, God gave her visions. Later on in life,
when this was no longer necessary, most of her visions were in dreams; but when she started off, the visions were
public visions.”167 Again, it must be admitted before we continue into the testimonies available that it is a very
tough act to speak without breathing and to remain wide-eyed for more than a few minutes at a time. It is likewise
also very hard to exhibit superhuman strength simply on our own. Did she exhibit the signs?
We find the whole sequence of events as we found in Daniel 10 in the following:

“In passing into vision, she gives three enrapturing shouts of “Glory!” which echo and re-echo, the second, and
especially the third, fainter but more thrilling than the first, the voice resembling that of one quite a distance
from you, and just going out of hearing. For about four or five seconds she seems to drop down like a
person in a swoon, or one having lost his strength; she then seems to be instantly filled with
superhuman strength, sometimes rising at once to her feet and walking about the room [or wherever else
she happened to be]. There are frequent movements of the hands and arms, pointing to the right or left as her
head turns. All these movements are made in a most graceful manner. In whatever position the hand or
arm may be placed, it is impossible for anyone to move it. Her eyes are always open, but she does not

Review and Herald, 01-26-05
Ibid, 03-21-93
Ellen G. White, Manuscript Release, vol. 4, p. 246
Video: Walter Veith, God’s Guiding Gift
P a g e | 86

wink; her head is raised, and she is looking upward, not with a vacant stare, but with a pleasant

And again we read on further in an eyewitness account of June 12th, 1868:

“She walked back and forth and talked to us, and as she walked, she fell right down. She fell down gently.
She went down as if an angel’s hands were under her.... Sister White lay perfectly quiet and unconscious....
Her eyes were open, with a pleasant expression on her face. Nothing unnatural or unusual.... Brother White
said to these large men, “Take her hands apart. You have two hands to her one. Just pull her hands apart.”
So they tried. They pulled and pulled till some of us got anxious that they would hurt her.
“Brother White said, “Don’t be anxious; she is safe in God’s keeping, and you can pull until you are
perfectly satisfied.” They said, “We are satisfied now. We don’t need to pull anymore.” He said, “Take up
one finger at a time.” That was impossible. They could not do so much as move a finger. It seemed like
a block of granite. ...Brother White said to these men, “Now hold her.” I think they thought they could. They
grasped her by the wrists, but they could not retard the motion. It looked like any child could hold
her, but she went on just the same.
“...Now we must see if her eyelids will close.” There was a large Rochester [kerosene] lamp close by
on the stand. He removed the shade and put this light right in front of her eyes. We thought she would move
her eyes to protect them. She didn’t. She was perfectly unconscious...the eyelids did not close. ...”Now,”
Brother White said, “we must see if there is any breath in her body.” There didn’t seem to be any. Everything
looked all right, only there was no breath. Brother White said, “Now we will send out and get a mirror, and
we will test it.” So someone went to the next door and got a mirror, and it was held close to her face, but no
moisture gathered. So there was no breathing....”169

The medical profession was no stranger either to these visions:

“Two physicians came in, an old man and a young man. Brother White was anxious that they should examine
Sister White closely, which they did. A looking glass was brought, and one of them held it over her mouth
while she talked; but very soon they gave this up, and said, “She doesn’t breathe.” Then they closely
examined her sides as she spoke, to find some evidence of deep breathing, but they did not find it. As they
close this part of the examination, she arose to her feet, still in vision, holding a Bible high up, turning from
passage to passage, quoting correctly, although the eyes were looking upward and away from the Book.
“...After Mrs. White rose to her feet, as they have stated, quoting the texts of Scripture, Doctor Fleming
called for a lighted candle. He held this candle as near her lips as possible without burning, and in direct line
with her breath in case she breathed. There was not the slightest flicker of the blaze. The doctor then said,
with emphasis, “That settles it forever; there is no breath in her body.”170

A few more quotes from eyewitnesses will be sufficient for this point:

“Her eyes are always open, but she does not wink; her head is raised, and she is looking upward, not with a
vacant stare, but with a pleasant expression, only differing from the normal in that she appears to be looking
at some distant object.”171

Biography of Ellen G. White, vol. 1, p. 122
Biography of Ellen G. White, vol. 2, pp. 232-234
David Seeley, in Biography of Ellen G. White, vol. 1, p. 303
J. N. Loughborough, The Great Second Advent Movement, (Fort Worth, Tex.” Southern Publishing Association, 1905), p. 204
P a g e | 87

“[Her] eyes are always open, and seem to be gazing at some far-distant object, and are never fixed on any
person or thing in the room. They are always directed upward. They exhibit a pleasant expression. There is
no ghastly look or any resemblance of fainting.” 172

“...she does not breathe, yet her pulse beats regularly.”173

“[On] June 28, 1857, I saw Sister Ellen G. White in vision for the first time. I was an unbeliever in the visions;
but one circumstance among others that I might mention convinced me that her visions were of God. To
satisfy my mind as to whether she breathed or not, I first put my hand on her chest sufficiently long to know
that there was no more heaving of the lungs than there would have been had she been a corpse. I then took
my hand and placed it over her mouth, pinching her nostrils between my thumb and forefinger, so
that it was impossible for her to exhale or inhale air, even if she had desired to do so. I held her thus
with my hand about ten minutes, long enough for her to suffocate under ordinary
circumstances...[and] she was not in the least affected by the ordeal.”174

According to George Butler and others, visions could vary in time “from fifteen minutes to one hundred and
eighty”175 and possibly more176. Not only is this an incredible length of time to not blink, but also to not breathe.
Either all this testimony is a big pile of worthless garbage, fit for the dumpster; or, on the other hand, it is
true and the whole world of Ellen White criticizers will have to rethink their position.
The New York Independent on August 23, 1925 wrote that Ellen White “showed no spiritual pride and she
sought no filthy lucre. She lived the life and did the work of a worthy prophetess, the most admirable of the
American succession.” In a final summary I’d like to quote Walter Veith one last time: “You know what happened
to me? When I began to discover the truths of the Bible, I said, ‘The Bible and the Bible alone; I don’t need this
[Ellen White] stuff. I don’t need this. Give me the Bible—it does everything for me. I don’t need anything else.’
And then I got a phone call from a colleague of mine who had heard that I had become and Adventist. At first he
gave me blazes for having become an Adventist, and then he went to town on this woman. I had never read a word
of hers. I had become an Adventist on the Bible and the Bible alone—nothing to do with the spirit of prophecy.
...And he called her the most terrible things you can imagine. He was so irate about this. And the words that came
out of his mouth... I don’t even want to repeat them. And then he put the phone down, [and] I thought to myself,
‘Now, who is this, that someone should be so angry about these writings?’ So I went and found them and started
reading. And the more I read—and I couldn’t read without my Bible next to me, and my Bible started coming
alive. And for the first time I understood Jesus Christ and what He meant for me. And I could have found it in the
Bible, but I couldn’t find it in that depth that I found it explained in the spirit of prophecy. The Bible became alive.
She didn’t take me away from the Bible, she led me to the Bible.
“And so, this prophet, that is demeaned in the world, that is detested in the world—if anybody hears even
the name they will say the most horrendous things about this prophet, ‘liar,’ ‘a plagiarist,’ name it; test the
prophets. Now, isn’t it so that when the prophet is loved and revered in the world, that there’s probably a
problem with it [their message]? Why is [Luciferian] Alice A. Bailey honored at the level of the United Nations?
Why are her writings the basis of the World Core Curriculum? Why does this prophetess influence the
world so much, and this one [Ellen White] is so despised? Interesting question. So my answer to you is: if it is
from God, then accept it and read it, and if you find that it takes you away from the Bible, throw it aside and read

George Butler, quoted in The Great Second Advent Movement, p. 204
John Loughborough in The Great Second Advent Movement, p. 205
Daniel T. Bourdeau in The Great Second Advent Movement, p. 210
George I. Butler, “Visions and Prophecy,” The Advent Review and the Herald of the Sabbath, vol. 43 (June 9, 1874), p. 201
Ellen G. White, Spiritual Gifts, vol. 2, (Washington, D. C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1860), 1944, pp. 77-79
P a g e | 88

the Bible and the Bible alone. [Because] after all, she does say we have no other creed except the Bible. So, the
proof of the pudding is in the eating,
“But every single Biblical [criterion] is fulfilled by her. And I know of no other prophet of modern times
that qualifies. Not one.”177 (Italics his emphasis) ‘And all the people shall say, Amen.’
The other ‘prophets’ of the modern world are not like Mrs. White. The other professing prophets not only
have a bad tendency to minimize Christ, but to also exhibit signs that are not Biblical, such as breathing with their
eyes closed during a vision. No other person of our time simply meets all the requirements as did Ellen White. She
also went to the people, and prepared the way for the coming of the Lord by providing us with works that are to
help us discern the times that we are living in. In a number of her works she touched upon the issue of salvation
and what it is to be saved. Though some may disagree, she also gave light to the Christian world that was walking
in darkness. Lastly, she also guided the people into the way of righteousness which comes by obedience to God’s
commandments. Every criterion is met in this woman.
This is but a short exposé on Mrs. White, so I would suggest independent research into the EGW
controversy if you are still not satisfied with the evidence given to show that Mrs. White was a true prophet and
does qualify for the Remnant Church’s testimony of Jesus. I have provided three links that are available for the
defense of Ellen G. White at the bottom of this page.178 But, when it comes down to it, the proof is in the pudding.
So therefore, instead of criticizing her, and kicking against the rocks trying to put her to shame, we should simply pick
up her work for ourselves, with our Textus Receptus-based Bible by our side (typically KJV for the English-speaking
crowd), and critique her work ourselves.
I also believe that if there seems to be contradictory remarks in Mrs. White’s works with the Word that they
cannot simply be tossed aside and she be condemned as a false prophet, but must be studied intimately in light of
context to really take a stand; because it is very easy to pull things out of context like many critics as Dirk Anderson
and Elder Olson have done, to make the text appear to say something it’s not; and I believe that in Ellen White’s case
her work can be vindicated in the end every time.

“Hear me, O Judah, and ye inhabitants of Jerusalem; Believe in the LORD your God, so shall ye be established;
believe his prophets, so shall ye prosper.”

Video: Walter Veith, God’s Guiding Gift
178,, and