In this article, George Weigel, who i presume to be a Catholic (and whom National Review writes as “a distinguished senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center”, speaks quite persuasively in favor of natural law. It is mind-boggling to see the title of his article: “Defending Religious Freedom in Full”, while knowing full well where this mindset is leading – to the world’s last dark age where everyone who doesn’t “fit in” is exterminated.

What am i talking about?

To give a very short background: Natural Law basically arose from the Catholic church. The ablest proponent of this theory is Thomas Aquinas, who is quoted: “… all human laws were to be judged by their conformity to the natural law. An unjust law is not a law, in the full sense of the word. It retains merely the ‘appearance’ of law insofar as it is duly constituted and enforced in the same way a just law is, but is itself a ‘perversion of law.’ At this point, the natural law was not only used to pass judgment on the moral worth of various laws, but also to determine what the law said in the first place”. So according to this, all human laws are subject to some super law which is enshrined in nature itself. There are various flavors of “Natural Law”: to see a short write-up in wikipedia, try this

I think all thinking SDAs will be able to see from this where this will lead.

Let me explain it very simply: There is a theory of law saying that there are universal “natural laws” which apply to all humans in all situations. Of course God’s Word is not the source of these laws, they just somehow “exist”. Since God created the natural world, proponents of this theory try to use God as their “source”, but of course, never seem to get around to actually quoting the 10 Commandments. They use very persuasive arguements like:
1. If a tree has a dead branch, you must prune it off to make the tree healthier.
2. If you have a barrel of apples, and there is one spoiled apple in it, you must throw it out to save the other apples.
3. Nature itself teaches you what is right and wrong, so abortion and homosexuality are wrong.

See, the logic sounds impeccable, and for most everything i’ve seen, the proponents of this theory DO go by the Biblical principles. But what about in the future when a “bad apple” wishes to keep the 7th day Sabbath? When all of Satan’s angels and Satan himself appearing as Jesus and the whole world are clamoring for a Sunday Law, how will “Natural Law” help those who wish to stay true to the words of the God who wrote “Keep the 7th day Sabbath” on tables of stone with his own finger? It won’t, of course. And this is what is so dangerous about it.

Where can we find the first prophecy in the Bible? — Genesis 2:17 Please notice that this prophecy is conditional.

The second prophecy in the Bible is in Genesis 3:14-15. This prophecy is NOT conditional.

Before God does something big, he always tells a prophet: Amos 3:7 Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.

Is it OK to consult the spirits to see what our future is?
1 Chronicles 10:13
So Saul died for his transgression which he committed against the LORD, even against the word of the LORD, which he kept not, and also for asking counsel of one that had a familiar spirit, to enquire of it;
and
Deuteronomy 18:10-13 shows us how much God hates this.

18:18-19 Explains how God raises up true prophets to help us. Notice whose words the prophet is speaking – is it his own words, or God’s words? This is very important.

18:20-22 Explains who is not a true prophet.

Why is it important to know if the words are from God or not?
Does God know everything? 1John 3:20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.
Satan has been alive for more than 6,000 years, and is much more intelligent than we are, but he doesn’t know all things. Many people who listen to fortune-tellers tho place themselves in Satan’s hands, and he can make circumstances happen that will make the words of the fortune-teller come true. This is to make more people believe in this lie.

In Jesus’ prophecy of the end of the world, in Matthew 24, what is the prophecy given by the greatest prophet – Jesus Christ himself? We all know about wars, famines, earthquakes, tsunamis etc. being signs of Christ’s coming, but what is the very first thing he mentions in this great prophecy? – Don’t be deceived. And he says in verse 11 that false prophets will deceive many.
Give personal testimony of how 20 years ago Sunday churches said Ellen White was a false prophet because there are no more prophets after Bible times, but now almost every church has its own prophet, and there are even prophetic webrings on the internet! Thus Satan gets people to doubt the validity of God’s true prophet – Ellen White. False prophets are also increasing inside the SDA church.

How will the true Jesus come? 1Thessalonians 4:13-18
Satan loves to counterfeit the true, and he will also try to imitate Christ’s return – 2Thessalonians 2:4, 2Corinthians 11:14
He will also have a false day of worship to imitate the true Sabbath, and a false Mark of the Beast to imitate the true Seal of God.

Some definitions are in order.
Strong’s concordance:
G25
ἀγαπάω = agapaō = ag-ap-ah’-o
Perhaps from ἄγαν agan (much; or compare [H5689]); to love (in a social or moral sense): – (be-) love (-ed). Compare G5368.

G26
ἀγάπη = agapē = ag-ah’-pay
From G25; love, that is, affection or benevolence; specifically (plural) a love feast: – (feast of) charity ([-ably]), dear, love.

Contrasted with “phileo”
G5368
φιλέω = phileō = fil-eh’-o
From G5384; to be a friend to (fond of [an individual or an object]), that is, have affection for (denoting personal attachment, as a matter of sentiment or feeling; while G25 is wider, embracing especially the judgment and the deliberate assent of the will as a matter of principle, duty and propriety: the two thus stand related very much as G2309 and G1014, or as G2372 and G3563 respectively; the former being chiefly of the heart and the latter of the head); specifically to kiss (as a mark of tenderness): – kiss, love.

There are at least 6 places in the Bible showing that “agape” can have meanings different than a “God-like” love. It can even mean a bad love!
agape:

Luke 6:32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.

Here we see that sinners “agape” each other.

Luke 11:43 Woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye love the uppermost seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets.

Jesus condemns the Pharisees for having “agape”!

John 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

Jesus condemns men for having “agape”!!

2Timothy 4:10 For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed unto Thessalonica; Crescens to Galatia, Titus unto Dalmatia.

Paul rebukes Demas for having “agape”.

2Peter 2:15 Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;

Peter shows that Balaam’s “agape” was bad.

1John 2:15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

If any man has this “agape”, the “agape” of the Father is not in him.

So we clearly see that there are times in the Bible when “agape” refers to a love of something definitely not of God. How about the “phileo” kind of love? Is it just a “human” love, or “brotherly” love as often stated? While it is true that “Philadelphia” means “brotherly love”, there is nothing inherent in the word to signify that it has the meaning of a somehow less than “Godly” type of love.
phileo:

John 5:20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

The Father “phileo”s the Son, showing conclusively that “phileo” can also refer to the love of God.

John 11:3 Therefore his sisters sent unto him, saying, Lord, behold, he whom thou lovest is sick.

Jesus had “phileo” for Lazarus.

John 16:27 For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God.

The Father “phileo”s us because we “phileo” the Father. Isn’t this perfect love?

John 20:2 Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.

Jesus “phileo”s John.

1Corinthians 16:22 If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.

If we don’t have “phileo” for Jesus, we are anathema!!!

Titus 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

God our Saviour has “phileo” towards us 🙂

Titus 3:15 All that are with me salute thee. Greet them that love us in the faith. Grace be with you all. Amen.

Paul says to his brethren in Christ to greet those who have “phileo” for him and his companions.

Revelation 3:19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

Jesus rebukes and chastens all those he “phileo”s.

With all this evidence, why do we still hear of “agape” being some kind of super-human “God-like” perfect love, and “phileo” being some kind of sub-perfect “human” love? I’m not sure, but guess that someone was studying to get a doctorate of divinity (above Jesus?!) and had to come up with something new and clever to catch the attention of those critiquing his thesis, and in reading something original into the text in John 21, got his doctorate, and the result is a confused remnant church today.

All thru the week we are to have the Sabbath in mind and be making preparation to keep it according to the commandment.

We should not make ourselves so weary that we cannot enjoy the Sabbath.

Friday is to be the special preparation day.

All should have special Sabbath clothes, to be worn on Sabbath in God’s house.

Before the setting of the sun on Friday, let all secular work be laid aside and all secular papers be put out of sight.

On the preparation day all differences between brethren, whether in the family or in the church, should be put away.

Before the setting of the sun, let the members of the family assemble to read God’s word, to sing, and to pray.

Let not the precious hours of the Sabbath be wasted in bed. On Sabbath morning, the family should be astir early.

The food should be more simple and less should be eaten, in order that the mind may be clear and vigorous to comprehend spiritual things.

While cooking upon the Sabbath should be avoided, it is not necessary to eat cold food.

Provide some kind of food that will be regarded as a treat, something the family do not have every day.

In pleasant weather let parents walk with their children in the fields and groves.

Thus parents can make the Sabbath as it should be, the most joyful day of the week.

*********************************************
db: 2RH
pt: Second Advent Review and Sabbath Herald
dt: 05-08-1883
at: Practical Thoughts for the Campmeetings
*********************************************
And let us not come to the campmeeting to break the Sabbath by cooking on that day. The instructions which God gave to Israel should not be disregarded: “Bake that which ye will bake today, and seethe that ye will seethe;” for “tomorrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord.” God meant what he said; and shall we who are presenting to the people the claims of the divine law, break that law ourselves, merely to please the appetite? God forbid! I know that frequently the Lord has withheld his blessing because we have failed to honor him by keeping the Sabbath according to the commandment. There has sometimes been nearly as much cooking done on the Sabbath as on other days. I would prefer to eat bread and water only, rather than to run any risk of breaking the fourth commandment. All needful preparation for the Sabbath should be made on Friday. On Sabbath morning, if the weather is cool, let hot gruel be provided. Further than this, all cooking should be avoided as a violation of the Sabbath.
…

enjoy the sabbath by not cooking on it 🙂Read More »

Deuteronomy 23:24 When thou comest into thy neighbour’s vineyard, then thou mayest eat grapes thy fill at thine own pleasure; but thou shalt not put any in thy vessel.
25 When thou comest into the standing corn of thy neighbour, then thou mayest pluck the ears with thine hand; but thou shalt not move a sickle unto thy neighbour’s standing corn.

*********************************************
db: 1ST
pt: The Signs of the Times
dt: 11-30-1876
at: The Sabbath
The grain was ready for the sickle when Jesus and his disciples passed through the corn fields on the Sabbath. The disciples were hungry, for their Master had extended his work of teaching and healing to a late hour, and they had been without food for a long time. They accordingly began to pluck the ears of corn and to eat, rubbing them in their hands, in accordance with the law of Moses, which provides that:
“When thou comest into the standing corn of thy neighbor, then thou mayest pluck the ears with thine hand; but thou shalt not move a sickle unto thy neighbor’s standing corn.”
***********************************************
db: 5RH
pt: Advent Review and Sabbath Herald
dt: 08-03-1897
at: Did Christ Break the Sabbath?
Jesus had lessons which he desired to give to his disciples, that when he was no longer with them, they might not be misled by the wily misrepresentations of the priests and rulers in regard to the correct observance of the Sabbath. He would remove from the Sabbath the traditions and exactions with which the priests and rulers had burdened it. In passing through a field of grain on the Sabbath day, he and his disciples, being hungry, began to pluck the heads of grain and to eat. “But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the Sabbath day.” To answer their accusation, he referred them to the action of David and others, saying: “Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungered, and they that were with him; how he entered into the house of God, and did eat the showbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests? Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the Sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless? But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.”

If excessive hunger excused David from violating even the holiness of the sanctuary, and made his act guiltless, how much more excusable was the simple act of the disciples in plucking grain and eating it upon the Sabbath day! Jesus would teach his disciples and his enemies that the service of God was first of all; and if fatigue and hunger attended the work, it was right to satisfy the wants of humanity even upon the Sabbath day.

Through Moses, Christ had declared: “And on the Sabbath day two lambs of the first year without spot, and two tenth deals of flour for a meat offering, mingled with oil, and the drink offering thereof: this is the burnt offering, of every Sabbath, beside the continual burnt offering, and his drink offering.” The work of the priests in connection with the sacrificial offerings was increased upon the Sabbath, yet in their holy work in the service of God, they did not violate the fourth commandment of the decalogue. Works of mercy and of necessity are no transgression of the law. God does not condemn these things. The act of mercy and necessity in passing through a grain field, of plucking the heads of wheat, of rubbing them in their hands, and of eating to satisfy their hunger, he declared to be in accordance with the law which he himself had proclaimed from Sinai. Thus he declared himself guiltless before scribes, rulers, and priests, before the heavenly universe, before fallen angels and fallen men.