Changes

"Seventh-day" means that the observance of the original Sabbath, on "Saturday", still is a sacred obligation. Adventists argue that just as the other nine of the original [[Ten Commandments]] had not been revised, so also the injunction to "remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy" remained in full force. This theological point in the late 19th century turned the young group into a powerful force for religious liberty. Growing into its full stature in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, these Adventists opposed Sunday laws on every side. Many were arrested for working on Sunday. In fighting against the real threat of a legally established National Day of worship, these Sabbatarians had to fight for their liberty on a daily basis. Soon, they were fighting for religious liberty on a broader, less parochial basis. The fear that other Protestants would establish a Christian Sunday expanded into opposition to the establishment of a "Christian" identity for the otherwise pluralistic secular nation, and, thus, opposition to state-sanctioned school prayer. This led, naturally, to certain alliances with secularists in the American political spectrum who opposed state enforcement of any form of theistic religion.<ref> Douglas Morgan, ''Adventism and the American Republic: The Public Involvement of a Major Apocalyptic Movement.'' (2001)</ref>

"Seventh-day" means that the observance of the original Sabbath, on "Saturday", still is a sacred obligation. Adventists argue that just as the other nine of the original [[Ten Commandments]] had not been revised, so also the injunction to "remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy" remained in full force. This theological point in the late 19th century turned the young group into a powerful force for religious liberty. Growing into its full stature in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, these Adventists opposed Sunday laws on every side. Many were arrested for working on Sunday. In fighting against the real threat of a legally established National Day of worship, these Sabbatarians had to fight for their liberty on a daily basis. Soon, they were fighting for religious liberty on a broader, less parochial basis. The fear that other Protestants would establish a Christian Sunday expanded into opposition to the establishment of a "Christian" identity for the otherwise pluralistic secular nation, and, thus, opposition to state-sanctioned school prayer. This led, naturally, to certain alliances with secularists in the American political spectrum who opposed state enforcement of any form of theistic religion.<ref> Douglas Morgan, ''Adventism and the American Republic: The Public Involvement of a Major Apocalyptic Movement.'' (2001)</ref>

In holding to a perpetuation of the literal seventh day for rest and celebration, Seventh Day Adventists, as such, do not equate its observance with [[legalism]]. They argue, rather, that, though legalism is possible in regard to any law, God was not being a legalist for having given, commanded, and enforced the seventh-day rest upon His own nation any more than for having given, commanded, and enforced the primary law (to have no other Gods but God). They further argue that the seventh day, in being the first thing which God called sacred in the human realm, is comparable to Adam’s own first words toward woman, such that the focus of the human creature’s life is not toward law at all, but toward what human life was made to be at its most joyous times; and, that, only by such extended and deep violations of the truths of these joys is even God Himself (like his wisely initiatived, humble representatives) finally induced to impose commands and enforcements concerning keeping them. <ref>’’Matthew Henry’s Commentary on Daniel 3:16’’ [http://www.blueletterbible.org/commentaries/comm_view.cfm?AuthorID=4&contentID=1506&commInfo=5&topic=Daniel&ar=Dan_3_16]</ref>

In holding to a perpetuation of the literal seventh day for rest and celebration, Seventh Day Adventists, as such, do not equate its observance with [[legalism]]. They argue, rather, that, though legalism is possible in regard to any law, God was not being a legalist for having given, commanded, and enforced the seventh-day rest upon His own nation any more than for having given, commanded, and enforced the primary law (to have no other Gods but God). They further argue that the seventh day, in being the first thing which God called sacred in the human realm, is comparable to Adam’s own first words toward woman; such that the focus of the human creature’s life is not toward law at all, but toward what human life was made to be at its most joyous times; and, that, only by such extended and deep violations of the truths of these joys is even God Himself (like his wisely initiatived, humble representatives) finally induced to impose commands and enforcements concerning keeping them, <ref>’’Matthew Henry’s Commentary on Daniel 3:16’’ [http://www.blueletterbible.org/commentaries/comm_view.cfm?AuthorID=4&contentID=1506&commInfo=5&topic=Daniel&ar=Dan_3_16]</ref> lest the whole Earth be destroyed by the natural consequences of their violation <ref>''Revelation 11:18'' [[http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Rev&c=11&v=18&t=KJV#18]]>/ref>

==Further reading==

==Further reading==