Tatlong Tanong na Kayang Magpaguho sa Doktrinang “Pope ang Nagpalit ng Sabbath to Sunday” ng mga Sabadista!

QUESTION #1:

Sino EXACTLY na Pope between 538 AD and 1798 AD ang Nagpalit ng Sabbath to Sunday?

Ito ang pinaka-basic na tanong na dapat kayang sagutin kung totoo nga ang claim. Pero sa loob ng anim na taon kong pakikipag-usap sa mga SDA pastors, elders, debaters, at missionaries, isang pattern ang lumitaw: walang consistent na sagot. May nagsasabing si Constantine pero hindi siya Pope, at 321 AD pa siya, labas sa prophetic time frame. May nagsasabi si Sylvester I. Pero lahat ng ito ay labas sa 538–1798 window. May iba pang nagsasabi na “symbolic lang,” “collective papacy,” o “unknown Pope.” Pero kung totoong may naganap na Sabbath-to-Sunday change sa loob ng 1260 years, bakit walang makapagpangalan ng Pope na gumawa nito? Even official SDA sources like The Great Controversy, SDA Bible Commentary, and Handbook of SDA Theology wala ni isa ang nagbigay ng pangalan [1]. Si William Branson, sa In Defense of the Faith, umamin na wala siyang maibigay na decree, kundi puro “probabilities.”[2] Sa madaling salita: guesswork. Pero ang historical claim ay hindi dapat nakasandal sa haka-haka. Kung walang pangalan, walang Pope, walang decree paano naging totoo?

QUESTION #2:

Anong EXACT Month, Day, and Year between 538–1798 naganap ang Sabbath → Sunday Change?

Kung may tunay na “change,” dapat may dokumento. Dapat may date, decree, council record, o kahit anong official proclamation. Pero sa loob ng 1260 years, wala ni isa ang makapagbigay ng eksaktong petsa. Ang sagot ng karamihan? “Hindi namin alam.” Paano mo ipagtatanggol ang isang doktrina na walang event date? Parang sinasabi mong may nag-nakaw ng kotse mo noong Dark Ages pero hindi mo alam kung sino, kailan, o saan. That’s not evidence. That’s vibes. Kahit si Ellen White, na confident magsabing ang papacy raw ang nagbago ng Sabbath, hindi rin nagbigay ng date, decree, o documentation.[3] Kung prophetic fulfillment ang basehan, dapat may historical timestamp. Pero kung wala, paano mo masasabing nangyari nga?

QUESTION #3:

Anong Ecumenical Church Council, between 538–1798, ang Nagdeklara na: “From now on, Sunday is the official Christian day of worship”?

Ito ang ultimate test kasi documented ang church councils. Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus, Chalcedon lahat may records. Pero sa pagitan ng 538–1798, wala ni isang council ang nagdeklara na “Sunday is now the official Christian day of worship.” Zero. As in wala. Pero bakit ginagamit pa rin ng SDA ang Daniel 7:25? Dahil hindi naman talaga ito historical claim interpretation lang. At kung interpretation lang ang basehan, kahit sino puwedeng akusahan. Ang tawag dito: eisegesis, circular reasoning, conspiracy hermeneutics, at post hoc fallacy[4]. Hindi ito solid theology ito ay theological speculation na pinilit gawing history.

SDA History Itself Admits the Weakness

Sa 1919 Bible Conference Minutes, p. 88–90, 146–150, ang mga SDA leaders mismo admitted: wala silang solid historical proof para sa papal Sabbath change⁵. Ellen White herself, sa The Great Controversy, repeatedly asserts the papacy changed the Sabbath, pero hindi siya nagbigay ng documentation, dates, papal names, or conciliar records³

Additional Apologetic Debunks

Sunday worship existed BEFORE any Pope existed, documented in the Didache, Ignatius of Antioch, Justin Martyr, and Didascalia⁶.

Conclusion:

Kung hindi kayang sagutin ng SDA theology ang tatlong basic historical questions na ito…

1. Sino ang Pope?
2. Kailan ang exact date?
3. Anong council ang nagdeklara?

…May isang honest conclusion lang: kathang-isip lang ang claim na “Pope changed the Sabbath to Sunday.” At kung kathang-isip ang foundation, kathang-isip din ang buong Sunday Law / Mark of the Beast framework. Hindi mo puwedeng itayo ang prophecy sa pundasyong walang historical laman. Kung gusto mong maging honest sa Scripture at history, kailangan mong harapin ang uncomfortable truth: walang Sabbath-to-Sunday change na ginawa ng Pope sa loob ng 538–1798. Period.

---

Notes

1. Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1911); Francis D. Nichol, ed., Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 4 (Washington, DC: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1955); Handbook of Seventh-day Adventist Theology, ed. Raoul Dederen (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2000); General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, Seventh-day Adventists Believe: A Biblical Exposition of Fundamental Doctrines (Silver Spring, MD: Ministerial Association, 2005); William H. Branson, In Defense of the Faith (Washington, DC: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1933), 184–186.

2. Branson, In Defense of the Faith, 184–186.

3. White, The Great Controversy, multiple references throughout; no specific decree or date cited.

4. See Richard R. Rice, The Reign of God: An Introduction to Christian Theology from a Seventh-day Adventist Perspective, 2nd ed. (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1997), for discussion on interpretive fallacies, including eisegesis and circular reasoning.

5. 1919 Bible Conference Minutes, General Conference Archives, pp. 88–90, 146–150.

6. Didache, c. late 1st century; Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Magnesians, c. 110 AD; Justin Martyr, First Apology, c. 150 AD; Didascalia Apostolorum, 3rd century, all affirm Sunday worship before papal supremacy.

Former Adventists Philippines

“Freed by the Gospel. Firm in the Word.”

For more inquiries, contact us:

Email: formeradventist.ph@gmail.com

Website: formeradventistph.blogspot.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/formeradventistph