Now this is silly:

A church pastor called deputies to remove 16 congregants who refused to stop singing as he tried to begin his sermon, according to a sheriff's report. ...

One congregant who received a warning said the group was protesting Noel's leadership and alleged misuse of insurance money for damage to the church caused by Hurricane Charley.

Adventists often complain because Catholics count the ten commandments differently, and claim that we have changed things.

Here is an Adventist commentary that explains that how they are counted is not important.

So if we count it the (western) Catholic way, it's fine.  If we count it the (eastern) Catholic way, like Adventists, it's also fine.

The Catholic Church is often called the Whore of Babylon by those who oppose her.

But this cannot be, for several reasons.  She does not fit the picture painted in Revelation, even though some claim she does.

For instance, being clothed in purple and red ... these, believe it or not, are not the dominant colours of the dress of the Catholic clergy, as some claim.  White is.

"... we can go beyond a mere critique of the shallow anti-Catholic arguments like Hunt’s. There is irrefutable evidence in Revelation 17–18 (the chapters Fundamentalists love to quote against the Catholic Church) that proves that it is impossible for the Catholic Church to be the Whore."

A post entitled The Whore of Babylon on an Ezboard forum goes into more detail.

"But," says one, "do you wish us to understand, that if a man is to be saved he must use violence and vehement earnestness in order to obtain salvation?" I do, most assuredly; that is the doctrine of the text. "But," says one, "I thought it was all the work of God." So it is, from first to last. But when God has begun the work in the soul, the constant effect of God's work in us is to set us working; and where God's Spirit is really striving with us, we shall begin to strive too. This is just a test whereby we may distinguish the men who have received the Spirit of God, from those who have not received it. Those who have received the Spirit in verity and truth are violent men. They have a violent anxiety to be saved, and they violently strive that they may enter in at the strait gate. Well they know that seeking to enter in is not enough, for many shall seek to enter in but shall not be able, and therefore do they strive with might and main.

A Sermon
(No. 252)
Delivered on Sabbath Morning, May 15th, 1859, by the
REV. C.H. SPURGEON
at the Music Hall, Royal Surrey Gardens.

Often one sees Adventists quoting Catholic sources to show that the Catholic Church changed the Sabbath to Sunday.

Usually these quotes are either from sources that are not real sources of Catholic teaching  (e.g. newspapers) while others are taken out of context.

When the Catholic Church says that it instituted Sunday observance, they mean that the Apostles did so.  We believe that the Apostles were the first leaders of our Church, and therefore saying "the Catholic Church began Sunday observance" and "the Apostles began Sunday observance" is exactly the same thing - to us.

While Adventists might not agree that the Apostles did this, they should try to see it from our perspective.  We believe the Apostles did so, we believe the Apostles were the first leaders of the Catholic Church, and so logically, we can attribute Sunday observance to the Catholic Church.  The dropping of circumcision (Acts 15) and the writing of the New Testament would fall into the same category, to give examples of things you DO believe the Apostles did.

One way they quote out of context is by conveniently ignoring those parts that would not benefit their position.

An example of a quote often provided on such lists:

It pleased the church of God, that the religious celebration of the Sabbath day should be transferred to the 'the Lord's day.' - Catechism of the Council of Trent

In the translation I quote below, it reads "But the Church of God has thought it well to transfer the celebration and observance of the Sabbath to Sunday."

They leave out the following part, so that their argument that the later Catholic Church changed the Sabbath to Sunday remains credible:

The Jewish Sabbath Changed To Sunday By The Apostles
 
The Apostles therefore resolved to consecrate the first day of the week to the divine worship, and called it the Lord's day. St. John in the Apocalypse makes mention of the Lord's day; and the Apostle commands collections to be made on the first day of the week, that is, according to the interpretation of St. Chrysostom, on the Lord's day. From all this we learn that even then the Lord's day was kept holy in the Church.

That says it all.  The Catholic Church believes that the Apostles instituted Sunday observance, not some Pope, not Constantine, not some pagan.

Since there is an misleading and ongoing thread in various forums about the Catholic Church saying that the Bible is not true, it is appropriate to point out that Adventism, like Catholicism, takes some verses literally, and others it does not take literally.  There is no real difference between what each is saying; the difference lies in interpretation, not principle.

My position is that BOTH churches believe that the Bible is completely true, but not all to be taken literally.  This is an exercise to show that Adventism can be misrepresented in the way that Catholicism is being misrepresented.

"The Bible points to God as its author; yet it was written by human hands; and in the varied style of its different books it presents the characteristics of the several authors. The truths revealed are all 'given by inspiration of God' (2 Tim 3:16); yet they are all expressed in the words of men. The infinite One by His Holy Spirit has shed light into the minds and hearts of His servants." - Ellen White, Selected Messages, Washington, D. C., 1958, book 1, p. 21.

"Some look to us gravely and say, 'Don't you think there might have been some mistakes in the copists or in the translators?' This is all probable . . . [but] all the mistakes will not cause trouble to one soul, or cause any feet to stumble, that would not manufacture difficulties from the plainest revealed truth." - Ellen White, Selected Messages, Washington, D. C., 1958, book 1, p. 21.

"It is not the words of the Bible that are inspired, but the men that were inspired. Inspiration acts not on the man's words or his expressions but on the man himself, who, under the influence of the Holy Ghost, is imbued with thoughts." - Ellen White, Selected Messages, Washington, D. C., 1958, book 1, p. 16.

"The Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God's mode of thought and expression. God, as a writer, is not represented. Men will often say such an expression is not like God. But God has not put Himself in words, in logic, in rhetoric, on trial in the Bible. The writers of the Bible were God's penmen, not His pen." - Ellen White, Selected Messages, Washington, D. C., 1958, book 1, p. 21.

Determine the literary type the author is using. Some biblical material is composed of parables, proverbs, allegories, psalms, and apocalyptic prophecies. Since many biblical writers presented much of their material as poetry, it is helpful to use a version of the Bible that presents this material in poetic style, for passages employing imagery are not to be interpreted in the same manner as prose. - Methods of Bible Study, General Conference website

In the New Testament application of Old Testament prophecies, some literal names become spiritual: for example, Israel represents the church, Babylon apostate religion, etc. - Methods of Bible Study, General Conference website

The Scriptures were written for the practical purpose of revealing the will of God to the human family. However, in order not to misconstrue certain kinds of statements, it is important to recognize that they were addressed to peoples of Eastern cultures and expressed in their thought patterns. - Methods of Bible Study, General Conference website

A background knowledge of Near Eastern culture is indispensable for understanding such expressions. For example, Hebrew culture attributed responsibility to an individual for acts he did not commit but that he allowed to happen. Therefore the inspired writers of the Scriptures commonly credit God with do­ing actively that which in Western thought we would say He permits or does not prevent from happening, for example, the hardening of Pharaoh's heart. - Methods of Bible Study, General Conference website

The literal interpretation of Scripture should not be confused with a "literalistic" understanding of biblical texts. For example, some Christians believe that "chariots . . . with flaming torches" in Nahum 2:3 is a literal reference to motorcars. Other Christians understand Revelation 16:12 to mean that the Euphrates River will literally dry up, so that the kings of the East (Chinese and Japanese) and their armies can march across. Such interpretations fail to recognize that the authors of Scripture used symbols, similes, metaphors, and other figures of speech. - Principles of biblical interpretation, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists

"Why would Jesus introduce into a parable figurative illustrations that do not accurately represent truth as clearly set forth elsewhere in the Scriptures, and particularly in His own literal statements?" - Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary

After many such examples, Shea observes that this closely parallel use of "days" and "years" prepared the "ancient Semite, whose mind was steeped in this parallelistic type of thought," to intuitively associate the "days" of chronological prophecies with calendar years, especially in symbolic passages where literal days do not make logical sense. - Reference to William H. Shea, "Year-Day Principle, Part I," in Selected Studies in Prophetic Interpretation [Review and Herald, 1982],  67-69)

Jesus used fictional stories such as the rich man - George Knight, Ph. D., Professor of Church History at the SDA Theological Seminary, Adventist Review

The Bible was written in a different culture, in languages other than our own, and with literary imageries and symbols unfamiliar to most people today. The different translations compound the need for correct principles of Biblical interpretation. - Samuele Bacchiocchi, Endtime Issues #21

TRUE

Joh 3:16 KJV For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Mat 27:26 KJV Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.

Luk 24:7 KJV Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.

Luk 9:22 KJV Saying, The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day.

Joh 2:11 KJV This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him.

Joh 6:26 KJV Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.

Luk 2:7 KJV And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.

FALSE

Joh 6:53-54 KJV Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. (54) Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

Mat 5:29-30 KJV And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. (30) And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Isa 66:23 KJV And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.

Rev 21:23 KJV And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

1Co 4:14-16 KJV I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you. (15) For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel. (16) Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.

Mat 16:18 KJV And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Gen 17:9-13 KJV And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations. (10) This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. (11) And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you. (12) And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed. (13) He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.

I got this question by e-mail recently:

If Sabbath was not moral law then why does the Roman Catholic Church say it is a mortal sin to miss Sunday [the new Sabbath?] worship?  If we don't have to observe the 7th day then why would we have to observe the first day?  God never ever said that!  I'm so confused.

That's a very good question.
 
The Sabbath is not a moral law in that the timing of it has nothing moral about it - that is purely ceremonial, a remembrance of a certain event.  The moral aspect lies with our duty to God.  It is our duty to worship God, and this includes coming together as a community of believers.  (Obviously not always possible, but the New Testament does call for more than private faith without fellowship.)
 
The New Testament does not bind us to the Sabbath - in fact, Paul tells us that whatever day we keep, we do so for the glory of God.  He also says that the Sabbath is a shadow of what we now have the reality of in Christ.  The day, the timing, is not important to Christians.
 
God did not formally ordain Sunday as a day of worship - that was done by the early Christians, with the Holy Spirit working in them.  Its purpose was to give glory to God by celebrating the resurrection.

Unless there is a good reason not to, refusal to worship with fellow Christians must be seen in a negative light - it is not good for the Christian, and it is not good for the fellowship of the Church.  It is in that sense that not going to church is considered to be a sin.  That is the moral sense that existed when the Sabbath was in force as well, and while the timing on the 7th day is no longer of importance to Christians, the same moral requirement to worship God applies to Christians on Sundays, Easter, Christmas, and any day when the faithful gather together as a group to celebrate some aspect of Christ's life and work.  For those who still keep the 7th day, God will judge their hearts, not their calendar, and so the same moral principle would apply to them regarding the Sabbath.

Michael Scheifler has a “rebuttalâ€? on his website to something I wrote.  He claims that the pope who changed the Sabbath to Sunday was Pope Sylvester I.

In light of the teachings of Ellen White, and in light of history – as taught by real historians – this cannot be seen as more than a failed attempt to make the argument seem viable.  But it is not.

From Ellen White:

"The 1260 years of papal supremacy began with the establishment of the papacy in A. D. 538, and would therefore terminate on 1798." (Great Controversy, p266, 1888 edition.)

"This period, as stated in the preceding chapters, began with the establishment of the papacy, A. D. 538, and terminated in 1798. At that time, when the papacy was abolished and the pope was made captive by the French army, the papal power received its deadly wound, and the prediction was fulfilled, 'He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity." (Great Controversy, p439, 1888 edition)

If the papacy was established in 538 AD (EGWs words were changed in later editions to cover up that mistake) then Sylvester could not have been a pope.

Samuele Bacchiocchi writes on the origin of Sunday and Ellen White:

What is problematic is the impression many people get from EGW's statements that the Sabbath was observed "by all Christians . . . in the first centuries" until "the early part of the fourth century [when] the emperor Constantine issued a decree making Sunday a public holiday." (pp. 52-53) ... The earliest documents mentioning Sunday worship go back to Barnabas in 135 and Justin Martyr in 150. Thus, it is evident that Sunday worship was already established by the middle of the second century. This means that to be historically accurate the term "centuries" should be changed to the singular "century." - End Time Issues, #87

More from Ellen White:

"It was on behalf of Sunday that popery first asserted its arrogant claims; and its first resort to the power of the state was to compel the observance of Sunday as 'the Lord's Day.'" (Great Controversy, p447)

"Royal edicts, general councils, and church ordinances sustained by secular power were the steps by which the pagan festival [day of the Sun] attained its position of honor in the Christian world." (Great Controversy, p574)

And Dr Bacchiocchi's rebuttal:

Both statements just cited are inaccurate, because the secular power of the state did not influence or compel Christians to adopt Sunday during the second and third centuries. At that time the Roman emperors were rather hostile toward Christianity. They were more interested to suppress Christianity than to support church leaders in their promotion of Sunday worship. The bishop of Rome could not have resorted to "the power of the state to compel the observance of Sunday as 'the Lord's Day.'" Eventually, beginning with the fourth century, some Roman emperors actively supported the agenda of the church, but this was long after the establishment of Sunday observance. - End Time Issues, #87

Bacchiocchi is presenting a more realistic view of the history of Sunday observance than Ellen White did.  No educated historian takes the claim that the pope change the Sabbath seriously.  The fact is that Sunday was kept by Christians long before Sylvester, long before Constantine.

Ignatius of Antioch, 107 AD: let every friend of Christ keep the Lord's Day as a festival, the resurrection-day, the queen and chief of all the days of the week.
- Epistle to the Magnesians, chp 9. Ante-Nicene Fathers , vol. 1, pg. 62-63.

The Epistle of Barnabas, 70-120 AD: Wherefore we Christians keep the eighth day for joy, on which also Jesus arose from the dead and when he appeared ascended into heaven.
- The Epistle of Barnabas, section 15, 100 AD, Ante-Nicene Fathers , vol. 1, pg. 147

Justin Martyr, 150 AD: But Sunday is the day on which we hold our common assembly, because it is the first day of the week and Jesus our saviour on the same day rose from the dead.
- First apology of Justin, Ch 68

This Pope Sylvester thing is a rather desperate attempt to salvage a claim which should have been abandoned long ago.  All it does today is make people laugh at those who suggest it, and when those who believe it realise they have been duped, they will realise that the whole system is based on such misinformation.  I didn't think that this is what Adventism wants ... but for some, their traditions seem more important than admitting the facts and moving on to a more productive Christianity.