If Christ be not the foundation...

I was recently contacted via a forum in which I haven't been active for probably close to a year. PM's result in an email, so I was drawn back to homeschoolalumni.org like a dog to...well, you get the point. The message was from a young (30) man who had, apparently, stumbled across an old thread in which I pointed out that the terminology in the book of Revelation seems to indicate a literal mark on our physical body, as opposed to an RFID on our clothes or something similar. This guy's purpose in PM'ing me was to give me the desparate warning that the mark of the Beast is actually the tradition of going to church on Sunday, and to plead with me for the salvation of my soul from this apparently grave identification with Satan.

I probably should have just ignored the message when I saw the phrase "regardless of the original language", (granted, in context it wasn't as bad as it sounds) but no, I just had to bite. The guy promised that the line of reasoning he presented (mostly summed up here and here) was "SO full of truth, you won't know what hit you". Unfortunately for him, I'm the kind of person who likes to know by what I've been hit, so I paid close attention, especially to the list of verses he presented as most relevant:
Ezek 9:4
Duet 6:8
Exod 13:9, 16
Rev 14:1
Rev 22:3-4
Duet 11:18-22

He had the audacity to ask, "Were these "signs" and "seals" these verses talking about literal marks on the heads and hands of the Israelites?". Again, silly me, I know just enough history to know that the Israelites DID literally bind the law to their forehead and hand, a practice that eventually was perverted into a symbol of religious status.

I ended up sending him a detailed explanation of why I believe the verses he was using hurt, rather than support, his position, and was hoping for an intelligent debate to ensue. Instead, the response I received belittled me for not already understanding the basics: "we're going to have to start from scratch proving that Rome is the Little Horn". Silly little old me. Anyhow, my responses to his points were completely ignored. I realized it was going nowhere, and expressed to him that, since he was clearly not giving my points the time of day, and I was certainly not going to be convinced by vitriol, dogma and condescension, and especially since he refused to bring the entire conversation into the public forum (which is why I haven't mentioned his name), we were both wasting our time.

I thought of this today because in a video he pointed me to it became obvious his beliefs were in line with those championed by the Seventh Day Adventist Church. Today I came across 1 Timothy 4, where Paul warns that "in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons,...men who...advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth.
1Ti 4:4 For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with gratitude; "

It seems that, rather than digging into obscure lines of reason with "a fine tooth comb", here is a blatant scripture that points out an evil doctrine in the SDA sect. Just another example of straining out a gnat, and you end up swallowing a camel.

That famous platitude uttered by Steven Covey comes to mind: "The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing." The argument in favor of eating pork has everything to do with Christ's work on the cross, whereas the argument against worshipping on Sunday has absolutely nothing to do with it. If Christ's work on the cross is not the main argument in favor of our particular convictions and traditions, they might be marginally important, but they must not be that important.