SDA Hypocrisy?

But, in your predilection to keep, and insist that others keep, the Sabbath...

You did not answers Jim's Question as to whether you also keep the New Moons?

And, please note Jim's contention that, in this case, the time span is Eight Days for the Sabbath to Sabbath event...

And, 30 days for the New Moon to New Moon event...

Have you *ever* kept this command?

And, do you regularly keep it now?

If not, then you are in violation of scriptural mandates and are guilty of ALL...

As long as you insist on being obedient to any part of the 'Laws' then you are required to be judged according to the Whole Law with which you have bound yourself.

This also applies if you are attempting to bind others with any of those laws...

So, please...

Judge yourself, you who are relying on the Law...

For to teach them as required is to Rely on them...

And, please mete out the appropriate punishment...

SMM

 

Spiritual Mad Man,

ARE YOU GOOFY OR SOMETHING???

for heavens sake man, I have explained time and again that we dont believe in keeping the ceremonial laws and have explained they were done away with at the cross.

Furthermore have you ever heard me ever say I was RELYING on the Law?

Its almost like you WANT OR NEED me and others to feel that way even though it isnt so!


You seem to NEED to have us be some sort of legalists... maybe to justify your own disobedience??

Thats the only reason I can think of as to why you keep on making these false assertions.

Claudia

 

Pretty funny SMM!

Not very serious - but funny!

The rule again is "exegesis". Key to that is the rule of the first order primary audience for Isaiah.

What did they think "All MANKIND" meant? Yes you got it "ALL MANKIND"!!

What did they think "New Heavens and New Earth" meant? YEP! you got it - the SAME thing John thought it meant in Rev 21!!

What was the OT view of "Worship from SABBATH to SABBATH"? Yep! we all get it -- IT is EXACTLY what they were doing!!

These simple and obvious facts ALONE explode your entire argument!

IF SDAs refused to obey the command against coveting that STILL would not "Excuse" your own atttempted eisegesis of Isaiah 66.

NOW here is the catcher - for someone that is "suupposedly" willing to argue IN FAVOR of "Sola Scriptura" you are using every trick in the book to avoid it when it comes to this subject -- why?

In Christ,

Bob

 

its just amazing!

 

Yes, Claudia it is... Simply amazing...

You appear to say one thing one time and then say another thing another time...

And, above, you and BobRyan seem to talk into opposite directions...

Why don't you just answer Jim's Questions instead of trying to divert attention from them?

Could it be that you are guilty as charged and though you continue to double-speak in your attempts to impress Believers to adhere to the Laws and Ordinances...

You yourselves are found in violation?

Answer the question! Are you blameless according to all the Law and Ordinances?

And, if not.. What is the penalty?

Seeing you can not claim Grace after claiming the Law and Ordinances...

What is your recourse. But, death?

If your Faith was indeed founded on nothing but the Blood of Jesus it would be an easy thing you the two of you to defuse this issue by merely making an unambiguous proclamation of faith in Jesus Christ...

And, stop trying to impress the Law and Ordinances on Believers.

SMM

 

SMM,


You sure are very antagonstic. Dont you allow anyone else to express their point of view?

Dont you try to impress the aspect of grace upon Believers? you act as if you would love to silence anyone elses view but your own.

You are scary to me... more and more.

furthermore, you really dont have a CLUE about how I believe. I rely only and always upon the blood of Christ for my salvatin and have said that repeatedly, but you keep on trying to pin your ideas of what I believe upon me.

 

Jim,

I cant remembr where I read this but I believe this is the answer to your question about the new moon and its sigificance in heaven...

As far as the New Moon goes and why that will be observed in Heaven along with the Sabbath... IMHO this is how I view it... I read something like this in Jewish writings... so its not accurate but you'll get the general idea...

The phases of the moon taught important lessons in its symbolism. Nobody is perfect, they fall, they sin, they are diminished.

"The righteous can fall even seven times, and rise again; but the wicked stumble with evil" (Proverbs 24:16). The righteous fall, but they get up again. It is only because they rise again that they are righteous. They have high and low moments. The moon does the same thing, it waxes and wanes. But the moon always comes back and starts all over again.

God's children fall and fail but get back up again after they have sinned. It takes a long time to get back up again just as it takes a long time for the moon to get bigger, it doesnt do it all at once.

But it was taught that when the Messiah comes, the moon will no longer get smaller each month. The moon will then be as big as the sun and shine as bright as the sun.

I dont know how to explain this in full, but I believe its significance has something to do with this.

and actually, in the Book of Revelation, this seems to support it...


Rv:21:23: 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.

it seems to have something to do with the perfection of Jesus


Claudia

 

The preponderance of evidence indicates that your concept of relying on Christ, is Christ Plus Ordinances...

Christ plus The Law...

Otherwise why are all the Ordinaces and Laws such an issue for you to convince others of?

I am not trying to impress Grace upon you, though I could have no other hope that that you would fully rely on Grace...

I am defending Grace against people whose preponderance of posting indicates they want to add Ordinances and Laws to Grace...

You say that you have posted that you rely on Christ for Salvation...

Then why not post the Thread, Time and Date of those posts?

Or, simply restate your concept of Basic Salvation here?

Again, you're going to have to make it real strong and real good to overcome the preponderance of all your previous posts.

As for your answer to Jim's question...

I think it best I let Jim try to answer that...

SMM

 

honestly Mike, I dont think that I care anymore how you feel about me or what you think about me.

Theres only so many times I beat my head against a brick wall and realize hey this hurts and on top of that, it is futile, then I quit doing it.

It doesnt take long for me to realize that no matter what I would say, you're going to come up with this "opinion" about what I believe. Because you feel the need to.

You are a tad bit too "agressive" (to try and put it nicely) for me to deal with

 

So, you won't or can't confess Christ alone?

If a person came at you and put a sword to your neck and told you to renounce Christ or die...

What would you do?

Here I have invited you, on a Board that Believes that Jesus Is Lord and there is None other, to confess Christ alone and you have avoided the issue... Several times...

That in itself speaks volumes, at least to me...

Yes, you may call that agressive...

But, in my own heart I am Earnestly Contending for the Faith...

Which from the preponderance of your posts you seem to not have. At least not as 90 percent of this board has and believes it.

SMM

 

Here then is FACT stated so clearly it is impossible to ignore.

Eric can only "object that I put a NAME to the fact instead of having to state it in LONG form each time"

What kind of non-answer it that??
</font>[/QUOTE]And what kind of non-answer is that?
Just as I'm saying; you don't even answer anything, just accuse.

I object that you're putting YOUR OWN naming category to a division of the Law you have just made up for this argument, but ignoring the real division in the Laws (universal, and Mosaic Covenant)

Is it your position that "I AM GOD"???

#1. GOD says REMEMBER
#2. GOD says "FOR IN SIX days GOD CREATED.."

Past tense - PAST history - God specifically points to the Gen 1-2:3 HISTORIC fact where "God SANCTIFIED the Seventh day and MADE IT HOLY".

This is GOD speaking in Exodus 20 - NOT ME!

How in the WORLD can you read that text and then eisegete to the point of saying "I see no MEMORIAL here"??

Where do you come up with this stuff Eric? [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]You did it again. I never said you made up it being a memorial, or that God didn't make it a memorial. Read the CONTEXT:

In other words, you insist that the sabbath SHOULD STILL BE KEPT because it was a "memorial", yet BY THAT CRITERIA, the Passover should be kept, because it too was a "memorial" of a significant event in God's plan.
Everytime we get into it, you start this selective quoting/snipping and then accusing based on what you make it appear to be saying. And every time, I tell you clearly that it is LYING! Bearing false witness! Now you think you're keeping the commandments so much better than everyone, do you have to lie to prove your point?

 

Id like to know exactly WHO ELSE would I think is Lord, besides Jesus? it seems like a stupid question or demand to me.

as if I wrote out the words "okay Mike, I confess Jesus Christ alone is Lord" then this would actually MEAN something special.

Who in the world ELSE would I think is the Lord? LOL!

geesh

 

One will do. So far you are at ZERO.

Try not to "gloss over the facts again" your unproven statement was that I was glossing over some sort of serious Bible-based "detail" you or someone had made on the point of the Ten Commandemnts or on Lev 11.

So far you seem to have entirely bailed on "proving that point"

How "surprising".

And that is your proof that YOU (or someone) on this thread has made a DETAILED substantive Bible based point that I have not responded too???!!!

Are you paying attention to your OWN argument at all???!!

Hint: Try actually posting the comment that I POSTED from the other side - the one I was responding TOO - instead of glossing over the "details" AGAIN in your own failed attempt to prove your initial statement that you (or someone) HAD provided some substantive Bible-detail that I glossed over... Remember... your initial failed claim??? You are "supposed" to be "proving it" Not simply ranting about OTHER details that you also don't like.

Bob </font>[/QUOTE]Look at you. This is just what I am saying. You're not doing anything but tearing down what I say, and now we're way off on a tangent, but meanwhile, you have completely avoided whatever points we have made. Don't say that we have not made them, or that it was a failed attempt. You have deliberately buried them beneath all of these semantics. And as I just showed in the last point, you cannot even take a person;s statement in context, so you cannot see a point when it is right in your face, because you have your mind made up on accusing us over the Law.

 

I dont know.... maybe thats some sort of weird Pentecostal thing where you're supposed to jump up and down and spin around three times saying "YES YES allright I confess that Jesus Christ is Lord!!!" and suddenly something is supposed to happen.. I guess... like suddenly everyone will accept you and believe you are something or other..

LOL!


I dont knowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
Or maybe its like Im supposedly possess by demons because I didnt say it just the right way that he thinks I ought to?


Or maybe Im supposed to make a signed confession?

 

ohhhhhhhhh I just realized that I kept saying over and over again that I rely on the blood of Christ alone but Mike kept saying I never said that... but what he really was trying to get me to do is say the magic words that I believe Jesus Christ alone is Lord. LOL!


Okay Mike, you ready?


Jesus Christ alone is Lord!


There, ya happy?

Geesh I feel like Im in a Catholic church where people think if you do certain acts or say some magic words that makes you a Christian.

anybody here can SAY anything, but that doesnt make them a Christian.


Claudia

 

Wow, someone finally gave an answer on the new moons. I've been trying to get that one out of Bob for years.
Hopwever, if you read "new moons" in the passage as "something to do with the perfection of Jesus" rather than simply the literall observance of New Moon festivals (which were also apart of the Law), and you don't believe in keeping new moon festivals now, then perhaps that shows this is also no proof for mandatory sabbath ovbservance now either.

 

And Abraham himself did not have the sabbath (at least not recorded in scripture) yet he did have circumcision.
Israel was only one son of Abraham, and we are sons spiritually, so that does not mean we keep all the same laws the nation of Israel kept. If that was the case, then once again, we are back to the OP.

 

Eric first you claim that you have done a wonderful job of providing details to back up your points against God's Word in Exodus 20 and against His Word in Lev 11. I simply ask you to SHOW that detail and how it was not "responded too" by me as you claimed.

Your response??

More wild claims and baseless assertions "still" without a single link or reference to prove them.

Oh well - nothing new there.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Eric

why do people seem so very reluctant to just do what God says?

God says keep my commandments. One of them is the Sabbath. Why so reluctant to do what He says?

It baffles me as to why people will go to such great lengths to try to find their way around them

also, as far as the new moon celebrations in heaven, with just about every single topic in the Bible there are one or two verses that dont seem to fit in with the rest of it... but Im not going to take one Bible verse and base my decision on that... ignoring the scores of other verses about the Sabbath.


I really dont understand the reference to the new moons on that particular passage.

But Im not going to let that change my entire doctrine

 

Good news - here is a case where Eric is responding point by point.

Did you even "look at Heb 10"?? You have to at least "try". Pretending not to understand the point or the references is not a compelling form of argument.

As was pointed out above - and as is so blatantly obvious Lev 19:18 and Deut 6:5 do not PREDICT the PRESCRIBE behavior.

Eric your attempts to pretend to be confused by it so vaccuous in terms of "substance" - why not join the discussion instead of playing your games?

What kind of non-answer it that??

More "gaming" Eric??

I pointed out "the obvious". That the command to Love God is "prescriptive". Every child can see this just as easily as you and I.

I "Again" pointed out the obvious with PAssover and 1Cor 5 where PAUL shows us how predictive law works "Christ OUR PASSOVER has been slain" and Heb 10 shows us how the SACRRIFICES that PREDICTED Christ's OWN sacrifice "ENDED" at HIS Sacrifice - type meets antitype. The PREDICTIVE laws end.

You simply pretend to be confused by the obvious as a "gaming strategy" on your point - rather than just honestly responding to the salient point made in the argument!

Why play those games Eric?

Eric your charge was that I AM the one that states that Sabbath is a memorial -

But the "details" given above show that it was GOD who insisted that HIS HOly day is a memorial "FOR IN SIX days the LORD MADE"