Witnessing to 7th day adventist

The Creation was God's reason for the first generations of mankind to remember His Holy Sabbath Day, "The Seventh Day" of His creation.
The Redemption from Egypt was God's reason for the People of Israel to remember His Holy Sabbath Day, "Day of First Sheaf Wave Offering Before the Lord".
The Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead was God's reason for Christians to remember the Lord's Day of Triumph, "In fulnesss of Sabbath's-Day".
The revelation received of God in His Mercy through the ages was progressive, proleptic, prophetic - eschatological.
One should have no problem with the Truth of God's once for all "Holy" Sabbath Day ("sanctified" by HIM), today, because of incomplete, partial revelation of God's Eternal Purpose and Covenant of Grace in eartlier times. For God in these last days through the Son "concerning the Seventh Day thus spoke: And God the Seventh Day rested from all His works".

 

Quoting ICU2YB,
Didn‘t God say the following only to the nation Israel, Amos 3:1-2 Gen 31:13; v 17; Deut 5:1-3, etc, which obviously means that the Gentile nations were given up, as evidence in Romans one & Ephesians 2:11-12?QE

And for thousands of years the Church preached these Scriptures to Christian Believers! Yes, and the greates of them teachers having been Jesus Christ Himself!
Ironic? Not al all! "ALL the Scriptures" Paul says - or was it Peter - or both - were given in the very end for us Christians!

 

Gerhard

Friend, what Bible are you using?

The Sabbath was a sign exclusively, please look the word up in a collegiate dictionary, between the nation Israel, which operated under a religious theocracy, & God.

Clearly God has temporarily set the nation Israel, & ALL its religious practices, aside until “… the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.” ( Luke 21:24; Acts 28:17-29; Romans chapter 11).

So when you state that; “The Creation was God's reason for the first generations of mankind to remember His Holy Sabbath Day, "The Seventh Day" of His creation”, are you implying that Adam to Moses observed the Sabbath? If so, would you please give me book, chapter & verse that supports that?

And when you state that: “One should have no problem with the Truth of God's once for all "Holy" Sabbath Day ("sanctified" by HIM), today, because of incomplete, partial revelation of God's Eternal Purpose and Covenant of Grace in eartlier times”, please note that you clearly disregard Heb 8:13; 9:1-28 since the Sabbath is part of the old covenant that was exclusively made with the nation Israel.

Therefore, when you claim: “For God in these last days through the Son "concerning the Seventh Day thus spoke: And God the Seventh Day rested from all His works", what scripture you are quoting, because if it is Heb 4:4 that is clearly under the OLD covenant as v 8 definitely proves. For the law, which includes the Sabbath, was exactly what Peter said (Acts 15:10).

Now please see my post to JCF, 2-25-05

http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/topic/28/3045/12.html?

since it deals with the Hebrew Epistle.

After that thoughtfully read Col 2:8; v16, for God has told believers how His word is to be correctly understood in both Testaments (Isa 28:10; 2 Tim 2:15). The reason for the 500 plus denominations in Christianity” is because such instruction has been ignored. With the advent of the internet it is now possible for believers to quickly eliminate the divisions created & thus obey Eph 4:7-14. Will you help me, friend?

Looking forward to your response, Gerhard.

Cordially, Dave

 

Claudia_T

If “Adventists” are correct about the Sabbath law still being required by God, then can they honestly claim that they obey Exodus 35:1-3; Numb 15:32-36; Acts 1:12, that’s @ 6/10’s of a mile trip, see the map at the back of your Bible, & are stoning disobedient members as God instructed?

If the Sabbath cannot change, as “Adventists” insist, usually quoting Mal 3:6, then what about all the other feast days & laws that have been changed? Heb 7:12; Col 2:8-16. Did not our Great High Priest give us a new commandment that encompasses all the law Jn 13:34; 14:15; Mt 22:36-40; Rom 13:10; 1 Tim 1:5?

Didn't The Lord take care of the law, the Old covenant Col 2:14?

Therefore, have you not taken your references to the word "commandments" out of context?

Since the Bible clearly teaches that you have, & you probably didn't learn to do such on your own, isn't it true that your interpretation is the result of the teaching of your "Adventist" potentates, who are obviously dividing believers?

Cordially, Dave

 

Yes - that is a good reference.

Thank you for posting it.

I don't argue that there are no differences - or areas for debate -- I just argue that they should be the "actual ones" and not just "whatever comes to someone's mind".

Yes -

Your argument abovee is based on the idea that Romans 1 and Eph 2 can be interpreted to mean that "God did NOT so love the WORLD until Christ came. Prior to that God only so-loved-the-jews".

Adventists do not go for that idea.

We claim that Christ was slain from the foundations of the World. One Gospel (Gal 1:6-11) in ALL ages!

WE claim that Adam was not a Jew, nor was Noah, nor Enoch (who went to heaven without dying). These are examples of saints living before the Cross that are not "loved just because they are descended from Abraham".

Further we claim the Romans 9 point that THEY ARE NOT all God's people who are children of the flesh but RATHER it is children of the PROMISE that have always been the people of God -

ONE Gospel in ALL ages given by ONE God that ALWAYS "So loved the World" and Always had the Gospel model of "Saved by Grace through faith - and that NOT of Works lest ANY MAN should boas".

Your model adopts a "Salvation by works" gospel for the first 4000 years claiming that God only loved the Jews during that time.

In Gen 2 there is no Jew - God makes the 7th day a Holy Day THEN according to Gen 2:3.

In Isaiah 66 we see that even in the future post-cross age of the NEW EARTH "From Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to Worship".

In Mark 2:27 Christ said that the "Sabbath was MADE for MANKIND".

It is impossible to limit Christ the Creator's Holy Day memorial of His own creative act in making us - to "just making the Jews".

The scope even by pre-cross OT text standards is bigger than that as we see above.

In Christ,

Bob

 

There is no question that the church of the OT after Sinai was "The Nation Church of Israel" and that we find the people of God in that group as we find the church today having the people of God.

Certainly scripture is written to and given to the "church" in all ages. So it is "they" who read it.

But that does not mean that God is not saying to the WORLD 22"Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth; For I am God, and there is no other. Is 45:22


In the NT (Acts 13:46-49) Paul quotes Isaiah 49:6 – showing it to be a command to God’s people to turn to the Gentiles and evangelize.

So what is the "purpose" of the OT Nation church for the WORLD in WORLD wide evangelism -- according to the OT text?

So in summary - God's commands ARE for the World since He "so loved the WORLD" even then and called out to the World to be "saved" via His priests - His Church - the Nation Church of Israel (After the time of the Patriarchs).

In Christ,

Bob

 

This objection "outside of doctrine" is brought up by those who are not serious about the doctrinal correctness of the subject. The reason is obvious. The basis for the argument above is NOT "what is consistent with God's Word" to discover "truth" rather it is "how odd is it to really keep Sabbath as I understand the Bible to describe it?".

That is not a doctrinal argument nor a form of exegeting the subject. Period.

#1. Having said that - in the case of having a fire in the home on Sabbath - while in the desert this was not needed - but in Canaan and even today - Jews have times when fire was needed to keep warm and the restriction above was not applicable.

#2. The "Civil" laws of the NATION were never applicable once the theocracy ended nor were they ever applied to jews (or non-jews) living outside of the theocracy. That means that you argument for stoning someone for building the fire is moot to start with even IF that command still applies. (And here again the debate is NOT over Christ the Creator's Holy day - but about the civil laws regarding enforcement at specific times).

#3. The point in Acts 1 IS a POST CROSS reference to a custom (not a command of scripture) regarding Sabbath keeping. This again is hardly a exegetically case for "Sabbath breaking".

The "shaddow" Sabbaths "created" at Sinai (as opposed to the 7th day MEMORIAL Sabbath created in Gen 2:3 as a Holy Day) all were based in the sacrificial system and all pointed as shaddows - pointing forward to the work of Christ and the plan of salvation future. Without the sacrifice - they had no "observance".

The sacrifices specifically 'ended' according to Heb 10 at the cross. This ended the yearly Sabbath feasts - because without their sacrifices they had no "observance".

But the "MEMORIAL" Sabbath of Gen 2:3 was made holy WITHOUT sacrifices in place. (Check Gen 2 - no Sacrifices).

That same memorial Sabbath is to be kept (as Isaiah 66) after the cross for all eternity "by ALL MANKIND" that comes before God "From Sabbath to Sabbath - to Worship before Me".

Do you mean the Lev 19:18 command to Love our Neighbor as ourself and the Deut 6:5 command to Love God with all of our heart?

Do you mean that Christ's pre-cross quote of these Mosaic law is a way to "delete" God's Word in those chapters of scripture?

Do you think that scripture ended then? Before the Cross? In Matt 22 simply by quoting the Mosaic law of Lev 19 and Deut 6?

Rather - Christ points out that the Law EXISTS BECAUSE of those commands! They form its foundation! You must first destroy them - to destroy God's Law.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Notice that Paul does NOT say "God nailed HIs WORD to the cross taking it out of the way" - as many "had hoped". RATHER IN Christ God nailed the TICKET - the amount OWED - the certificate of DEBT!

FAR from obliterating HIS OWN LAW - He upholds it and pays what it demands!

Col 2

Hence - Paul asserts in Romans 3 "DO WE then make VOID the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH The LAW of God!"
Rom 3:31

Christ paid our DEBT! He does not destroy the LAw that defines sin - rather in Romans 3 he points out that the law REMAINS to define sin placing ALL mankind (yes we are ALL under the law - in that sense) in need of a Savior.

It is BECAUSE it exists and declares mankind to STILL be in sin - that we STILL need a savior!

It then AFTER salvation - as Romans 7 points out remains "HOLY JUST AND GOOD" and as Heb 8 points out "the LAW is WRITTEN ON THE HEART" in its ongoing role in the life of a born-again - new-creation Spirit-filled Christian.

In Christ,

Bob

 

In the previous posts your error has been pointed out clearly. One can now ask of you the same question "was this your potentates" teaching you such erroneous ideas?

However - I would not ask that - or go there, because that is more along the realm of arrogance than compelling discussion.

In Christ,

Bob

 

To me "cultic" is based on false prophets. Joseph Smith was a false prophet yet the Mormons place his writings equal with the Word of God. Therefore, even though they claim the name Christian, they are a "cultic" type church. However, there may be those within this church who have been touched by the Holy Spirit and have received enough Truth about salvation that they have recieved Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. I believe there are those who are saved within these cults, but they have been erroniously taught when it comes to Grace and Law. Most are taught to fear ever leaving the church. They are held in place through the threat of losing their standing with Christ if they do not follow their church's specific interpretations of the Scriptures. They often claim that God is only blessing their church because they are God's True church and anyone who does not stay in line will be cut off.

Catholics are guilty of this and this is why they are classified as "cultic". They also follow a false prophet, the pope.

JW's follow the false prophets of the Watch Tower.

And the SDA's follow the false prophet Ellen White. This is why they are considered "cultic". They have mixed together Truth with error. They could teach what ever they please as a Christian church and we would simply argue over interpretations of doctrine. However, they place a false prophet at their lead and give that false prophet authority equal to the Word of God. This is no different than the RCC and the pope or Joseph Smith and the Mormons.

I do not call the SDA cultic because they keep a Sabbath day. They are free in Christ to do so. I don't call them cultic because they teach that one must keep the law. These things do not make them cultic, just ignorant of the Truth. However, they are considered cultic because they have at their head a false prophet whom they place equal to the Holy Spirit filled, true and proven prophets of the Holy Bible. They also teach that theirs is God's true church called out in these last days, therefore God being for them and against the rest of us. This is false teaching, cultic, and is designed to scare and control the weak into following their church alone, never leaving it. This is how cults control their members. The RCC was the first to come up with the idea in the NT age that I know of, at least they are the most known.

Now I just want to say that I don't believe that the Mormons, JW's, Catholics or SDA's are intentionally out to lead people astray. What has happened is they have embraced false prophets as true prophets and therefore are simply repeating lies of satan. I would venture to state that Joseph Smith, Ellen White and the Watch Tower prophets are not saved. Satan used them as a weapon against the church of God and because of their sin, many have fallen under their spell as well and the lies live on through those who have not submitted themselves to the teaching of the Holy Spirit. The only way one can hear the Spirit is to place all doctrine as questionable and then let the Spirit teach, but one must first from the heart dismiss all doctrine and begin afresh with God and His Word alone.

The Truth is that one ONLY need belong to Jesus Christ through a rebirth, born of God, for salvation. Anything added to Grace are doctrines of devils!

God Bless!

[ March 06, 2005, 12:20 PM: Message edited by: steaver ]

 

Greetings Steaver,

Can you show anywhere in Catholic teaching where the Pope claims to be a prophet and on equal grounds with God??

Again...please cite your source that the Church teaches the "God being for them and against the rest of us" quote.

 

I don't believe I implied that he was on equal grounds with God, but doesn't the church claim the pope has the authority to speak for God? That would be a prophet. And isn't he to be obeyed as though he speaks for God on deciding all church matters? The pope being the final authority rather than the Scriptures themselves?

I don't have it at my finger tips, but doesn't the Catholic creed state that apart from the Chruch their is no salvation? I can look it up again. I know I read it somewhere in their writings.

God Bless!

 

BobRyan said: “I don't argue that there are no differences - or areas for debate -- I just argue that they should be the "actual ones" and not just "whatever comes to someone's mind".

Since all religion is established on something, shouldn’t the correct one be in accordance with God’s instruction (Isa 28:10; 2 Tim 2:15), precept upon precept, in context, the meaning of the words subjected to Webster, or some other unbiased collegiate dictionary definition, & not what someone thinks the verses or the words mean?

A) Sir, do you accept that standard?

There are over 500 “Christian” denominations all claiming they are being obedient to what God said. Since it‘s obvious they all can‘t be right, then it is also obvious all but one are wrong, if not all, is it not?

B) Yes or no?

BobRyan said: “Your argument above is based on the idea that Romans 1 and Eph 2 can be interpreted to mean that "God did NOT so love the WORLD until Christ came. Prior to that God only so-loved-the-jews".”

Friend, that is not my interpretation, that is exactly what God said in the context as He said it (Isa 28:10; 2 Tim 2:15). As you well know there are no “Jews” until “Father Abraham.”

C) Yes or no?

BobRyan said: “Adventists do not go for that idea.”

OK, demonstrate, book, chapter & verse, that “Adventists” can scripturally (Isa 28:10; 2 Tim 2:15) prove the dogma they teach is correct.

BobRyan said: “We claim that Christ was slain from the foundations of the World. One Gospel (Gal 1:6-11) in ALL ages!”

It is clear from Mt 10:5-6; Jn 4:22 that Gentiles were excluded as God said (Gen 17:12-14; Isa 56:1-6; Amos 3:2; Acts 13:47-48; Romans One; Eph 2:11-12 etc). Nobody, including the 12 Apostles, fully understood what The Lord did for us at Calvary, until they learned such from Paul, @ 12 years later, as demonstrated by what they preached. Therefore, your premise fails God's requirements Isa 28:10; 2 Tim 2:15.

BobRyan says: “WE claim that Adam was not a Jew, nor was Noah, nor Enoch (who went to heaven without dying). These are examples of saints living before the Cross that are not "loved just because they are descended from Abraham".”

1) Where did I imply Adam, Noah or Enoch were Jews, or that “… they are descended from Abraham”? Sir, I can scripturally prove that Abram descended from them.

2) When God called out Abram He then restricted Himself (Gen 12:1-7; Amos 3:2 )

3) So please give me book, chapter & verse for your opinion that Gentiles could have salvation apart from Abraham ( Gen 17:1-14 ) since the scriptures stated above, & here are a few more (Gen 12:1-4; Josh 24:2-13), refute your opinion.

As you well know, idolatry is the reason God separated Abram (Rom 1:17-32) in order to make out of him a Godly nation that was to be His witness to the Gentile nations. Thus by your false false premise you are claiming idol worshippers could be saved.

BobRyan says: “Further we claim the Romans 9 point that THEY ARE NOT all God's people who are children of the flesh but RATHER it is children of the PROMISE that have always been the people of God - “

Better expand on that with book chapter & verse, for it is clear from the verses I’ve given that salvation was NOT extended to Gentiles UNLESS they submitted to God’s covenant, judgments & kept His Sabbaths.

BobRyan says: “ONE Gospel in ALL ages given by ONE God that ALWAYS "So loved the World" and Always had the Gospel model of "Saved by Grace through faith - and that NOT of Works lest ANY MAN should boas".”

Friend, to suppose that Adam to the time of Christ that anyone knew the truth of Eph 2:8-9 is presumptuous ( Ps 19:13 ). When David said ( Ps 32:2) remember he also said ( Ps 33:12 ), & that nation was Israel, consequently God‘s choice ( Ps 65:4 ) which ( Rom 9:13-18 ) reinforces.

If you have scripture, in context, that refutes what I earlier gave you then please cite such. You are demonstrating why there are over 500 denominations by your deliberately rejecting what God clearly told you to do Isa 28:10; 2 Tim 2:15.

BobRyan says: “Your model adopts a "Salvation by works" gospel for the first 4000 years claiming that God only loved the Jews during that time.”

1) Please post the date & time that my “model” implied such. You well know the “old covenant” wasn’t given until Exodus 20. Not until Genesis 12 does God began His separation of a nation dedicated to Himself & starts dispensing the terms of its operation. Do you agree to that? If not give me book, chapter & verse, sir.

2) From Adam to Abram there was no “old covenant”, thus there was no Jew.

3) And from Genesis 12; Josh 24:2-13 it is clear as to who, Abram, what, a nation, where, the land promised, & why, idolatry, such was being done. Do you agree to that? If not, give me book, chapter & verse, sir.

Therefore, to claim that: “In Gen 2 there is no Jew - God makes the 7th day a Holy Day THEN according to Gen 2:3.”, is a ruse. Please identify, from Genesis 2 - 12, chapter & verse where anyone is instructed by God to observe the Sabbath. Thank you, sir.

BobRyan said: “In Isaiah 66 we see that even in the future post-cross age of the NEW EARTH "From Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to Worship".

That gets into premill verses amill doctrine, which is being debated elsewhere on this website, & it doesn’t pertain to the present practices of “Adventist” doctrine. So unless you have a good scriptural explanation for going there, please refrain. Thank you, sir.

BobRyan said: “In Mark 2:27 Christ said that the "Sabbath was MADE for MANKIND". “It is impossible to limit Christ the Creator's Holy Day memorial of His own creative act in making us - to "just making the Jews".

Again, your premise is faulty, as you will see when you fail to give me book, chapter & verse where God instructed Gentiles to observe His Sabbath.

BobRyan said: “The scope even by pre-cross OT text standards is bigger than that as we see above.”

I don’t understand your point, sir. Would you please elaborate. Thank you.

Cordially, Dave

 

BobRyan said: “But that does not mean that God is not saying to the WORLD 22"Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth; For I am God, and there is no other. Is 45:22”

What is your point? Are you saying the Gentiles could have been saved without circumcision, taking hold of God’s statues & judgments, observing the Sabbaths?

BobRyan said: “In the NT (Acts 13:46-49) Paul quotes Isaiah 49:6 – showing it to be a command to God’s people to turn to the Gentiles and evangelize.”

If you will carefully read v 46 you will see it clearly supports my point about Israel being exclusively God’s, that the Gentiles had no right or part in Israel‘s blessings (Eph 2:11-12), & that is was because of their refusal to believe that Israel would be set aside (Rom 28:20-28).

BobRyan said: “So what is the "purpose" of the OT Nation church for the WORLD in WORLD wide evangelism -- according to the OT text?

PS 67:2-7
1.God be gracious to us and bless us …
2. that Thy way may be known on the Earth. Thy salvation among All nations.
3. Let the peoples praise Thee – let All the peoples praise Thee.
6. God our God blesses us
7. Our God blesses us that all the ends of the earth may fear Him

So in summary - God's commands ARE for the World since He "so loved the WORLD" even then and called out to the World to be "saved" via His priests - His Church - the Nation Church of Israel (After the time of the Patriarchs).”

Which is a presumption, at best, as it totally violates Isa 28:10; 2 Tim 2:15. Israel was to be a light unto the Gentiles, yet as a nation failed. The only record of any outreach by God to the Gentiles, in the O.T., is in the book of Jonah, & its clear he didn’t want to go (Jonah 1:1-3). It is also clear while the Gentiles deferred God’s judgment by repenting of their wickedness, that in no way proves they became His children as proselytes, for where is the Divine record of such ( Deut 29:29 )?

And where is your book, chapter & verse where God sent priests out to evangelize the Gentiles?

Good night, Dave

 

ICU2YB said: “If Adventists are correct about the Sabbath law still being required by God, then can they honestly claim that they obey Exodus 35:1-3; Numb 15:32-36; (about starting a fire on Sabbath) and Acts 1:12 ( a post-cross reference to Christ and the disciples going a Sabbath days journey on Sabbath), that’s @ 6/10’s of a mile trip, see the map at the back of your Bible, & are stoning disobedient members as God instructed?

And BobRyan said: “This objection "outside of doctrine" is brought up by those who are not serious about the doctrinal correctness of the subject. The reason is obvious. The basis for the argument above is NOT "what is consistent with God's Word" to discover "truth" rather it is "how odd is it to really keep Sabbath as I understand the Bible to describe it?". That is not a doctrinal argument nor a form of exegeting the subject. Period.”

OK, so like the Pentecostal potentate, when caught being unable to heal, blames the believer for the problem, the Roman Catholic priest, who refuses to let his wafer be chemically analyzed, least the world know the truth about “transubstantiation”, etc this is the “Adventist” answer to their dilemma? If it is not a “doctrinal argument”, are you telling me that God;

1) apologized to that man in Numb 15:32-36?
2) rescinded His commandment to Moses Ex 35:1-3?
3) Luke had no reason to point out the distance of a Sabbath day trip Luke 1:12?

The following is an article from the Birmingham News, 1-5-92, which is titled:

“Jews Observe Ancient Sabbath” (emphasis mine)

“Jerusalem (AP) Ultra-Orthodox Jews were barred from carrying anything outdoors Saturday after a blizzard snapped a rope that encircled the city & exempted residents from the strict Sabbath observance.

The 80-mile long rope, known in Jewish law as the Eruv, symbolically turns the city into a single dwelling, thus allowing people to sidestep a ban against carrying anything outside one’s house on the Sabbath.

The storm which dumped more than a foot of snow on the holy city tore the rope in several places. As a result, tens of thousands of ultra-Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem were required to observe the original rule.” etc, etc, etc

Sir, would you like to guess what that “original rule” is?

BobRyan said: “#1. Having said that - in the case of having a fire in the home on Sabbath - while in the desert this was not needed - …”

That being true, which it isn’t, as you well know, why did the man in Numb 15:32-36 forfeit his life, other than warmth?

Sir, have you ever been in a desert even on a clear summer night? Please, try it before you pontificate any more on this subject.

BobRyan said: “#2. The "Civil" laws of the NATION were never applicable once the theocracy ended nor were they ever applied to jews (or non-jews) living outside of the theocracy. That means that you argument for stoning someone for building the fire is moot to start with even IF that command still applies. (And here again the debate is NOT over Christ the Creator's Holy day - but about the civil laws regarding enforcement at specific times).”

Excellent! And what do you think those "ultra-orthodox Jews" would say to you when you tell them their “theocracy ended”? Make swings out of that rope for their kids? Or will they brush you off with their religious customs that have taken God’s word out of context?

BobRyan said: “#3. The point in Acts 1 IS a POST CROSS reference to a custom (not a command of scripture) regarding Sabbath keeping. This again is hardly a exegetically case for "Sabbath breaking".”

Please see the Birmingham News article dated 1-5-92, titled: “Jews Observe Ancient Sabbath”, for how “ultra-Orthodox Jews” have figured out how to get around God’s law regarding the length of a Sabbath trip. Thank you.

ICU2YB said: “If the Sabbath cannot change, as “Adventists” insist, usually quoting Mal 3:6, then what about all the other feast days & laws that have been changed? Heb 7:12; Col 2:8-16.”

To which BobRyan answered: “The "shaddow" Sabbaths "created" at Sinai (as opposed to the 7th day MEMORIAL Sabbath created in Gen 2:3 as a Holy Day) all were based in the sacrificial system and all pointed as shaddows - pointing forward to the work of Christ and the plan of salvation future. Without the sacrifice - they had no "observance".”

Sir, that is a ruse, for you have not established, with scripture in context (Isa 28:10; 2 Tim 2:15) your "Adventist" precept for the: “7th day MEMORIAL Sabbath created in Gene 2:3” as God has instructed. Until you do that this paragraph will be my reply whenever you attempt such again

BobRyan said: “But the "MEMORIAL" Sabbath of Gen 2:3 was made holy WITHOUT sacrifices in place. (Check Gen 2 - no Sacrifices).”

Sir, that is a ruse, for you have not established, with scripture in context (Isa 28:10; 2 Tim 2:15) your "Adventist" precept for the: “7th day MEMORIAL Sabbath created in Gene 2:3” as God has instructed. Until you do that this paragraph will be my reply whenever you attempt such again.

BobRyan said: “That same memorial Sabbath is to be kept (as Isaiah 66) after the cross for all eternity "by ALL MANKIND" that comes before God "From Sabbath to Sabbath - to Worship before Me".”

Since this was previously addressed I will let my remark for then answer the above question, for I see nothing that pertains to the insistance by the "Adventist" for observance of the Sabbath in this present era.

ICU2YB said: “Did not our Great High Priest give us a new commandment that encompasses all the law Jn 13:34; 14:15; Mt 22:36-40; Rom 13:10; 1 Tim 1:5?”

BobRyan asks: “Do you mean the Lev 19:18 command to Love our Neighbor as ourself and the Deut 6:5 command to Love God with all of our heart?”

Sir, isn’t Jn 13:34; 14:5; Mt 22:36-40; Rom 13:10; 1 Tim 1:5 self explanatory?
Isn’t Rom 13:10; 1 Tim 1:5 post Calvary?

BobRyan asks: “Do you mean that Christ's pre-cross quote of these Mosaic law is a way to "delete" God's Word in those chapters of scripture?”

“Do you think that scripture ended then? Before the Cross? In Matt 22 simply by quoting the Mosaic law of Lev 19 and Deut 6?”

“Rather - Christ points out that the Law EXISTS BECAUSE of those commands! They form its foundation! You must first destroy them - to destroy God's Law.”

Sir, please elaborate further on the above 3 sentences, with my head cold I can’t understand your questions. Sorry, but it's that bad.

Thank you & good night, Dave

 

ICU2YB asked: “Didn't The Lord take care of the law, the Old covenant Col 2:14?”

BobRyan answered: “Notice that Paul does NOT say "God nailed HIs WORD to the cross taking it out of the way" - as many "had hoped".”

Please identify the many that “had hoped” God nailed His word to the cross taking it out of the way? If its those in other denominations that reject the “Adventist” precept, that God created a memorial Sabbath in Gen 2:3 that was, supposedly, obeyed by Adam etc, then it remains for you to scripturally (Isa 28:10; 2 Tim 2:15) prove that principle.

BobRyan says: “RATHER IN Christ God nailed the TICKET - the amount OWED - the certificate of DEBT! FAR from obliterating HIS OWN LAW - He upholds it and pays what it demands!” ( And then quotes Col 2:13-14 from various Bibles.)

That we are in agreement on, so keep that thought in mind because the dogma of the “Adventist” contradicts this as the unbiased will soon see.

BobRyan said: “Hence - Paul asserts in Romans 3[:31] "DO WE then make VOID the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH The LAW of God!" Christ paid our DEBT! He does not destroy the LAw that defines sin - rather in Romans 3 he points out that the law REMAINS to define sin placing ALL mankind (yes we are ALL under the law - in that sense) in need of a Savior.”

Now the unbiased believer will be shown the difference between the position of the saved & the lost. Notice how saved Gentiles could fall from grace Gal 5:1-4; Eph 2:8-9; by going back to the works of the law Gal 4:9-11. Consequently Paul warns a young preacher about anyone that would put a believer back under any portion of the law 1Tim 1:1-9, note especially v 9, because in Col 2:8-16, especially v 10, it is again reinforced. Bob, what part of “complete” don’t you understand?

BobRyan said: “It is BECAUSE it exists and declares mankind to STILL be in sin - that we STILL need a savior!”

Bob, I’m not picking on you, but the dogma you’ve been taught, so don’t take offense.
In my answer to your last question, read those scriptures thoroughly, it is apparent, to the unbiased, that only the lost are under the law. Therefore, when you state that: “… we STILL need a savior!” you classify yourself as lost. Sir, I have a savior & am a part of “mankind.” Do you understand that statement?

BobRyan said: “It then AFTER salvation - as Romans 7 points out remains "HOLY JUST AND GOOD" and as Heb 8 points out "the LAW is WRITTEN ON THE HEART" in its ongoing role in the life of a born-again - new-creation Spirit-filled Christian.”

Do not take offense, but I don’t understand your point. If the above pertains to Sabbath observance you have not proved your, “Adventist”, precept for such.
Sir, I await your response to all the above.

Cordially, Dave

 

ICU2YB asked Claudia_T: “Therefore, have you not taken your references to the word "commandments" out of context?
Since the Bible clearly teaches that you have, & you probably didn't learn to do such on your own, isn't it true that your interpretation is the result of the teaching of your "Adventist" potentates, who are obviously dividing believers?”

To which BobRyan said: “In the previous posts your error has been pointed out clearly. One can now ask of you the same question "was this your potentates" teaching you such erroneous ideas? However - I would not ask that - or go there, because that is more along the realm of arrogance than compelling discussion.”

Sir, trust me, I won’t take offense. Please show me where I, supposedly, failed to correctly teach you, or where you proved my "error", according to God's instruction (Isa 28:10: 2 Tim 2:15). Thank you.

Cordially, Dave

 

The following is in response to the Seventh Day Adventist doctrine on tithing:

“Principles Regarding the Use of Tithe” (taken from website)

http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/guidelines/main_guide4.html

Bob, the following is from a Church of Christ (CoC) potentate, Foy Wallace Jr, “God’s Prophetic Word”, revised edition 1960, page 332, par # 4 which soundly refutes the “Adventist” precept on tithing. Hopefully this will prove that when anyone correctly (Isa 28:10; 2 Tim 2:15) applies scripture I accept such.

"In the Corinthian letter Paul devoted two whole chapters to the subject of giving - telling the Corinthian church how to give. If tithing were the system he could have settled it in one word. He could have just said “tithe.” Anybody knows what tithing is. He could have settled the whole thing with that word, but he wrote two whole chapters, explaining the principles of New Testament giving."

I used Foy’s logic to squelch another CoC potentate regarding the following.

Sir, apply Foy’s logic, for even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Didn’t Christ have opportunity in His last 40 days on earth to forever eliminate any possible misconception regarding the O.T. scriptures being incorrectly interpreted as literal, in respect to an earthly kingdom, Israel at the head of the nations, the Apostles judging the 12 tribes of Israel, etc by saying when asked (Acts 1:6):

"There will be no physical kingdom on earth as mine is spiritual, which was the burden of the O.T. prophets, for they spoke in similitude’s about spiritual things."

And shouldn’t Paul then have said in Rom 11:1, were CoC dogma true:

"I say then, Hath God cast away His people? Yes!"

thereby eliminating at least 27 verses that clearly refute CoC biased dogma?

Bob, do date that CoC potentate refuses to address the above, & like Frank has gone into hiding. It is the potentates in the denominations that have failed to heed God’s instruction (Isa 28:10; 2 Tim 2:15), which has resulted in the 500 plus divisions in “Christianity.”

When the potentates see they cannot defend their biased precepts they hid, least their peers learn of their failure & see the truth of God's instruction for correctly applying His word (Isa 28:10; 2 Tim 2:15).

Sir, my job is 1 Thes 5:21, & that is your job also.

Looking forward to your response.

Cordially, Dave

 

True enough. I am not suggesting that the "basis" for doctrine be anything other than the Bible "alone".

My comment above was directed to those who sought to "make up beliefs for SDAs to adopt" as if the idea of just "making stuff up for me" would be a "sufficient proof" that SDAs actually believe it.

Yes! Exegetically established IN CONTEXT. Not just taking Greek texts and trying to get a Webster-English "rewrite" of what they are saying, but actually looking at the context.

Absolutely correct. (An argument I often make myself in these cases).

The "BEST" scenario is that ONE is right - the worst is that all are wrong with some being "less wrong than others."

In Christ,

Bob

 

If you will check the text and the reference in my quote above - I show that God ALREADY established Himself as "savior of the World" and as "So loving the World" and as "calling to ALL NATIONS" to be saved - BEFORE the Cross.

My argument is that you can not take the NT texts you are using and "render them" in such a way as to contradict the scriptures.

That point remains.

No.

#1. The term Jew is never applied prior to the split of Israel into Northern and Southern Kingdom.

#2. The term Israel is never used for Abraham or for Isaac. It is a term that starts with Jacob.

#3. The only term that applied to Abraham was "Hebrew" and this included more than just Abraham.

That was done in my previous post. You have yet to respond to the texts in Isaiah that make this point.

I already show that Noah among the saints preaching in the OT, Enoch (taken to Heaven) are not Jews, Are not Israel are not relying "on Abraham".

As for Abraham's day - clearly Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God Heb 7:1 was a contemporary - saint not of the line of Abraham.

This could go on.. but the scripture evidence is clear. Surely you can see that.

In Christ,

Bob