IF A Christian refuses sabbath as saturday, Do they forfeit salvation?

[Yeshua1]

As per ellen white?

 

[BobRyan]

No one has yet received the mark of the beast.—Evangelism, 234 (1899). {LDE 224.5}

Sundaykeeping is not yet the mark of the beast, and will not be until the decree goes forth causing men to worship this idol sabbath. The time will come when this day will be the test, but that time has not come yet. The S.D.A. Bible Commentary 7:977 (1899). {LDE 224.6}

[FONT=&quot]GC 382-383[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
And in what religious bodies are the GREATER part of the followers of Christ now to be found? Without doubt, in the various churches professing the Protestant faith.

[/FONT] No one has yet received the mark of the beast. The testing time has not yet come. There are true Christians in every church, not excepting the Roman Catholic communion. {Ev 234.2}[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

 

[The Biblicist]

No one has yet received the mark of the beast.—Evangelism, 234 (1899). {LDE 224.5}

Sundaykeeping is not yet the mark of the beast, and will not be until the decree goes forth causing men to worship this idol sabbath. The time will come when this day will be the test, but that time has not come yet. The S.D.A. Bible Commentary 7:977 (1899). {LDE 224.6}

[FONT=&quot]GC 382-383[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
And in what religious bodies are the GREATER part of the followers of Christ now to be found? Without doubt, in the various churches professing the Protestant faith.

[/FONT] No one has yet received the mark of the beast. The testing time has not yet come. There are true Christians in every church, not excepting the Roman Catholic communion. {Ev 234.2}[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

What an absolute joke. LIke most cults the SDA builds it doctrine upon ambiguous and debated symbolism rather than upon explicit precepts and principles. This is the cultic modus operandi because symbols can be shaped and molded more easily to fit such heresies. The JW's do this with Revelation as do about every cult.

The conditions of salvation does not change from one dispensation to another. Man has always been a sinner, salvation has always been by the same Savior, same salvation through faith in the same gospel and it will not change in the future to be conditioned upon something brand new when Sunday observance has been the standard since the resurrection.

 

[Yeshua1]

What an absolute joke. LIke most cults the SDA builds it doctrine upon ambiguous and debated symbolism rather than upon explicit precepts and principles. This is the cultic modus operandi because symbols can be shaped and molded more easily to fit such heresies. The JW's do this with Revelation as do about every cult.

The conditions of salvation does not change from one dispensation to another. Man has always been a sinner, salvation has always been by the same Savior, same salvation through faith in the same gospel and it will not change in the future to be conditioned upon something brand new when Sunday observance has been the standard since the resurrection.

Strange that God NEVER stated that he sabbath would be THE sign of taking the marof the beast, as he instead said that all whose names were NOT written down in Book of Life would it, as worship to the beast!

Did Ellen get confused and misunderstood her revelation, as ONLY unsaved would ever even take it, NONE forfeiting salvation was ever mentioned?

 

[BobRyan]

The conditions of salvation does not change from one dispensation to another. Man has always been a sinner, salvation has always been by the same Savior, same salvation through faith in the same gospel and it will not change in the future to be conditioned upon something brand new when Sunday observance has been the standard since the resurrection.

making stuff up where you lack Bible support is not the compelling argument you seem to have at first imagined it to be.

1. NOT ONE Bible text in all of the NT stating that weekly week-day-1 "observance" even existed at all in the NT.

2. NOT ONE Bible text in all of the NT calling week-day-1 by any title of honor - other than "week-day-1".

Having said that - the fact that you understand that the Gospel is unchanged NT and OT - is a big step for you. I am happy to see it whenever you get around to it.

Even you will admit (when put on the spot) that the Sabbath as God gave it in the actual Bible was on Saturday (friday evening to Sat evening).

Some people with at least half an interest in sola-scriptura testing of doctrine - would sit up and take notice at that point.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[The Biblicist]

making stuff up where you lack Bible support is not the compelling argument you seem to have at first imagined it to be.

I have refuted this imaginary defense of yours soooooo many times it is tiring to listen to this drivel over and over again. Bob you belong to a cult, with cultist false prophetess and cultic doctrine that preaches "another gospel" and your conscience is seared to the truth.

 

[BobRyan]

making stuff up where you lack Bible support is not the compelling argument you seem to have at first imagined it to be.

1. NOT ONE Bible text in all of the NT stating that weekly week-day-1 "observance" even existed at all in the NT.

2. NOT ONE Bible text in all of the NT calling week-day-1 by any title of honor - other than "week-day-1".

Having said that - the fact that you understand that the Gospel is unchanged NT and OT - is a big step for you. I am happy to see it whenever you get around to it.

Even you will admit (when put on the spot) that the Sabbath as God gave it in the actual Bible was on Saturday (friday evening to Sat evening) the 7th day of the week. (I can quote you if you would like)

Some people with at least half an interest in sola-scriptura testing of doctrine - would sit up and take notice at that point.

I have refuted this imaginary defense of yours soooooo many times

You have registered your complaints numerous times but you were never able to actually refute "in substance" a single point listed above.

Bob you belong to a cult, with cultist

It has taken you much longer to engage in name calling than it would have to simple quote the reference to the "one text" for each point listed above that you claim to have. (Which you obviously do not have).

Clearly you resort to the vaccuous idea of name-calling because you simply do not have the actual text to respond to the points listed.

I suppose your idea in doing that - is your imagining that name-calling will be such an impressive demonstration of non-fact - that all will be amazed and simply use "you" and the names you call out as their new papal authority to determine doctrine, truth, and error.

For some that anti-Bible method will work. But not for all.

I think we both know that.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Revmitchell]

See this is the true definition of a works based salvation when it is actually tied to the OT law. Ungodly

 

[BobRyan]

hint - Jer 31:31-33 is all about the OT law written on the heart under the New Covenant. Hebrews 8 affirms that same point.

hint 2: Matt 22 is all about the OT law Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbors as yourself" and Deut 6:5 "Love God with all your heart" as primary for NT saints as well as OT.

Hint 3: Eph 6:1-4 says that the OT 5th commandment is the FIRST of those OT TEN Commandments "with a promise" and as such is binding on the NT saints.

Hint 4: Mark 7:6-13 says that the OT 5th commandment is one of the "Commandments of God" and it is in fact "The Word of God". The Commandments of God cannot be "Set aside" according to Mark 7 - by man's tradition.

Hint 5: When Paul quotes from the "Commandments of God" in the book of Romans it is always from the OT TEN Commandments.

Hint 6: James says to Break ONE is to break ALL after he quotes from two of the OT TEN commandments. He argues on the basis of "HE WHO SAiD" do not commit adultery ALSO said do not kill. His argument is a based on "HE WHO SAID" and in Ex 20 we are told that HE said ALL TEN of the ten commandments.

And finally - if you will check out the thread here on gays and the Pope's recent statements etc - you will find that DHK and others point out the OT Laws that condemn the gay agenda.

No wonder then that the "Westminster Confession of Faith" and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" and D.L. Moody and R.C.Sproul, C.H. Spurgeon, Seventh-day Baptists, Philadelphia Association of Baptist Churches (in the 18th century) et al. admit to the TEN Commandments being the moral law of God written on the heart of the saints and binding on all mankind even to this very day.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Some historic facts - that might be "inconvenient" to some.

The 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith[1] (also called the Second London Baptist Confession) was written by Particular Baptists, who held to a Calvinistic Soteriology in England to give a formal expression of their Christian faith from a Baptist perspective. This confession, like The Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) and the Savoy Declaration (1658), was written by Puritans who were concerned that their particular church organisation reflect what they perceived to be Biblical teaching. Because it was adopted by the Philadelphia Association of Baptist Churches in the 18th century, it is also known as the Philadelphia Confession of Faith.[2]


Historical effects of the 1689 Confession

Particular Baptists were quick to develop churches in colonial America, and in 1707 the Philadelphia Baptist Association was formed.[3] This association formally adopted the 1689 confession in 1742[3] after years of tacit endorsement by individual churches and congregational members. With the addition of two chapters (on the singing of psalms and the laying on of hands), it was retitled The Philadelphia Confession of Faith[4] Further Calvinistic Baptist church associations formed in the mid-late 18th century and adopted the confession as "The Baptist Confession".

So while Arminians would reject the Calvinist teaching - many of them such as myself and D.L. Moody and Seventh-day Baptists affirm the moral Law of God as the Ten Commandments - applicable to mankind in Eden and still binding on the saints today. In the case of the Seventh-day Baptists it is both Arminian and Calvinists among them that accept this point.

 

[clark thompson]

As per ellen white?

She was wrong about the rapture why would she be right about this.

 

[DHK]

So while Arminians would reject the Calvinist teaching - many of them such as myself and D.L. Moody and Seventh-day Baptists affirm the moral Law of God as the Ten Commandments - applicable to mankind in Eden and still binding on the saints today. In the case of the Seventh-day Baptists it is both Arminian and Calvinists among them that accept this point.

I would appreciate it if you would stop slandering Moody and using his work for your nefarious purposes.

Here is a link to his sermon on "The Ten Commandments."
http://www.whatsaiththescripture.com/Voice/Moody.Ten.Commandments.html

He does not believe in keeping the sabbath, for sabbath is Saturday, and he defines the sabbath as Sunday. He has redefined it and through his sermon is simply encouraging people to take this day of rest (Sunday) and be faithful in coming to church.
That is NOT keeping the sabbath.

What you have posted is slander. That is not permitted here.
Please stop using Moody's works to support your erroneous doctrine, especially when he himself distances himself from it.
This is totally unethical

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The author of this book was not an advocate of the tenets of Seventh Day Adventism.

The above is at the end of Moody's exposition of the fourth commandment.

 

[targus]

No one has yet received the mark of the beast.—Evangelism, 234 (1899). {LDE 224.5}

Sundaykeeping is not yet the mark of the beast, and will not be until the decree goes forth causing men to worship this idol sabbath. The time will come when this day will be the test, but that time has not come yet. The S.D.A. Bible Commentary 7:977 (1899). {LDE 224.6}

[FONT=&quot]GC 382-383[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
And in what religious bodies are the GREATER part of the followers of Christ now to be found? Without doubt, in the various churches professing the Protestant faith.

[/FONT] No one has yet received the mark of the beast. The testing time has not yet come. There are true Christians in every church, not excepting the Roman Catholic communion. {Ev 234.2}[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

Hold on there...

Didn't bobryan claim just a couple of days ago to hold to sola scriptura...

And that he NEVER quotes the false prophet Ellen White on the baptistboard.

Why is this guy allowed to preach a false gospel on the baptistboard?

 

[BobRyan]

Hold on there...

Didn't bobryan claim just a couple of days ago to hold to sola scriptura...

And that he NEVER quotes the false prophet Ellen White on the baptistboard.

There were two threads started at the same time by the same person - the first one asked for Ellen White's statement on some point of non-SDA salvation etc. I answered them both using the source they were asking for on that thread - and did not notice that this thread did not include a reference to Ellen White by the OP.

I am happy to stick with James 4:17 as the answer.

Same thing point made.

(What is interesting here - is that you are one of the most consistent members of this board to introduce Ellen White quotes from one of your playbook sources -- and now you pretend to be unable to see the point.??)

In any case - on page 1 of this thread I did revert immediately to my usual sola-scriptura (plus some non-SDA sources added at the end) policy.

====================================
From Post#9 of this thread -- http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2017333&postcount=9

hint - Jer 31:31-33 is all about the OT law written on the heart under the New Covenant. Hebrews 8 affirms that same point.

hint 2: Matt 22 is all about the OT law Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbors as yourself" and Deut 6:5 "Love God with all your heart" as primary for NT saints as well as OT.

Hint 3: Eph 6:1-4 says that the OT 5th commandment is the FIRST of those OT TEN Commandments "with a promise" and as such is binding on the NT saints.

Hint 4: Mark 7:6-13 says that the OT 5th commandment is one of the "Commandments of God" and it is in fact "The Word of God". The Commandments of God cannot be "Set aside" according to Mark 7 - by man's tradition.

Hint 5: When Paul quotes from the "Commandments of God" in the book of Romans it is always from the OT TEN Commandments.

Hint 6: James says to Break ONE is to break ALL after he quotes from two of the OT TEN commandments. He argues on the basis of "HE WHO SAiD" do not commit adultery ALSO said do not kill. His argument is a based on "HE WHO SAID" and in Ex 20 we are told that HE said ALL TEN of the ten commandments.

And finally - if you will check out the thread here on gays and the Pope's recent statements etc - you will find that DHK and others point out the OT Laws that condemn the gay agenda.

No wonder then that the "Westminster Confession of Faith" and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" and D.L. Moody and R.C.Sproul, C.H. Spurgeon, Seventh-day Baptists, Philadelphia Association of Baptist Churches (in the 18th century) et al. admit to the TEN Commandments being the moral law of God written on the heart of the saints and binding on all mankind even to this very day.


in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan
So while Arminians would reject the Calvinist teaching - many of them such as myself and D.L. Moody and Seventh-day Baptists affirm the moral Law of God as the Ten Commandments - applicable to mankind in Eden and still binding on the saints today. In the case of the Seventh-day Baptists it is both Arminian and Calvinists among them that accept this point.

I would appreciate it if you would stop slandering Moody and using his work for your nefarious purposes.

I would appreciate it if you would tell the truth - because we both know that in Moody's sermon on the TEN commandments HE claims that HE accepts the Ten Commandments.

Your argument that to quote Moody saying what HE said - is slander is totally beyond all reason.

He (D. L. Moody) does not believe in keeping the sabbath, for sabbath is Saturday, and he defines the sabbath as Sunday.

You have already been called out on that numerous times -- and you don't seem to care to answer the flaw in your false accusation.

I have said dozens of times that the point where I differ with Moody and the other sources is where they BEND the Sabbath to POINT it to week-day-1.

And you nonsensically answer with a false accusation of the form "Bob you are a liar because we both know that they are bending the Sabbath commandment to point it to week-day-1".

When exactly you do you expect that little game of yours to actually work?

I fail to see who is supposed to be mislead by such a response when you are in fact making the point of my own complaint about what Moody did??

Did you think you were fooling me with that?? Surely not!

You pounding the pulpit with your straw man as if I am supposed to believe that your response makes sense. I have posted dozens of times my objection to what Moody and the other sources do when they bend the Sabbath to point to week-day-1 in their promotion of ALL TEN of the TEN commandments.

And your only response is then to pound the pulpit louder - as if that is addressing the glaring whole in your argument.

I prefer the facts.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

I would appreciate it if you would tell the truth - because we both know that in Moody's sermon on the TEN commandments HE claims that HE accepts the Ten Commandments.

Your argument that to quote Moody saying what HE said - is slander is totally beyond all reason.


You have already been called out on that numerous times -- and you don't seem to care to answer the flaw in your false accusation.

I have said dozens of times that the point where I differ with Moody and the other sources is where they BEND the Sabbath to POINT it to week-day-1.

And you nonsensically answer with a false accusation of the form "Bob you are a liar because we both know that they are bending the Sabbath commandment to point it to week-day-1".

When exactly you do you expect that little game of yours to actually work?

I fail to see who is supposed to be mislead by such a response when you are in fact making the point of my own complaint about what Moody did??

Did you think you were fooling me with that?? Surely not!

You pounding the pulpit with your straw man as if I am supposed to believe that your response makes sense. I have posted dozens of times my objection to what Moody and the other sources do when they bend the Sabbath to point to week-day-1 in their promotion of ALL TEN of the TEN commandments.

And your only response is then to pound the pulpit louder - as if that is addressing the glaring whole in your argument.

I prefer the facts.

in Christ,

Bob

Did Moody keep the Sabbath? NO!
Even if the Sabbath were on Sunday, how did he keep the Sabbath?
First, according to Moody's own admission, the Sabbath was his busiest day. To him he worked more on that day than on any other day.
Second, though he encouraged the people to refrain from secular employment, did they refrain from all work--a sabbath requirement? NO
--They had large meals after services. They cooked. Often their meetings were in the nature of camp meetings where tents were put up and taken down, and likewise with chairs. There was work for all to be done. It was a busy day full of work and worship. The only rest they had was from secular work.
That in no way is keeping the Sabbath.
His "version" of keeping the sabbath was simply to come to church on Sunday.
That is not remotely associated in any way with keeping the Sabbath.
How can you say that Moody kept the Sabbath, when he admitted that he worked more on that day than on any other?
That is where you slander this man.

 

[BobRyan]

Posted over half a dozen times so far -and dozens of times if we include the other forms of this.

====================================

they all accept the Bible fact that Saturday was the Sabbath as God gave it in Eden and reminded Israel of it in Ex 16 "Tomorrow is the Sabbath" and repeated it in Ex 20:11.

They all admit that it was fulfilled as God gave it - by keeping the actual 7th day of the week (If one is going to go "sola scriptura" on this doctrine)

In the Six points of the Sabbath doctrine - those sources accept the first 4. And then they try and "Bend the Sabbath" to point to "week-day 1".

1. Made for mankind in Gen 2:1-3, According to Mark 2:27 and Exodus 20:11.
2. Applicable to all mankind even for eternity in the future - Is 66:23.
3. Kept by gentiles in both OT (Isaiah 56) and NT (Acts 13, 17, 18)
4. Still binding on the saints today (James 2 - Heb 4 there remains therefore a Sabbath rest for the people of God)

5. Cannot be "bent" to point to "week-day-1" by the traditions of man - Mark 7:6-13.
6. The language of Ex 20:11 and Gen 2:3 specify God’s own selected seventh-day of the week – not the mythical and much imagined “any-ol day in seven” idea. Ex 16 “Tomorrow is the Sabbath” – not “any day in seven you wish”.

Point 6 is demonstrated not only in the language and historic facts in Exodus 16 – showing that God selects the very day that is to be considered the 7th day – and no other, but also in the Genesis 1 and 2 fact that the seventh day in Genesis 2 is actually the SECOND day of Adam’s week! God’s selection for the 7th day was not the 7th day of Adam’s week – but of Creation week as seen by God! God Himself selects the very day based on his observation of earth - not man's observation.

· - note if you swap week-day-1 for 7 – then the week only has week-day-1. Not week day 7 since the only thing made on week day 7 – was week-day 7.[FONT=&quot]

DHK you object to the first 4 but may well accept point 5.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Originally Posted by DHK [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]He (D. L. Moody) does not believe in keeping the sabbath, for sabbath is Saturday, and he defines the sabbath as Sunday.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

To which I have said the 4th commandment [/FONT]"Cannot be "bent" to point to "week-day-1" by the traditions of man - Mark 7:6-13" – in my opposition to what D.L. Moody and others have said about it being bent. (Whereupon DHK usually chooses to agree disagreeably)
[FONT=&quot]
The many other non-SDA sources, groups, documents I have listed here accept the first 4 and reject point 5.

I accept all 6 - as do the Seventh-day Baptists and others. But I never claim that Moody, or Spurgeon, or Sproul, or the "Baptist Confession of Faith" or the "Westminster Confession of Faith" accept all 6 points.

This is irrefutable
============================.[/FONT]

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Did Moody keep the Sabbath? NO!

Again this is your attempt to agree with my complaint that the Sabbath is still Saturday and is unchanged - as I object to what D.L. Moody and others do to it. But as usual you are careful to express your agreement on that point - disagreeably.

Even if the Sabbath were on Sunday, how did he keep the Sabbath?

Now you are going to an extreme for I already object to his bending the commandment to point to week-day-1. Still let us quote HIM on that point to see WHAT HE said.

First, according to Moody's own admission, the Sabbath was his busiest day. To him he worked more on that day than on any other day.

Also true of the OT approved priests on the real Bible Sabbath - Saturday.

Christ insisted that this was in perfect agreement with the law for they were performing works of Worship and service to God. Not mowing the lawn, not playing football, not building roads as if Priests had an exemption from God to build roads on the Sabbath.

I think we both know that - no need to agree disagreeably.

Second, though he encouraged the people to refrain from secular employment, did they refrain from all work--a sabbath requirement? NO
--They had large meals after services. They cooked.

You are sounding more and more like the pharisees judging someone else's Sabbath practice.

Often their meetings were in the nature of camp meetings where tents were put up and taken down, and likewise with chairs.

Indeed - but was Moody or anyone connected with his view of "keeping Sunday Sabbath" doing that "on Sunday"?

In fact they would insist on those who do that as their business not having the business open on Sunday.

You speak as though you lived in the 1800's and saw Moody putting up a Tent on Sunday instead of Saturday - the real Sabbath.

(Seventh-day Adventists were also doing their own large-tent meetings not only in the 1800's but through the 1900's) and we also put the tents up prior to a Sabbath meeting - even more difficult when you admit that the real Sabbath is Saturday so getting the tent up meant getting time during a week day to do it.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[SovereignMercy]

Does BR keep the Sabbath? No, only Jesus kept all of the law perfectly and He fulfilled it. For those who are really in Christ it was our tutor to drive us to Christ.

 

[BobRyan]

Does BR keep the Sabbath? No, only Jesus kept all of the law perfectly and He fulfilled it. For those who are really in Christ it was our tutor to drive us to Christ.

That is true with Lev 19:18 "Love your Neighbor as yourself" as the "Baptist Confession of Faith" section 19 would also agree.

That is true with Deut 6:5 "Love God with all your heart and soul" s the "Baptist Confession of Faith" section 19 would also agree.

But that does not mean that Christians are not obligated to obey the Law of God - in Christ for the saints are those who "KEEP the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus" Rev 14:12.

For the saints "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1Cor 7:19.

John is quick to make this SAME point in 1John 5:2-3 - read it and see.

In the Ten Commandments God commands that the saints are to "Love Me and KEEP My Commandments".

In John 14:15 Jesus said to the saints "Love Me and KEEP My Commandments".

Paul says in Gal 2:17-20 that when we Love God and keep His commandments we demonstrate the full power of the Gospel as it was designed to produce good fruit in us. So also does he make this point in Romans 6.

in Christ,

Bob