Would you fellowship with a Seventh Day Adventist Family?

[DHK]

Originally posted by BobRyan:

We do teach that the Bible (ALL 66 books - not just 23 of them) is the Word of God.

We also believe ALL 66 books of the Bible Bob. But just out of curiousity, which ones do you accuse us of not believing. My guess is all of the Old Testament, and the Book of James. That accounts for 40. You said 23. What are the other books, according to you that we would not believe?
DHK

 

[DHK]

Bob,
My arguments stand unrefuted. Your objections are bogus.
1. There is no command in the New Testament command for the believer to keep the Sabbath. The Old Testament Canon was finished 450 years before Christ was born. The book of Malachi has nothing to do with this. If you bring in the Old Testament be sure to bring in Exodus 31 which specifically says that the sabbath is a sign between Israel and Jehovah and for their generations forever. It is not for the Gentile or the believer. It is for the nation of Israel. This chapter is conveniently ignored.

1Cor.16:2, in spite of your objections to Barnes explanation, says "the first day of the week." Yes or no?" Case closed.

Acts 20:7 mentions on the first day of the week they were breaking bread and Paul preached unto them. Was this worship or not? Case closed.

Col.2:16,17 explains the sabbath as only a shadow of Christ who was to come, and not necessary to observe along with the rest of the Old Testament law. Christ fulfilled the law. It was nailed to the cross.
DHK

 

[Singer]

Colossians 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen
with [him] through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised
him from the dead.

2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision
of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having
forgiven you all trespasses;

2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us,
which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross


What handwriting of ordinaces was he talking about ?

 

[BobRyan]

DHK
We also believe ALL 66 books of the Bible Bob. But just out of curiousity, which ones do you accuse us of not believing. My guess is all of the Old Testament, and the Book of James. That accounts for 40. You said 23. What are the other books, according to you that we would not believe?

My reference to the 23 books of the NT - was simply to point out that most Sabbath keeping Christians accept all 66. I have some RC friends who seem to only accept 23 books - the NT only.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

DHK Bob,
My arguments stand unrefuted. Your objections are bogus.

DHK -

My arguments stand unrefuted in fact.

And yes - your objections are "bogus" so far. you have not been able to respond to a single point.

Here is an excellent example --

DHK
1. There is no command in the New Testament command for the believer to keep the Sabbath. The Old Testament Canon was finished 450 years before Christ was born. The book of Malachi has nothing to do with this.

The "point" that you "pretend not to see" (as if pretending not to understand - could possibly form a valid response to a devastating argument against your speculations) - is simply --

YOU invent a rule "The Sabbath commandment is not REPEATED so it becomes VOID where NOT repeated".

I respond that your invented-rule does not hold water since EVEN in the OT - we have many cases where the Sabbath commandment is "NOT repeated" but we KNOW it is not VOID simply because it is NOT repeated.

I then point out the FUTHER failure of your invented-rule by noting that EVEN those who reject God's Holy Seventh-day memorial of Creation "made for Mankind" - agree that the Gospels pertain to events BEFORE the cross WHILE the Law of God is in force EVEN by your own account. I show that EVEN in that Pre-Cross era - (be it Malachi or the Gospels PRE-Cross) the Sabbath is not "repeated" but all agree is IN FORCE.

Your argument utterly collapses under those two observations. And your response??

Pretend you don't see it????

You can do "better" than that.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

SingerWhat handwriting of ordinaces was he talking about ?

Lets take a look at Col 2

Col 2
13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions,
14 having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

It is the "certificate of debt" that He cancelled, (NOT His law).

He paid our debt - INSTEAD of "abolishing the Law that DEFINES sin" He "paid the DEBT of sin"..

His Law when applied to our rebellion - produces a "certificate of Debt" and it is that certificate of DEBT OWED that needs to be paid. Abolishing God's Law would obviate the need to pay the debt in the first place.

So now "By faith we Establish Law". Rom 3:31.

The Sovereign of the universe RETAINS His law and PAYS the debt it demands to save mankind.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by BobRyan:

My reference to the 23 books of the NT - was simply to point out that most Sabbath keeping Christians accept all 66. I have some RC friends who seem to only accept 23 books - the NT only.

Bob,
27 + 39 = 66

There are 27 books in the New Testament. That was the reason for my question.
DHK

 

[neal4christ]

It is the "certificate of debt" that He cancelled

Was this a handwritten document?

Neal

 

[Abiyah]

Originally posted by DHK:
Abyiah,
With respect to your comments:
1. There is no command anywhere in the New Testament for any believer to observe the Sabbath.

I am sorry. I often forget that not
everyone accepts the whole Bible as
relevant for today. Even so, how can
you discount Matthew 5:17 - 20?

2. However, we do have the examples of believers observing the first day of the week (Acts 20:7; 1Cor.16:2).

Do you understand Jewish time? This
was written by Jews about Jews, who
lived within Jewish customs and
understood the days and their
divisions according to those customs.
Many who do not understand assume
that Paul started preaching on Sunday
morning and preached until Sunday
midnight, but he did not.

After the Sabbath, the first day of the
week comes upon sundown. As was
the custom, when Shabbat ended,
many would gather in a home and
eat there, while continuing to discuss
the day's Scriptures. This is what
they were doing, and Paul used the
opportunity to preach. (This was quite
ordinary; what was not ordinary was
the child falling out of the window.)

The reason money, food, and other
items were set aside on the first day
of the week was that money was not
handled on th Sabbath, other than
the Temple coins. It was a convenient
time to do this--when all were already
together. Also, the poor could take
their portions as they left the Sabbath
assembly that evening and left for
home.

3. We have the command of Paul (Col.2:16,17) not to allow anyone to judge a believer who does not keep the Sabbath or any other Old Testamen ordinance for we are not under bondage to such.

If I remember correctly, this was
already explained here.

4. We have the command of Paul in Romans 14 that no one should judge a believer for not worshipping on the first day of the week, and that every day is alike. The key here he points out is: "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind."

I think this was also explained.

5. We have Hebrews 4 teaching us that Christ Himself is the fulfillment of the Sabbath. He is our Sabbath.

Shall we, then, discount our Lord
and His Sabbath by refusing to
acknowledge His day of which
He is Lord?

To use Constantne as an example of the one who made the change from Saturday to Sunday is just plain wrong. Constantine was not a Christian, but a wicked man who used Christianity for his own political gains. He paganized Christianity, and Christianized paganism. He introduced many pagan concepts into the church at that time including the worship of idols. This is not when Christianity began, but it is when the Catholic Church began. It has nothing to do with the Sabbath or the first day of the week, as believers were already worshipping on the first day of the week. The New Testament gives ample evidence of this.

Then you must be one who will
deny historic facts in order to
justify your beliefs.

I am not as legalistic as some in "doing nothing but worship" on Sunday. However I do agree, that things were much better in that age when on Sundays all but the most necessary of things were closed (police, hospitals, etc.). They were closed in order that people could go to church. Since times have changed so has our society. It has become much more secular, and much more godless.
DHK

If Christians would only truly
observe their chosen worship day
as the Bible commands the Sabbath
to be observed, it would be much
easier to accept that they are truly
trying to observe it in righteousness.
I am glad tha you do try to observe
it more seriously than most.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by BobRyan:

The "point" that you "pretend not to see" (as if pretending not to understand - could possibly form a valid response to a devastating argument against your speculations) - is simply --

YOU invent a rule "The Sabbath commandment is not REPEATED so it becomes VOID where NOT repeated".

I respond that your invented-rule does not hold water since EVEN in the OT - we have many cases where the Sabbath commandment is "NOT repeated" but we KNOW it is not VOID simply because it is NOT repeated.

Bob,
You have no argument at all. The command to keep the sabbath is repeated many times throughout the Old Testament, for it was a command given to the Jews. It is never given to the New Testament believers, so why should it be repeated in the New Testamenet. This is the very reason that it isn't. It is specifically for the Jews. Please read and study Exodus 31!

13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you.
14 Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.

Either you believe the Bible on this point or you don't. Apparently you don't, for you have failed to address this verse even once. The reason there is no command in the New Testament to keep the Sabbath is the command is for the Israelites.

I then point out the FUTHER failure of your invented-rule by noting that EVEN those who reject God's Holy Seventh-day memorial of Creation "made for Mankind" - agree that the Gospels pertain to events BEFORE the cross WHILE the Law of God is in force EVEN by your own account. I show that EVEN in that Pre-Cross era - (be it Malachi or the Gospels PRE-Cross) the Sabbath is not "repeated" but all agree is IN FORCE.

My so-called "rule" is obviously not invented. You just fail to believe the Scripture on this point.
The gospels may pertain to events before the cross. So what? The church was formed on the day of Pentecost. From that day onward believers began to meet in remembrance of the resurrection of Christ. They could hardly do that before Christ rose again from the dead could they??
DHK

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Abiyah:

Do you understand Jewish time? This
was written by Jews about Jews, who
lived within Jewish customs and
understood the days and their
divisions according to those customs.
Many who do not understand assume
that Paul started preaching on Sunday
morning and preached until Sunday
midnight, but he did not.

So when the Holy Spirit of God inspires Luke to write "Sabbath" it means "Sabbath." But when the Holy Spirit of God inspires Luke to write "the first day of the week," Luke becomes all confused, does not know how to tell time, (neither does the Spirit of God apparently), and "the first day of the week" still means "sabbath."
I'm sorry but you can't have it both ways.
DHK

 

[Abiyah]

Originally posted by DHK:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Abiyah:

Do you understand Jewish time? This
was written by Jews about Jews, who
lived within Jewish customs and
understood the days and their
divisions according to those customs.
Many who do not understand assume
that Paul started preaching on Sunday
morning and preached until Sunday
midnight, but he did not.

So when the Holy Spirit of God inspires Luke to write "Sabbath" it means "Sabbath." But when the Holy Spirit of God inspires Luke to write "the first day of the week," Luke becomes all confused, does not know how to tell time, (neither does the Spirit of God apparently), and "the first day of the week" still means "sabbath."
I'm sorry but you can't have it both ways.
DHK </font>

DHK, it is very simple -- really. 8o)
What you have written above -- well,
it is so out of context with what I
wrote, and ignores so many of te
thins I said, that it is amazing to me
and, I think, below your normal
standards.

 

[DHK]

Acts 20:7 And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

Really, Abyiah, Isn't it an honest question?
Does not Luke writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit know the difference between the first day of the week and the Sabbath. If he meant the sabbath, why would he not write the sabbath?

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Abiyah:

The reason money, food, and other
items were set aside on the first day
of the week was that money was not
handled on th Sabbath, other than
the Temple coins. It was a convenient
time to do this--when all were already
together. Also, the poor could take
their portions as they left the Sabbath
assembly that evening and left for
home.

If this were true Paul would have mentioned the Sabbath, and not the first day of the week. He mentioned the first day of the week because of its importance to the believers. That's when they met together. These were not Jews. The church at Corinth was made up of people primarily of a Gentile or pagan background. The sabbath would not have had much significance to them anyway. Paul mentions their background in 1Cor.12:2:

2 Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.

The Sabbath was of no great importance to these believers, and Paul did not make it an issue with them. What money they put aside during the week they were to bring on the first day of the week, the day that they gathered together. The Sabbath Day had nothing to do with it.
DHK

 

[Abiyah]

Originally posted by Singer:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Abiyah:
I do not hate those who worship on Sunday; I do
not even dislike them. I have much respect and
love for many who do this, including my husband
and children, but these facts remain, and they
cannot be changed by arguing, although some
try. I know that it goes against tradition, but what
is tradition when measured against our God's
word?

Do I correctly gather from this admission that your husband and
children are not Sabbath Keepers..?

If so, it must grieve you that they are not able to see your standards.</font>[/QUOTE]

Admission? 8o) Not really. A
mere statement of the facts. 8o)

Thank you. It is sweet of you to
be concerned, but no, I do not
see this as problematic. They
are all works in progress,
following what the belief
system I reared them in taught
them. They are, in a way, where
I once was.

Although I had always questioned
a "Sunday-Sabbath" (since age 12
- 14 or so), I went along with it, too,
because that was what everyone
else did. In spite of my questions,
I kept thinking, "Could so many
people be so wrong?" Thus, I
justified not teaching them anything
about Sabbath. I did, however,
teach them not to work, buy, or sell
on Sunday.

However, both my children and
one stepchild are beginning to
ask questions. My husband
has also stated that if he was
not so bound to his job, he
would observe Sabbath.

Bob Ryan said it is not necessary to
be a Sabbath worshipper to go to
heaven, so you can at least rest in
that assurance. 3AM seems to think
that Sabbath keeping is of more
importance, as you do.

As we have stated, we all come
from different backgrounds,
varying beliefs. I did not read that
Bob said tis, so I have no idea what
he believes. I do not happen to
agree with this, in regard to those
who innocently do not observe
Sabbath.

Don't be so concerned for your
family as the "works" of keeping
the Sabbath is not a requirement
to salvation. The law cannot
save, it can only convict.[/quote}

8o) Again, thank you for your
concern. My salvation is through
my Lord and is not through
Sabbath-keeping. Sabbath-
keeping is that extra blessing
our Lord has given us all --
a delight, as it says in the
Psalms.

As an afterthought, this is Saturday and I'm preaching. Do you
suppose your pastor feels guilty about working on the Sabbath.
After all....he gets paid for his services does he not ? IT is his life's
vocation for him much as mine is singing on Saturday nights.
(I also witness for the Lord in my setting...a form of preaching, but
I don't get paid for that additional feature)

Oh, no! That is the way our God set
it up, and He does not disappoint.
The priests, from ancient times,
were to do it this way. Even the
sacrifice system was not absolutely
humanly perfect, but our God works
through human imperfection, and
His system is perfect as He set it
up.

Gee whiz...another afterthought :
I preach on the Sabbath and take no pay for it..or even expect it.
Your pastor preaches on the Sabbath (which is work for him) and
he expects to get paid for his Sabbath labor; but probably won't accept
pay until Sunday for work done on Saturday.



Singer

Well, SInger! You have a great
imagination! 8oD

 

[3AngelsMom]

Singer,

Just a quick correction for you.

The Pastors of the SDA are not payed based on the money taken into the congregation they preside over. The SDA has the most moral financial system of ANY church I have ever studied.

We take up tithes and offerings. Those moneys go to the Conference level. The Conference pays EVERY pastor the same salary regardless of whether there are 33 members or 3300 members. They all make the same pay.

Now, with your remark regarding them 'working' on the Sabbath.

The pastors are SUPPORTED by the Church. THIS is Biblical. The 'work' they do is for GOD, on the Sabbath, it is not for financial gain.

I am truly repulsed that you see the work of the Ministry in this way.

If I went to a friends house on the Sabbath, who was sick or bed ridden and washed their dishes for them, that would not be 'work', that would be an act of charity. However if I washed MY dishes that would be work.

If my pastor was preaching for the sole reason of making a buck, then it wouldn't matter which day he was preaching on, for his entire life would be found in reproach.

God Bless

 

[3AngelsMom]

DHK,

We need to get something straight once and for all.

If you do not believe that the promises made to the seed of Abraham are for every believer, regardless of race, then YOU my friend DO NOT have a Saviour.

HE was promised to the JEWS.

The prophecies made to fortell His coming was given to the JEWS.

The blood line that He came through was JEWISH.

The people who He has called HIS are JEWISH.

Your antisemitism needs to stop HERE.

Jesus IS the God who made the Sabbath.

Jesus IS the God who gave us the LAW.

JESUS IS GOD.

He does not change.

NOR DOES HIS LAW.

If you do not think that you are part of the Family of God, and do not think that you are an heir according to the promises made to Abrahams seed, then you are NOT a child of God.

It is that simple.

Since I can safely assume that you ARE a child of God, then you need to prayerfully consider the theology that you have been duped into believing that makes you think that you are NOT a Jew.

God Bless

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by Singer: I might add that if you're going to live by the law; you will be judged by the whole
law and not by grace. (The law that you hope will save you will actually accuse you)

That is a grave misunderstanding of that passage, my friend! You HONESTLY think that GOD would inspire someone to say that if you OBEY HIM you won't be under Grace any more???? I hope you don't really think that.

That statement should have caused you to realize then that DHK and myself are
saved. To deliver yourself from exclusivism, you'll have to further let go of the
Sabbath Syndrome.....you already admit there are God's people elswhere, or are
you only referring to Sabbath keepers of other denomination. (Like SDBs) ?

You point to my statement as if I am judging you, then you turn around and judge me. I did not say, or even imply for that matter that you or DHK are not saved. I would not seriously say that. I might put it in a question, that is meant to inflict thought, but I wouldn't say it seriously, like 'you're not saved cuz you disagree with me!'
For what good reason would I need to 'let go' of the Sabbath? HOW, would OBEDIENCE keep me out of Heaven? And for that matter, how would that keep me from seeing you as a brother? It doesn't. If you believe in Jesus, as your Saviour, then you are my brother.

This comment of yours, re: Sabbath, that follows is the same approach used
by Catholics to attempt to shed guilt upon others for not succumbing to Catholic
conversion. They have convincing biblical evidence that God expects everyone
to join the "One true Church" (as they see it) and for those who do not do so, will
be judged for the 'light that they do have'. You're saying the same thing only displacing
Sabbath worship for some other fallacy. So far, I've found someone to dispute nearly
every bible truth that is the makeup of my total belief. Why would I separate out their
misleadings and accept yours...?

For one, I have NEVER said that I belong to the "one true church", secondly, I have never said that you must succomb to my doctrines or be
'ananthema'. You are misunderstanding me if you think I feel this way!

You said:
" Don't be so quick to believe the false doctrine that tells you that you
don't need to obey God anymore. It is very evident from Scripture that
Grace is the means by which we are forgiven, but that Grace is NOT an
occasion for us to sin."

Saved by Grace
Singer

I find it interesting that you could percieve all these thing about me, even after reading that last statement. Yes, you are saved by grace. But saved from WHAT? Saved from good works? Saved from obedience? NO NO NO. You are saved from the PENALTY of sin. NOT the rule by which it is defined.

If you throw out the ruler, by what do you measure yourself against? If you know not what you are, how can you know that you need a Saviour?

God Bless

 

[neal4christ]

3AM,

An honest question for you. Do you observe all the laws of the OT?

Neal

 

[BobRyan]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Ryan said it is not necessary to
be a Sabbath worshipper to go to
heaven, so you can at least rest in
that assurance.

3AM seems to think
that Sabbath keeping is of more
importance, as you do.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abyiah said --
As we have stated, we all come
from different backgrounds,
varying beliefs. I did not read that
Bob said tis, so I have no idea what
he believes. I do not happen to
agree with this, in regard to those
who innocently do not observe
Sabbath.

My statement was as stated above - that you do not need to Keep Sabbath - to go to heaven.

In Christ,

Bob