WHAT IS THE REAL GOSPEL?

[bbbbbbb]

You just avoided answering anything in the post you are responding to. You do not have to answer my questions if you do not want to. I am happy to answer them for you. There was no Priesthood when there was no sin. It is impossible for the Sabbath to be a shadow law of anything because it points "backwards" to the finished work of creation as a memorial of the finished Word of creation "Remember the Sabbath day" - Exodus 20:8. Not forwards to things to come because there was no sin when the Sabbath was created for all mankind *Genesis 2:1-3; Mark 2:27.

Here is what I posted to which you replied none of it is true -

I fear that you fail to understand the point. The writer of Hebrews uses the person of Melchizedek as being a priest comparable to Jesus Christ. If, what you say is true, then Jesus Christ is no priest at all because, according to your hypothesis, Melchizedek was not a priest at all. Nevertheless we have lengthy writing in Hebrews stating that Melchizedek was, indeed, a priest, and that Jesus Christ was a priest after his order. Moreover, the writer of Hebrews has no difficulty in making it quite explicit that Jesus Christ serves both as the high priest of His people, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time through His blood and that He perpetually intercedes for His people as high priest seated on the right hand of God the Father.

Are you saying that it is not true that Jesus Christ offered one sacrifice for sins for all time through His blood?

 

[LoveGodsWord]

LoveGodsWord said: ↑ You just avoided answering anything in the post you are responding to. You do not have to answer my questions if you do not want to. I am happy to answer them for you. There was no Priesthood when there was no sin. It is impossible for the Sabbath to be a shadow law of anything because it points "backwards" to the finished work of creation as a memorial of the finished Word of creation "Remember the Sabbath day" - Exodus 20:8. Not forwards to things to come because there was no sin when the Sabbath was created for all mankind *Genesis 2:1-3; Mark 2:27.

Your response here...

Here is what I posted to which you replied none of it is true -

I fear that you fail to understand the point. The writer of Hebrews uses the person of Melchizedek as being a priest comparable to Jesus Christ. If, what you say is true, then Jesus Christ is no priest at all because, according to your hypothesis, Melchizedek was not a priest at all. Nevertheless we have lengthy writing in Hebrews stating that Melchizedek was, indeed, a priest, and that Jesus Christ was a priest after his order. Moreover, the writer of Hebrews has no difficulty in making it quite explicit that Jesus Christ serves both as the high priest of His people, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time through His blood and that He perpetually intercedes for His people as high priest seated on the right hand of God the Father.

Are you saying that it is not true that Jesus Christ offered one sacrifice for sins for all time through His blood?

I read it the first time and yes I do not know what your talking about or how you have answered anything in the post you are quoting from. Your talking about things that have nothing to do with what I am asking you and are not relevant as I am talking pre-fall at creation when the Sabbath was made for all mankind (Mark 2:27) when there was no sin and when there was no Priesthood. What do you think the post you are quoting from is saying and why do you think it is disagreeing with you?

Take Care.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Your response here...

I read it the first time and yes I do not know what your talking about or how you have answered anything in the post you are quoting from. Your talking about things that have nothing to do with what I am asking you and are not relevant as I am talking pre-fall at creation when there was no sin and when there was no Priesthood. What do you think the post you are quoting from is saying and why do you think it is disagreeing with you?

Take Care.

You simply stated that none of what I posted was true. I am merely asking particular questions about what I posted. Do you actually believe that none of the following is true?

I fear that you fail to understand the point. The writer of Hebrews uses the person of Melchizedek as being a priest comparable to Jesus Christ. If, what you say is true, then Jesus Christ is no priest at all because, according to your hypothesis, Melchizedek was not a priest at all. Nevertheless we have lengthy writing in Hebrews stating that Melchizedek was, indeed, a priest, and that Jesus Christ was a priest after his order. Moreover, the writer of Hebrews has no difficulty in making it quite explicit that Jesus Christ serves both as the high priest of His people, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time through His blood and that He perpetually intercedes for His people as high priest seated on the right hand of God the Father.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

LoveGodsWord said: ↑ You just avoided answering anything in the post you are responding to. You do not have to answer my questions if you do not want to. I am happy to answer them for you. There was no Priesthood when there was no sin. It is impossible for the Sabbath to be a shadow law of anything because it points "backwards" to the finished work of creation as a memorial of the finished Word of creation "Remember the Sabbath day" - Exodus 20:8. Not forwards to things to come because there was no sin when the Sabbath was created for all mankind *Genesis 2:1-3; Mark 2:27.

Your response here..

I fear that you fail to understand the point. The writer of Hebrews uses the person of Melchizedek as being a priest comparable to Jesus Christ. If, what you say is true, then Jesus Christ is no priest at all because, according to your hypothesis, Melchizedek was not a priest at all. Nevertheless we have lengthy writing in Hebrews stating that Melchizedek was, indeed, a priest, and that Jesus Christ was a priest after his order. Moreover, the writer of Hebrews has no difficulty in making it quite explicit that Jesus Christ serves both as the high priest of His people, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time through His blood and that He perpetually intercedes for His people as high priest seated on the right hand of God the Father.

What do you think the post you are quoting from is saying and why do you that what your posting is not relevant to my post and scriptures shared with you?

 

[LoveGodsWord]

I would say there is no other "gospel". Because there are many false gospels.

I suspect one common one is the idea that Jesus died for us, and therefore we are guaranteed to go to Heaven, but there is nothing about being deeply corrected in our character so we become like Jesus and share intimately with our Heavenly Father in His love now. But ones only or mainly talk about how we will go to Heaven, no matter what sins we do in this life. And they say God unconditionally loves us, but there is no mention of how He truly corrects our character because He so loves us; but Hebrews 12:4-14 means that His grace favors us by correcting us to become holy and peaceful in sharing with Jesus. But ones talk mainly or only about how God will keep loving us, no matter how we mess up, but they do not say how God's grace in us has us succeeding in doing all His word of the New Testament means to Him, because of how we have been growing in this grace > God's redeeming almighty creative energizing, I suppose this could mean.

The bible talks about "another gospel" in 2 Corinthians 11:4 what do you think these scriptures are talking about (more scriptures here)?

 

[LoveGodsWord]

There was grace before the Law came. But the Law is used to help people know they need Jesus. Therefore, the Law is used by God in His overall working of things. I would summarize: His grace can use His Law; but His grace does not depend on His Law.

How can we receive God's grace without God's law when it is God's law that leads us to Gods' grace (scriptures here)?

 

[Ligurian]

Good scriptures Ligurian. Thanks for sharing them. What do you think is the meaning of Revelation 14:7-12?

The results of two different choices are shown in Revelation 14.

14:1 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with Him an hundred forty four thousand, having His Father's name written in their foreheads. (Revelation 7:4) (Rev.3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God: New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God, and My new name.)

14:6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the Everlasting Gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, 7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to Him; for the hour of His judgment is come: and worship Him that made Heaven, and Earth, and the Sea, and the fountains of waters.

14:8 And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication. 9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive [his] mark in his forehead, or in his hand,

14:14 And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud [one] sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.

14:18 And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe.

 

[Ligurian]

The bible talks about "another gospel" in 2 Corinthians 11:4 what do you think these scriptures are talking about (more scriptures here)?

2 Corinthians 11:4* + Galatians 3:2-5
versus
John 14:15-17

We can't help knowing that there's another gospel before "Christ Crucified", if we read the synoptic gospels at all... or even (gasp) do a word-search. Jesus didn't preach Himself crucified to the people He was healing. In fact, John's gospel records Jesus saying He got His gospel in words and sayings from the Father.

The ancient Gospel of God's Kingdom on Earth, spoken of by the Prophets and Psalms, came to Earth with Jesus. And it never left, but went underground so to speak... with the advent of "Christ crucified", which received so much acclaim that the Laws which Jesus brought have perforce been buried within His lost-and-found sheep.

For Matthew 24 to be able to say that this Gospel of the Kingdom will be preached in all the world and then the end will come, then this Gospel of the Kingdom is what the two witnesses will be preaching while being battled by Jezebel's prophets and modern-day Pharaohs. Because these two witnesses are the ones found on the mount of transfiguration, since we see the same plagues and draught done by Elijah and Moses. These are specifically Israelite witnesses, so we expect to hear Laws from them.

___________
* a different spirit AND a different gospel...

2 Corinthians 11:4-5 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or [if] ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with [him].
5 For I suppose I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles.

 

[The Liturgist]

Well none of that is true.

Forgive me, but I have no idea what you are talking about - @bbbbbbb merely recapitulated the Epistle of the Hebrews, and his recapitulation was accurate - it does clearly express in Genesis that Melchizedek was a priest, because St. Abraham made an offering to him, and in the Epistle to the Hebrews it further says of Jesus Christ that He is a priest (Hiereus) forever after the order of Melchizedek. And @bbbbbbb is simply factually recounting that.

Let me ask you again because you did not answer the question or understand what was being asked of you. How can the weekly Sabbath point to rest in Jesus when it points backwards to the finished work of creation before mankind sinned?

I addressed this point in great detail in this post.

If there was no sin why would you need a Priest?

Firstly, there was obviously a great deal of sin in the world when St. Abraham made an offering to St. Melchizedek. But secondly, even in the absence of sin, it is gravely fallacious to assume that the hieratic priesthood would be unnecessary. Now, to clarify, in this context by priest, we mean Sacerdotal priests, holders of the office known as Kohanim in Hebrew and as Hiereus in Koine Greek, and not Presbyters (from which the English word for Priest is derived). This sacerdotal, hieratic priesthood is the Royal Priesthood of all faithful Christians, with Jesus Christ as the high priest - the Kohen Gadol.

This priesthood is of particular importance for all Christians, both now, in Heaven, and in the World to Come after the General Resurrection, because it represents our ability to pray to and commune with God (and at present, to receive grace by means of the Sacraments administered by the Episcopate and the Presbyters), and at all times now and in the future, to facilitate our unceasing prayer to, and worship of, God.

If there was no sin where are your "shadow laws"? Was the Priesthood made before the fall of mankind or after the fall of mankind?

Before, since Jesus Christ is a High Priest forever, which is to say He always has been and always will be the Supreme Hierarch of the Christian faith.

Was Gods' plan of salvation given before sin or after sin?

The early Church Fathers consistently believed that the Economy of Salvation was part of God’s intentions for us from the beginning, since God, being omniscient, and desiring us to possess free will, knew that some would fall astray, and that sin would enter into the world - the economy of Salvation, involving the recreation of humanity by Jesus Christ on the Cross so as to restore our sin-tarnished image of God, the early Church Fathers and the Eastern churches taught us results in our being perfected through the grace of the Holy Spirit to a state far beyond Adam in terms of glory, through Theosis, because in order to restore us, God the Son became man, exalting our mortal and debased humanity by rendering it immortal, incorruptible and godlike in the Resurrection, so that the faithful Christian can become by grace what Christ is by nature.

Do you understand what is being asked now?

Well, syntactically, yes, although I am not sure what has prompted you to ask these questions, or what the basis for some of your apparent opinions is.

Lastly, I realize these questions were intended for my friend @bbbbbbb, however, insofar as they transect a number of core doctrinal issues, I felt compelled to answer them.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Forgive me, but I have no idea what you are talking about - @bbbbbbb merely recapitulated the Epistle of the Hebrews, and his recapitulation was accurate - it does clearly express in Genesis that Melchizedek was a priest, because St. Abraham made an offering to him, and in the Epistle to the Hebrews it further says of Jesus Christ that He is a priest (Hiereus) forever after the order of Melchizedek. And @bbbbbbb is simply factually recounting that.



I addressed this point in great detail in this post.



Firstly, there was obviously a great deal of sin in the world when St. Abraham made an offering to St. Melchizedek. But secondly, even in the absence of sin, it is gravely fallacious to assume that the hieratic priesthood would be unnecessary. Now, to clarify, in this context by priest, we mean Sacerdotal priests, holders of the office known as Kohanim in Hebrew and as Hiereus in Koine Greek, and not Presbyters (from which the English word for Priest is derived). This sacerdotal, hieratic priesthood is the Royal Priesthood of all faithful Christians, with Jesus Christ as the high priest - the Kohen Gadol.

This priesthood is of particular importance for all Christians, both now, in Heaven, and in the World to Come after the General Resurrection, because it represents our ability to pray to and commune with God (and at present, to receive grace by means of the Sacraments administered by the Episcopate and the Presbyters), and at all times now and in the future, to facilitate our unceasing prayer to, and worship of, God.



Before, since Jesus Christ is a High Priest forever, which is to say He always has been and always will be the Supreme Hierarch of the Christian faith.



The early Church Fathers consistently believed that the Economy of Salvation was part of God’s intentions for us from the beginning, since God, being omniscient, and desiring us to possess free will, knew that some would fall astray, and that sin would enter into the world - the economy of Salvation, involving the recreation of humanity by Jesus Christ on the Cross so as to restore our sin-tarnished image of God, the early Church Fathers and the Eastern churches taught us results in our being perfected through the grace of the Holy Spirit to a state far beyond Adam in terms of glory, through Theosis, because in order to restore us, God the Son became man, exalting our mortal and debased humanity by rendering it immortal, incorruptible and godlike in the Resurrection, so that the faithful Christian can become by grace what Christ is by nature.



Well, syntactically, yes, although I am not sure what has prompted you to ask these questions, or what the basis for some of your apparent opinions is.

Lastly, I realize these questions were intended for my friend @bbbbbbb, however, insofar as they transect a number of core doctrinal issues, I felt compelled to answer them.

Well you have posted a lot of words that do not address anything to what I posted earlier. Perhaps it might have been better to follow the whole conversation through before commenting but let me show you what I mean. Here let's follow the discussion...

The weekly Sabbath pointed to these rests - specifically the seventh day of creation. Which, the seventh day of creation pointed to the work God had finished in Christ before the foundation of the world. It is no surprise really. Everything points to God and His Son.

Responded with...

How can the weekly Sabbath point to rest in Jesus when it points backwards to the finished work of creation before mankind sinned?

bbbbb responded with...

How can Melchizedek be a type of Jesus considering that we know virtually nothing about him and he popped up long before the Law was given on Mount Sinai to Moses and the nation of Israel?

Responded with...

I do not think you understood what we were quoting from. What do you need a Priest for when there was no sin and no plan of salvation given because mankind had not fallen into sin? You do know that Priests are written into God's plan of salvation right and given after the fall of mankind not before right?

bbbbb responded with...

I fear that you fail to understand the point. The writer of Hebrews uses the person of Melchizedek as being a priest comparable to Jesus Christ. If, what you say is true, then Jesus Christ is no priest at all because, according to your hypothesis, Melchizedek was not a priest at all. Nevertheless we have lengthy writing in Hebrews stating that Melchizedek was, indeed, a priest, and that Jesus Christ was a priest after his order. Moreover, the writer of Hebrews has no difficulty in making it quite explicit that Jesus Christ serves both as the high priest of His people, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time through His blood and that He perpetually intercedes for His people as high priest seated on the right hand of God the Father.

Responded with...

Well none of that is true. I did indeed understand what you wrote. Let me ask you again because you did not answer the question or understand what was being asked of you. How can the weekly Sabbath point to rest in Jesus when it points backwards to the finished work of creation before mankind sinned? If there was no sin why would you need a Priest? If there was no sin where are your "shadow laws"? Was the Priesthood made before the fall of mankind or after the fall of mankind? Was Gods' plan of salvation given before sin or after sin? Do you understand what is being asked now?

bbbbb responded with...

When you stated "none of that is true" do you also mean that it is not true that Melchizedek was a priest? If so, how do you view his stated role in Hebrews as a priest?

Responded with...

You just avoided answering anything in the post you are responding to. You do not have to answer my questions if you do not want to. I am happy to answer them for you. There was no Priesthood when there was no sin. It is impossible for the Sabbath to be a shadow law of anything because it points "backwards" to the finished work of creation as a memorial of the finished Word of creation "Remember the Sabbath day" - Exodus 20:8. Not forwards to things to come because there was no sin when the Sabbath was created for all mankind *Genesis 2:1-3; Mark 2:27.

.....................

Now you tell me how @bbbbbbb's post answers my questions above and how anything you have written in your post that I am responding to answered anything in my post or the questions that are asked there? You are also welcome to answer these questions if you would like to or will I hear silence (scripture please)?

Take Care.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Your response here...

I read it the first time and yes I do not know what your talking about or how you have answered anything in the post you are quoting from. Your talking about things that have nothing to do with what I am asking you and are not relevant as I am talking pre-fall at creation when there was no sin and when there was no Priesthood. What do you think the post you are quoting from is saying and why do you think it is disagreeing with you?

Take Care.

Here is the complete content of your post #698.

bbbbbbb said: ↑

I fear that you fail to understand the point. The writer of Hebrews uses the person of Melchizedek as being a priest comparable to Jesus Christ. If, what you say is true, then Jesus Christ is no priest at all because, according to your hypothesis, Melchizedek was not a priest at all. Nevertheless we have lengthy writing in Hebrews stating that Melchizedek was, indeed, a priest, and that Jesus Christ was a priest after his order. Moreover, the writer of Hebrews has no difficulty in making it quite explicit that Jesus Christ serves both as the high priest of His people, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time through His blood and that He perpetually intercedes for His people as high priest seated on the right hand of God the Father.

Well none of that is true. I did indeed understand what you wrote. Let me ask you again because you did not answer the question or understand what was being asked of you. How can the weekly Sabbath point to rest in Jesus when it points backwards to the finished work of creation before mankind sinned? If there was no sin why would you need a Priest? If there was no sin where are your "shadow laws"? Was the Priesthood made before the fall of mankind or after the fall of mankind? Was Gods' plan of salvation given before sin or after sin? Do you understand what is being asked now?

Do you actually believe that none of what I posted is true?

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Here is the complete content of your post #698.

bbbbbbb said: ↑

I fear that you fail to understand the point. The writer of Hebrews uses the person of Melchizedek as being a priest comparable to Jesus Christ. If, what you say is true, then Jesus Christ is no priest at all because, according to your hypothesis, Melchizedek was not a priest at all. Nevertheless we have lengthy writing in Hebrews stating that Melchizedek was, indeed, a priest, and that Jesus Christ was a priest after his order. Moreover, the writer of Hebrews has no difficulty in making it quite explicit that Jesus Christ serves both as the high priest of His people, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time through His blood and that He perpetually intercedes for His people as high priest seated on the right hand of God the Father.

Well none of that is true. I did indeed understand what you wrote. Let me ask you again because you did not answer the question or understand what was being asked of you. How can the weekly Sabbath point to rest in Jesus when it points backwards to the finished work of creation before mankind sinned? If there was no sin why would you need a Priest? If there was no sin where are your "shadow laws"? Was the Priesthood made before the fall of mankind or after the fall of mankind? Was Gods' plan of salvation given before sin or after sin? Do you understand what is being asked now?

Do you actually believe that none of what I posted is true?

No, I do not believe your claims that I did not understand what you wrote was true and I believe that what you posted had nothing to do with the questions asked of you and the post you were quoting from. Did you want to answer the questions that were asked of you in regards to the Sabbath and the priesthood? If not you do not have to just say so.

Take Care.

 

[bbbbbbb]

No, I do not believe that your claims that I did not understand what you wrote was not true and that what you posted had nothing to do with the questions asked of you and the post you were quoting from. Did you want to answer the questions that were asked of you not in regards to the Sabbath and the priesthood? If not you do not have to just say so.

Take Care.

Do you want to address all the questions I asked of you? You are quite off-topic of this thread if you think that the gospel is all about Sabbath-keeping.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Do you want to address all the questions I asked of you? You are quite off-topic of this thread if you think that the gospel is all about Sabbath-keeping.

Actually the questions I was asking was a response to someone else who was making a comment on the Sabbath. It had nothing to do with you. You simply commented on my post and the questions and provided a response that had nothing to do with the post you are quoting from. So the comments started with you commenting on my questions not me commenting on your posts. If you do not want to answer the questions asked of you in the original post I can understand why and of course you do not have to if you do not want to. As posted in this thread in the OP the gospel is every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God *Matthew 4:4. Not some of it.

Take care.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Actually the questions I was asking was a response to someone else I was posting a response to who was making a comment on the Sabbath. It had nothing to do with you. You simply commented on those questions and provided a response that had nothing to do with the post you are quoting from. So the comments started with you commenting on my questions not me commenting on your posts. If you do not want to answer the questions asked of you in the original post I can understand why and of course you do not have to if you do not want to. As posted in this thread in the OP the gospel is every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God *Matthew 4:4. Not some of it.

Take care.

If you actually believe what you wrote, then you probably consider the letter to the Hebrews to have proceeded out of the mouth of God. If you mean that literally God opened His mouth and spoke words, then you may be limited to only the Ten Commandments, which would actually be really helpful because you can ignore everything else in the Bible because God did not literally speak it.

Do you believe the entire Bible proceeded out of the mouth of God?

If so, then why do you stubbornly refuse to obey all of His commandments?

 

[LoveGodsWord]

If you actually believe what you wrote, then you probably consider the letter to the Hebrews to have proceeded out of the mouth of God. If you mean that literally God opened His mouth and spoke words, then you may be limited to only the Ten Commandments, which would actually be really helpful because you can ignore everything else in the Bible because God did not literally speak it.

Do you believe the entire Bible proceeded out of the mouth of God?

If so, then why do you stubbornly refuse to obey all of His commandments?

Why? There was no Hebrews before sin was there? Just the same as there was no Priesthood, no Sanctuary, no law, no sin, no plan of salvation, no Moses, no Israel and no "shadow laws" for God's plan of salvation because mankind was in perfect harmony with God and sinless. Only Adam and Eve in perfect harmony with the creator. All of the above did not come until after the fall when mankind (Adam and Eve) sinned against God. Do you understand why I asked someone else earlier; How can the weekly Sabbath point to rest in Jesus and be a "shadow law" pointing to things to come in the future, when it points backwards to the finished work of creation before mankind sinned? There was no gospel because there was no sin what God made the Sabbath for all mankind. I think this is what your not understanding in our discussion here.

Take Care.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Why? There was no Hebrews before sin was there? Just the same as there was no Priesthood, no Sanctuary, no law, no sin, no plan of salvation, no Moses, no Israel and no "shadow law" for God's plan of salvation because mankind was in perfect harmony with God and sinless. Only Adam and Eve in perfect harmony with the creator. Do you understand why I asked someone else earlier; How can the weekly Sabbath point to rest in Jesus when it points backwards to the finished work of creation before mankind sinned? There was no gospel because there was no sin what God made the Sabbath for all mankind. I think this is what your not understanding in our discussion here.

Take Care.

Gotcha. The REAL gospel, according to you, is centered on attending church on Saturdays only and going through standard nineteenth-century American religious activities.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Gotcha. The REAL gospel, according to you, is centered on attending church on Saturdays only and going through standard nineteenth-century American religious activities.

Sorry dear friend but I respectfully disagree. What has this post response have to do with anything in the post you are responding to? Or how does it address or answer any questions asked of you? - It doesn't. What do you mean the real gospel? Did God give us His gospel before the fall (before Adam and Eve sinned) or after the fall (after Adam and Eve sinned)? I do not think this question is a very hard one. May I ask what is it in the posts I am sharing with you that you do not understand or disagree with? I am only trying to be helpful here.

Take care.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Sorry dear friend but I respectfully disagree. What has this post response have to do with anything in the post you are responding to? Or how does it address or answer any questions asked of you? - It doesn't. What do you mean the real gospel? Did God give us His gospel before the fall (before Adam and Eve sinned) or after the fall (after Adam and Eve sinned)? I do not think this question is a very hard one. May I ask what is it in the posts I am sharing with you that you do not understand or disagree with? I am only trying to be helpful here.

Take care.

The title of this thread is "WHAT IS THE REAL GOSPEL?" Please see the OP's statement concerning "the real gospel". I am here to attempt to address that question, not to engage in fruitless questions about "the real Sabbath".

 

[LoveGodsWord]

The title of this thread is "WHAT IS THE REAL GOSPEL?" Please see the OP's statement concerning "the real gospel". I am here to attempt to address that question, not to engage in fruitless questions about "the real Sabbath".

I wasn't talking about the real Sabbath with you. You started that conversation. I was posting a comment to what someone else said about the Sabbath. Anyhow if you do not want to answer those questions in the post you made your comments on you do not have to if you do not want to that is up to you and I welcome your discussion on what you think the "real gospel" is. For me as shown through the scriptures on page one it is every Word of God (all the scriptures) not some of it.