Why do SDA preach

tall73 said:

You are saying that you have to use other texts. Which makes the point.

I was noting to someone else that it is not the best text to use. You then come along and say you disagree, and note that you have to use another text to make a point that is in the other text.

You said you treat them the same. Then said you can't treat them the same because they are not the same. This strand of the conversation is about as helpful as using Isaiah 66 as a Sabbath proof text, which is to say not very.




So then which of the two texts, Isaiah 66, or Exodus 31 speaks of the Sabbath as an everlasting covenant?

Exo 31:16 Therefore the people of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, observing the Sabbath throughout their generations, as a covenant forever.

Isa 66:23 From new moon to new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me, declares the LORD.

Click to expand...

Ok so you agree then that using Isaiah 66:21 and understanding that the Sabbath is an everlasting covenant *Exodus 31:16 is a great way of showing that the Sabbath is a requirement here and now; right?

LoveGodsWord said:

Ok so you agree then that using Isaiah 66:21 and understanding that the Sabbath is an everlasting covenanant is a great way of showing that the Sabbath is a requirement here and now; right?

Click to expand...

No! I agree that Exodus 31 says the Sabbath is a covenant forever, and that is the perfect way to say that the Sabbath is a covenant forever, because it actually says it.

Isaiah 66 confuses the whole situation, ties your argument to a text with many elements that you have to explain, and another assembly, the new moon, which you don't treat the same way.

tall73 said:

No! I agree that Exodus 31 says the Sabbath is a covenant forever, and that is the perfect way to say that the Sabbath is a covenant forever, because it actually says it. Isaiah 66 confuses the whole situation, ties your argument to a text with many elements that you have to explain, and another assembly, the new moon, which you don't treat the same way.

Click to expand...

Well I respectfully disagree. Isaiah 66:22-23 proves Exodus 31:16. As does God's 10 commandments in the new covenant of which the Sabbath is a part of. The two scriptures build off each other.

LoveGodsWord said:

Nonsense. Isaiah 66:22-23 proves Exodus 31:16. As does God's 10 commandments in the new covenant.

Click to expand...

Exodus 31 doesn't need proving. And Isiah 66 doesn't prove it at all if you can look at the new moon and apply things differently.

tall73 said:

Exodus 31 doesn't need proving. And Isiah 66 doesn't prove it at all if you can look at the new moon and apply things differently.

Click to expand...

True though Isaiah 66:22-23 proves that it will be continued in the new earth as an everlasting covenant and that covenant being given here and now proves that the Sabbath is required here and now. I already told you I do not use Isaiah 66:22-23 in isolation to itself in my first post to you.

LoveGodsWord said:

True though Isaiah 66:22-23 proves that it will be continued in the new earth.

Click to expand...

How? According to you, there is "no correct and true understanding of the scriptures".

LoveGodsWord said:

True though Isaiah 66:22-23 proves that it will be continued in the new earth.

Click to expand...

A. It shows it will be in the new earth. It on its own doesn't show now, because it is talking about the new earth.

B. It is a terrible proof text that mixes in elements you don't think apply now.

C. Showing that the Sabbath will be observed in the new earth was something Major1 (who the text was being shown to) already stipulated. So this added nothing.

If you want to make a point about the Sabbath being a forever covenant, use the text that says that.

MMXX said:

How? According to you, there is "no correct and true understanding of the scriptures".

Click to expand...

Please do not pretend that I have said things I have never said to you Brian. That is being dishonest. I am not responding to your posts because you trying to post things I have never said or believe again.

LoveGodsWord said:

True though Isaiah 66:22-23 proves that it will be continued in the new earth as an everlasting covenant and that covenant being given here and now proves that the Sabbath is required here and now. I already told you I do not use Isaiah 66:22-23 in isolation to itself in my first post to you.

Click to expand...

You just added through editing again.

For crying out loud we just wasted a bunch of posts for you to say what I said in the first place. Isaiah 66 didn't add anything, and was not helpful.

And I pointed out your statement you don't use it in isolation showed that from the beginning.

Major1 said he had no issue with us keeping it in the new earth.

The text shows we will keep it in the new earth. So it added nothing to the argument. He wasn't disputing that.

Now this is why I don't care to go through pages of discussing things with you in circles.

tall73 said:

A. It shows it will be in the new earth. It on its own doesn't show now, because it is talking about the new earth.

B. It is a terrible proof text that mixes in elements you don't think apply now.

C. Showing that the Sabbath will be observed in the new earth was something Major1 (who the text was being shown to) already stipulated. So this added nothing.

If you want to make a point about the Sabbath being a forever covenant, use the text that says that.

Click to expand...

True my post is that it is an everlasting covenant given here and now in our earth and that Isaiah 66:22-23 only proves this. It the covenant is here and now then so is the Sabbath. Being kept in the new earth only proves this. Which makes your argument a waste of time in my view.

LoveGodsWord said:

Please do not pretend that I have said things I have never said to you Brian.

Click to expand...

See below:

LoveGodsWord said:

Why do you feel that that is an argument that there is no true Church and that there is no correct and true understanding of the scriptures?

Click to expand...

#580

You can go back and edit that out, but I already took a screen shot of it.

tall73 said:

You just added through editing again.
For crying out loud we just wasted a bunch of posts for you to say what I said in the first place. Isaiah 66 doesn't add anything. And I pointed out your statement you don't use it in isolation showed that from the beginning. Major1 said he had no issue with us keeping it in the new earth. The text shows we will keep it in the new earth. So it added nothing to the argument. He wasn't disputing that. Now this is why I don't care to go through pages of discussing things with you in circles.

Click to expand...

There is nothing in my edits that I have made that changes subject matter and content and most of my edits are normally completed before you post anything. My edits are mainly fixing up typos or grammar or adding something I left out. So please do not pretend that I am changing content and subject matter. Sorry I disagree with you. Your trying to claim that Isaiah 66:22-23 is not a good text that supports the Sabbath. I was disagreeing with you stating that is not true and that it is a great text if used in connection with the scriptures that show that the Sabbath is an everlasting covenant. If you read my posts from the start you would know this. So you agree that the Sabbath as an everlasting covenant from Exodus 31:16 used with Isaiah 22:23 is a great argument right as it shows that this everlasting covenant started here and now and is continued into the New earth? The new moon thing is only a distraction. That is the point I brought up from the beginning. If the covenant is here and now then so is the Sabbath. If you read my posts you would know this.

LoveGodsWord said:

True my post is that it is an everlasting covenant given here and now in our earth and that Isaiah 66:22-23 only proves this.

Click to expand...

Isiah 66 doesn't not talk about now. So it does not prove it. It proves it will be in the new earth. And that was not being disputed by either party.

Which makes your argument a waste of time in my view.

Click to expand...

You may certainly feel free to ignore it then, as you have only said:

a. Isaiah 66 is helpful, if you look at other texts to find what you want to say.

b. you do, and you don't treat the new moon and the Sabbath the same in Isaiah 66.

We agree, this is wasting time.

tall73 said:

So now you admit you don't treat them the same, and this is based on other texts. Which was my point. Isaiah 66 is not good for making points in this discussion.

Click to expand...

Please state which of the 10 commandments state to keep the new moon sabbath.

LoveGodsWord said:

There is nothing in my edits that I have made that changes subject matter and content and most of my edits are completed before you post. So please do not pretend that I am changing content and subject matter.

Click to expand...

I note when you edit because I begin responding when you post, and then I post it, and look, and you have added new content I have not responded to.

So I edit to note you have edited so I can add the response to the edit.

Sorry I disagree with you. Your trying to claim that Isaiah 66:22-23 is not a good text that supports the Sabbath. I was disagreeing with you if used in connection with the scriptures that show that the Sabbath is an everlasting covenant.

Click to expand...

Exodus doesn't need something used in conjunction to say what it already plainly says.

If you read my posts from the start you would know this. So you agree that the Sabbath as an everlasting covenant from Exodus 31:16 used with Isaiah 22:23 is a great argument right as it shows that this everlasting covenant started here and now and is continued into the New earth? The new moon thing is only a distraction. That is the point I brought up from the beginning. If you read my posts you would know this.

Click to expand...

The new moon is not a distraction. It is part of the text which contains many elements you want to ignore, and only look at the Sabbath. But what it says about the Sabbath was that we will worship on the Sabbath in the new earth. That point is not disputed. So no, it is not helping.

Bringing in Isaiah 66 means you must explain the presence of the various bolded items in the new earth, and hopelessly complicates something simple in Exodus 31.

Isa 66:20 And they shall bring all your brothers from all the nations as an offering to the LORD, on horses and in chariots and in litters and on mules and on dromedaries, to my holy mountain Jerusalem, says the LORD, just as the Israelites bring their grain offering in a clean vessel to the house of the LORD.
Isa 66:21 And some of them also I will take for priests and for Levites, says the LORD.
Isa 66:22 “For as the new heavens and the new earth that I make shall remain before me, says the LORD, so shall your offspring and your name remain.
Isa 66:23 From new moon to new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me, declares the LORD.
Isa 66:24 “And they shall go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against me. For their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.”

mmksparbud said:

Please state which of the 10 commandments state to keep the new moon sabbath.

Click to expand...

They don't. Which was also not in dispute.

tall73 said:

Isiah 66 doesn't not talk about now. So it does not prove it. It proves it will be in the new earth. And that was not being disputed by either party

Click to expand...

Well that is now true at all. As posted earlier the everlasting Sabbath covenant is linked directly to the here and now so do not pretend that it is not *Exodus 31:16. Where as Isaiah 66:22-23 proves that the everlasting Sabbath covenant is continued in the new earth. Now if the everlasting Sabbath covenant is given in the here and now so then the Sabbath remains good argument right? Your upset now because this undoes what your trying to argue with the distraction of new moons. You do not seem to be picking this up for some reason. The new moons are only a distraction as there is no covenant of new moons and they are not one of God's 10 commandments that give us the knowledge of what sin is when broken (Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7; 1 John 3:4).

tall73 said:

You may certainly feel free to ignore it then, as you have only said: a. Isaiah 66 is helpful, if you look at other texts to find what you want to say. b. you do, and you don't treat the new moon and the Sabbath the same in Isaiah 66. We agree, this is wasting time.

Click to expand...

See the above I said no such thing so please do not pretend that I have. I posted scripture that says Gods' Sabbath and 4th commandment of the 10 commandments is an everlasting covenant and Exodus 31:16 and Isaiah 66:22-23 proves this. Do you agree that Exodus 31:16 and Isaiah 66:22-23 link in together proving that God's 4th commandment is an everlasting covenant? They are Gods' Word dear friend not mine. Then I said to you if God's Sabbath is an "everlasting covenant" given here in this earth to God's people then together these are great texts to show that the Sabbath is here and now as that is what the scriptures says. The Sabbath as an everlasting covenant is given on our earth here and now. Of course you are free to believe as you wish. What your trying to argue with the new moons is simply a distraction to something that was never an everlasting covenant or one of God's 10 commandment.

This is where you and your friends whole argument falls down in my opinion.

LoveGodsWord said:

There is nothing in my edits that I have made that changes subject matter and content and most of my edits are normally completed before you post anything. My edits are mainly fixing up typos or grammar or adding something I left out. So please do not pretend

Click to expand...

It appears the only one who's pretending is you. Like pretending you didn't say:

LoveGodsWord said:

Why do you feel that that is an argument that there is no true Church and that there is no correct and true understanding of the scriptures?

Click to expand...

#580

tall73 said:

The new moon is not a distraction. It is part of the text which contains many elements you want to ignore, and only look at the Sabbath. But what it says about the Sabbath was that we will worship on the Sabbath in the new earth. That point is not disputed. So no, it is not helping.

Bringing in Isaiah 66 means you must explain the presence of the various bolded items in the new earth, and hopelessly complicates something simple in Exodus 31.

Isa 66:20 And they shall bring all your brothers from all the nations as an offering to the LORD, on horses and in chariots and in litters and on mules and on dromedaries, to my holy mountain Jerusalem, says the LORD, just as the Israelites bring their grain offering in a clean vessel to the house of the LORD.
Isa 66:21 And some of them also I will take for priests and for Levites, says the LORD.
Isa 66:22 “For as the new heavens and the new earth that I make shall remain before me, says the LORD, so shall your offspring and your name remain.
Isa 66:23 From new moon to new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me, declares the LORD.
Isa 66:24 “And they shall go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against me. For their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.”

Click to expand...

Look lets be honest here, how does what you have posted above disagree with what has been shared with you from the scriptures in Exodus 31:16 and it's link into Isaiah 66:22-23 showing that Gods' 4th commandment Sabbath of the 10 commandments is not an everlasting covenant and not a requirement for the here and now to when the covenant was given? - It doesn't. (see post # 618 linked)

MMXX said:

It appears the only one who's pretending is you. Like pretending you didn't say:

#580

Click to expand...

No it is you I was correct the first time where did I post as you claimed earlier that there is no truth or true church? I did not say any such thing... context added from the linked post.

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

"It is true that there are many false teachers on Christianity in the world today and as discussed earlier at one consensus over 40,000 different denominations of Christianity were recorded and growing in fulfillment of the very Words of Jesus (Matthew 24:24; 2 Peter 2:1 etc). Why do you feel that that is an argument that there is no true Church and that there is no correct and true understanding of the scriptures? How then Brian are you going to know if your not deceived in following the false teachings of the majority when the many come up to Jesus at the second coming and say Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in your name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity (sin). According to Jesus only those who do the will the will of God will enter the kingdom of heaven. The many will not enter into God's Kingdom *Matthew 7:21-23. The only way therefore we can know God's will and the truth of God's Word is to seek Jesus through His Word asking God to be our guide and teacher. According to God's promises in the new covenant God promises to be our guide and teacher through His Spirit *Hebrews 8:11; John 14:26; John 16:13; John 7:17; John 8:31-36; 1 John 2:27. It is true however according to the words of Jesus that men love darkness rather then light because their deeds are evil and everyone that does evil hates the light (Gods Word in the lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path - Psalms 119:105) lest their deeds are reproved. But the good news is that he that comes to the light (Gods' Word) we can see that our deeds are wrought in God or not. He that believes and follows Gods' Word is not condemned according to the scriptures but he that believes not is condemned already because he has not believe in the name of the old begotten Son of God. *John 3:18-21

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

I was asking you a question to your argument there not being a true church or truth.