A question about SDA methodology.

[Frogster]

Please, no Sabby talk, I am just trying to understand the Methodology.

SDA friends will quote Jer 31, to bind the Sabbath as law, the 10.

Yet, when asked if they have to keep the festival commands, they say no, all while the reach out of the 10, and declare others in sin, if they eat a shrimp coctail because of Mosaic food restrictions, whereby binding those laws that are not in the 10, all while they say they don't keep festival commands, that are not in the 10, while they uphold the food stuff as law.

So they are semi binding.

With all due respect, is this a pick-n-choose type of methodology? Forgive those words, but I am at a loss for a description.

Why do they add the food stuff on to "what is written on the heart", but not add festival laws to what is written?

Forgive these words, but I just actually don't know what other description fits here, but pick-n-choose.


Again, this is not about the Sabbath, this is about how we are supposed to understand this approach here on our forum.

Is it selection of preference?

It just seeds odd to reach out of the 10, for just some non 10 laws, and bind those also, using Jer 31.

 

[Stryder06]

Please, no Sabby talk, I am just trying to understand the Methodology.

SDA friends will quote Jer 31, to bind the Sabbath as law, the 10.

Yet, when asked if they have to keep the festival commands, they say no, all while the reach out of the 10, and declare others in sin, if they eat a shrimp coctail because of Mosaic food restrictions, whereby binding those laws that are not in the 10, all while they say they don't keep festival commands, that are not in the 10, while they uphold the food stuff as law.

So they are semi binding.

With all due respect, is this a pick-n-choose type of methodology? Forgive those words, but I am at a loss for a description.

Why do they add the food stuff on to "what is written on the heart", but not add festival laws to what is written?

Forgive these words, but I just actually don't know what other description fits here, but pick-n-choose.


Again, this is not about the Sabbath, this is about how we are supposed to understand this approach here on our forum.

Is it selection of preference?

It just seeds odd to reach out of the 10, for just some non 10 laws, and bind those also, using Jer 31.

It is understood that certain laws were temporary in nature because they served to point towards Christ. It is also understood that certain laws were local in their application as they were for a particular society. It isn't about picking and choosing but about properly understanding and applying God's laws, commandments, and statutes. In regards to food, it's simply about eating what's good for you. Certain food God gave the ok to, while other food was given the thumbs down.

And to be honest, everyone understands this in principle, it's simply that there is a large disagreement on what stands and on what has passed away, so one can't claim that another is "picking and choosing", without being hypocritical.

 

[Frogster]

duplicate.

 

[Frogster]

Often our SDA friends, and for that matter the MJ people, stress how the Sabbath is so holy, but then don't they minimize how holy it is, by putting shrimp eating restrictions along side of the sabbath laws, whereby equalizing the laws, bringing down the very Sabbath they deemed holy, because they are downgrading the Sabbath to the same level as food restrictions, by putting them in the same class as the Sabbath, and the whole 10 package?

So...I guess food restrictions are on par with the 10, all while they often stress how important the 10 are.

 

[Frogster]

It is understood that certain laws were temporary in nature because they served to point towards Christ. It is also understood that certain laws were local in their application as they were for a particular society. It isn't about picking and choosing but about properly understanding and applying God's laws, commandments, and statutes. In regards to food, it's simply about eating what's good for you. Certain food God gave the ok to, while other food was given the thumbs down.

And to be honest, everyone understands this in principle, it's simply that there is a large disagreement on what stands and on what has passed away, so one can't claim that another is "picking and choosing", without being hypocritical.

It is picking, either bind just the 10, which i don't agree with anyway, or bind festivals also, if some are going to bind food.

as u know, i was told i was in the act of sin, for eating a shrimp right here on the forum.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

It is understood that certain laws were temporary in nature because they served to point towards Christ. It is also understood that certain laws were local in their application as they were for a particular society. It isn't about picking and choosing but about properly understanding and applying God's laws, commandments, and statutes. In regards to food, it's simply about eating what's good for you. Certain food God gave the ok to, while other food was given the thumbs down.

And to be honest, everyone understands this in principle, it's simply that there is a large disagreement on what stands and on what has passed away, so one can't claim that another is "picking and choosing", without being hypocritical.

We do know the OC Temple, Sanctuary and Priesthood "passed away" in ad 70. It is no longer standing
No more sacrifices

Revelation 1:1 A revelation of Jesus Christ, that God gave to him, to shew to His servants what things it behoveth to come to pass in swiftness;
And he did signify [it], having sent through his messenger to his servant John,

The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD

Nevertheless, the city was at this time crowded with Jewish strangers, and foreigners from all parts, so that the whole nation may be considered as having been shut up in one prison, preparatory to the execution of the Divine vengeance ;
and, according to Josephus this event took place suddenly ; thus, not only fulfilling the predictions of our LORD, that these calamities should come, . .........................

The Temple now presented little more than a heap of ruins ; and the Roman army as in triumph on the event, came and reared their ensigns against a fragment of the eastern gate, and, with sacrifices of thanksgiving, proclaimed the imperial majesty of Titus, with every possible demonstration of joy.

 

[Frogster]

We do know the OC Temple, Sanctuary and Priesthood "passed away" in ad 70. It is no longer standing
No more sacrifices

Revelation 1:1 A revelation of Jesus Christ, that God gave to him, to shew to His servants what things it behoveth to come to pass in swiftness;
And he did signify [it], having sent through his messenger to his servant John,

The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD

Nevertheless, the city was at this time crowded with Jewish strangers, and foreigners from all parts, so that the whole nation may be considered as having been shut up in one prison, preparatory to the execution of the Divine vengeance ;
and, according to Josephus this event took place suddenly ; thus, not only fulfilling the predictions of our LORD, that these calamities should come, . .........................

The Temple now presented little more than a heap of ruins ; and the Roman army as in triumph on the event, came and reared their ensigns against a fragment of the eastern gate, and, with sacrifices of thanksgiving, proclaimed the imperial majesty of Titus, with every possible demonstration of joy.

do u think food stuff is on par with the 10?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

do u think food stuff is on par with the 10?

Par only counts on golf courses

Redneck Ten Commandments - YouTube

 

[Frogster]

i just think that par is par, the food stuff is parring with the 10..I guess?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

i just think that par is par, the food stuff is parring with the 10..I guess?

Par is also a greek word used as a prefix with other root words.

All this argueing about food laws and sabbaths brings to mind this verse

Acts 13:50 And the Jews/[sabbatarians] stirred up/parwtrunan <3951> (5656) the devout and honourable women and the first men of the city[CF], and did raise persecution against Paul and Barnabas and did put them out from their borders;

3951. parotruno par-ot-roo'-no from 3844 and otruno (to spur); to urge along, i.e. stimulate (to hostility):--stir up.

3844. para par-ah' a primary preposition; properly, near; i.e. (with genitive case) from beside (literally or figuratively), (with dative case) at (or in) the vicinity of (objectively or subjectively),

 

[Stryder06]

It is picking, either bind just the 10, which i don't agree with anyway, or bind festivals also, if some are going to bind food.

as u know, i was told i was in the act of sin, for eating a shrimp right here on the forum.

It's crazy, I actually thought that you simply wanted to discuss SDA methodology with an...I don't know, SDA

How foolish of me to think that. It would seem you're more interested in talking about the dietary laws. You should have stated that in your OP so I would have known to stay away. Such a slippery frog you are.

Anywho, like I said, you pick and choose as much as anyone else, so I'm kind of over that whole line of logic.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

It's crazy, I actually thought that you simply wanted to discuss SDA methodology with an...I don't know, SDA

How foolish of me to think that. It would seem you're more interested in talking about the dietary laws. You should have stated that in your OP so I would have known to stay away. Such a slippery frog you are.

Anywho, like I said, you pick and choose as much as anyone else, so I'm kind of over that whole line of logic.

He got ya!!

 

[Frogster]

It's crazy, I actually thought that you simply wanted to discuss SDA methodology with an...I don't know, SDA

How foolish of me to think that. It would seem you're more interested in talking about the dietary laws. You should have stated that in your OP so I would have known to stay away. Such a slippery frog you are.

Anywho, like I said, you pick and choose as much as anyone else, so I'm kind of over that whole line of logic.

u have put food laws on the same level as the 10, which i thought u held in high esteem?

so, u pick which laws u want to esteem, while u unesteem the very 10, u hold as the most important.

 

[Frogster]

Par is also a greek word used as a prefix with other root words.

All this argueing about food laws and sabbaths brings to mind this verse

Acts 13:50 And the Jews/[sabbatarians] stirred up/parwtrunan <3951> (5656) the devout and honourable women and the first men of the city[CF], and did raise persecution against Paul and Barnabas and did put them out from their borders;

3951. parotruno par-ot-roo'-no from 3844 and otruno (to spur); to urge along, i.e. stimulate (to hostility):--stir up.

3844. para par-ah' a primary preposition; properly, near; i.e. (with genitive case) from beside (literally or figuratively), (with dative case) at (or in) the vicinity of (objectively or subjectively),

i speak italian, not greek!

 

[Frogster]

He got ya!!

uh uh...the frog has diverse thought, and the food laws are a subordinate but important topic, and they are in the op.

SDA friends put them in the same box as the 10...

 

[bugkiller]

Some people can not see the forest for the trees and other people say there are no trees in the forrest.

bugkiller

 

[brinny]

Please, no Sabby talk, I am just trying to understand the Methodology.

SDA friends will quote Jer 31, to bind the Sabbath as law, the 10.

Yet, when asked if they have to keep the festival commands, they say no, all while the reach out of the 10, and declare others in sin, if they eat a shrimp coctail because of Mosaic food restrictions, whereby binding those laws that are not in the 10, all while they say they don't keep festival commands, that are not in the 10, while they uphold the food stuff as law.

So they are semi binding.

With all due respect, is this a pick-n-choose type of methodology? Forgive those words, but I am at a loss for a description.

Why do they add the food stuff on to "what is written on the heart", but not add festival laws to what is written?

Forgive these words, but I just actually don't know what other description fits here, but pick-n-choose.


Again, this is not about the Sabbath, this is about how we are supposed to understand this approach here on our forum.

Is it selection of preference?

It just seeds odd to reach out of the 10, for just some non 10 laws, and bind those also, using Jer 31.

Oh dear, no Sabby talks? LOL!

 

[Stryder06]

u have put food laws on the same level as the 10, which i thought u held in high esteem?

so, u pick which laws u want to esteem, while u unesteem the very 10, u hold as the most important.

I can't believe I've never seen it like that! Thank you for sharing that with me.

 

[bugkiller]

It stems from substuting words in theScripture.

In Jeremiah the word is new chadash and not renew chadash. One who does not know and speak fluent Hebrew or how to use a lexicon would say those Hebrew words are the same. I offer read and read. They are spelled exactly alike and are pronounced differently based on context. In reading we do this automaticly. Do not ask me how we know when the word read comes up how we know without rereading the sentence and context.

There are 2 words spelled chadash - khä·däsh' (2319) and khä·dash' (2318).

Some people look at both and choose the one they want. After all they look like the same word. The only people they trap are themselves and the unlearned.

They trap themselves because they have an idea they want to establish opposed to wanting to know what a text says. They trap others because it seems good to the flesh for the purpose of vanity. They are no deeper than the surface (looks/vanity/selfserving). The movie Shallow Hal comes to mind.

bugkiller

 

[asiyreh]

This really depends on what type of SDA your talking to traditional or progressive adventists. Some adventists place allot of stock on the writing of Ellen G white.

For some Adventists, if Ellen says something you might as well put. And the L*rd saith before it. Yes I mean that literally. Ellen wasn't keen on meat. I believe she prophesied that it would be basically poisoned in the latter days. Don't quote me on that, I'm not entirely sure. Well with the all hormones and antibiotics they pump into the meat these days maybe one could argue she was right.

I attend an SDA church although I must admit I'm non to keen on Ellen. I eye her with a strong measure of skepticism.

Do you know what would be nice? Bit of an antithesis admittedly, but a nice Luthern church that holds service on a Saturday.