Advice on a debate with a SDA ex-pastor?

[mnorian]

Hello;
For the last year or so; I have been having lunch with my friend; an SDA retired pastor; and we have some entertaining debates on SDA theology and other topics; but as I'm a main stream protestant; lay person; he can bring to the table much more theological arguments; after 30+ years studying SDA and other subjects.

So I started emailing him my Sabbath day beliefs; as we are on a more even field when I have access to the web and CF.

We have been debating several topics; and the other night after signing off from our debate of the day; I sent him the following "Scripture and a picture" as a friendly gesture:

Which he sends back a reply to; asking:


"In regards to your quote, please define how you understand the following words in the quote.

1. God
2. Lord
3. Mercy
4. Begotten us again
5. What happened when Jesus was resurrected from the dead.

I'll be interested in your thoughts."

So I'm wondering why he would:
1--call it a "quote" instead of a scripture.
2--take apart something that was obviously not part of the debate posts
3--is this passage a SDA sensitive one?
4--are there things I could say for each item that would make a SDA person happy with the answers; as I don't want to get into a side argument; detracting from our main debate.
5--do you think this is a distracting debate maneuver?

Any advice or thoughts would be welcome.
Thanks
Peace in Jesus

 

[BobRyan]

Which he sends back a reply to; asking:


"In regards to your quote, please define how you understand the following words in the quote.

1. God
2. Lord
3. Mercy
4. Begotten us again
5. What happened when Jesus was resurrected from the dead.

I'll be interested in your thoughts."

So I'm wondering why he would:
1--call it a "quote" instead of a scripture.

A "quote of scripture" maybe he was just using the short form since the text is in the quote.

2--take apart something that was obviously not part of the debate posts

He appears to want to know what your view of God and salvation is -- the new birth etc -- he may be trying to steer this toward a discussion of the New Covenant.

3--is this passage a SDA sensitive one?

Not that I have ever heard of

4--are there things I could say for each item that would make a SDA person happy with the answers; as I don't want to get into a side argument; detracting from our main debate.

Maybe something like - "I think we both agree on the triune God head where the Holy Spirit is the third person of the Godhead and Christ the second, and the Father is the first person of the Godhead. I also think we probably both agree that the New Birth is key to the Gospel as it creates in us a new nature "a new creation" in harmony with the Word and Will of God - while still "also" retaining our sinful nature".

Here is what I think happened when Jesus was resurrected from the dead -- in Hebrews 8:1-5 we are told that the "main point" is that He went to heaven as our High Priest - in the sanctuary in heaven. I believe that your pastor-and-friend wants to know if you are aware of what Hebrews 8 teaches regarding the work of Christ after His resurrection.

5--do you think this is a distracting debate maneuver?

He might just be curious about what you believe.

================= observation
One thing I have found is that pastors in general - across all denominations tend to stay out of "debates". After a few exchanges with someone who is studying with them on a give topic... that person either accepts, or defers to some later point, or outright rejects the point and shows no sign of changing.

They will sometimes move on to another topic and come back to whatever the sticking point is - later.. but very often they end it and move on to a more promising prospect which may get better results but does not get them into the "weeds" where they have to figure out some of the answers to the harder questions. It seems that a lot of pastors go for this across all denominations.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[mnorian]

A "quote of scripture" maybe he was just using the short form since the text is in the quote.
He appears to want to know what your view of God and salvation is -- the new birth etc -- he may be trying to steer this toward a discussion of the New Covenant.
Not that I have ever heard of
Maybe something like - "I think we both agree on the triune God head where the Holy Spirit is the third person of the Godhead and Christ the second, and the Father is the first person of the Godhead. I also think we probably both agree that the New Birth is key to the Gospel as it creates in us a new nature "a new creation" in harmony with the Word and Will of God - while still "also" retaining our sinful nature".

Here is what I think happened when Jesus was resurrected from the dead -- in Hebrews 8:1-5 we are told that the "main point" is that He went to heaven as our High Priest - in the sanctuary in heaven. I believe that your pastor-and-friend wants to know if you are aware of what Hebrews 8 teaches regarding the work of Christ after His resurrection.
He might just be curious about what you believe.
================= observation
One thing I have found is that pastors in general - across all denominations tend to stay out of "debates". After a few exchanges with someone who is studying with them on a give topic... that person either accepts, or defers to some later point, or outright rejects the point and shows no sign of changing.

They will sometimes move on to another topic and come back to whatever the sticking point is - later.. but very often they end it and move on to a more promising prospect which may get better results but does not get them into the "weeds" where they have to figure out some of the answers to the harder questions. It seems that a lot of pastors go for this across all denominations.

in Christ,

Bob

Thank you Bob;for your well thought out answer; check my post above; it touches on your first part.

Yes; I have tried to email questions to another pastor a few years ago; but he was running a good size church at the time; and didn't have the time to give me answers to only about a fourth of my queries; so I stopped sending them. He did like you said; only give me one answer to a question; and follow-up questions were ignored.

I like your thoughts on Jesus as our High Priest in Heaven. My friend has spent some time talking about how Jesus is in submission to the Father; which I believe also; only he wants to say that the Father is supreme and Jesus is the Lesser God.

My friend seems to want to nullify Apostle Paul's roll in the new Gospel; and has said in the past: "who are you going to believe; Paul or Jesus" on the Sabbath as given to the Israelite's for an eternal covenant.

 

[BobRyan]

My friend has spent some time talking about how Jesus is in submission to the Father; which I believe also; only he wants to say that the Father is supreme and Jesus is the Lesser God.

My friend seems to want to nullify Apostle Paul's roll in the new Gospel; and has said in the past: "who are you going to believe; Paul or Jesus" on the Sabbath as given to the Israelite's for an eternal covenant.

I find that pretty unnusual. It is hard to find an SDA pastor who will say "believe Paul or Jesus" ... either he has someone who got off track ... or he is out of his element in a debate context. Since the latter is more common - I tend to go for that as the explanation.

On the other hand - you can find a number of SDAs on this section of the board who are very comfortable in the debate context... staying on focus and within the SDA doctrinal framework.

Pastors do what they do best... we here do what we do best.

as for the covenants...

The New Covenant - do you accept it or reject it?
Here is what it says

Jer 31:31-33
31 “Behold, days are coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,” declares the Lord. 33 “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the Lord, “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

And in the NT - it is "unchanged" -- Hebrews 8:6-10

So also in the case of the TEN Commandments -

Ex 20
Then God spoke all these words, saying,

2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.
3 “You shall have no other gods before Me.
...
7 “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain.

Question. Do you think "do not take God's name in vain" is a commandment "just for Jews"??

Paul never quotes it. Nor does Christ in the NT.

Yet as almost all Bible scholars will admit - even the pro-Sunday ones -- the TEN Commandments are for Christians.. in fact they define sin for all mankind and are included in the moral law of God written on the heart.

Paul in Ephesians 6:2 specifically pulls in the TEN Commandments as having authority over the saints when he says that the 5th commandment is the "First commandment " in the still-valid-unit-of-TEN with a promise.

And even in the OT "from Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL mankind come before Me to worship" Isaiah 66:23 for all eternity after the cross in the New Earth.

Isaiah 56:1-8-- gentiles in the OT specifically blessed for keeping Sabbath.

Even Paul write in Hebrews 4 "there REMAINS therefore a Sabbath rest for the people of God"

While also stating "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19

And it is Paul who meets "every Sabbath" in the synagogue with BOTH Jews and gentiles preaching the Gospel and not one single statement in all of the NT of Paul saying to them "come those of you who are accepting the Gospel - join us TOMORROW in our weekly Christian worship service".. not not one.

Acts 17:3-4, Acts 13 -- also great examples of getting gentiles to come out on Sabbath and hear Paul preach the Gospel... in the NT.

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

Here is an idea -- send a copy of this post to your pastor friend - and ask him if he agrees with it.

 

[mnorian]

I find that pretty unnusual. It is hard to find an SDA pastor who will say "believe Paul or Jesus" ... either he has someone who got off track ... or he is out of his element in a debate context. Since the latter is more common - I tend to go for that as the explanation.

On the other hand - you can find a number of SDAs on this section of the board who are very comfortable in the debate context... staying on focus and within the SDA doctrinal framework.

Pastors do what they do best... we here do what we do best.

as for the covenants...

The New Covenant - do you accept it or reject it?
Here is what it says

Jer 31:31-33
31 “Behold, days are coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,” declares the Lord. 33 “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the Lord, “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

And in the NT - it is "unchanged" -- Hebrews 8:6-10

So also in the case of the TEN Commandments -

Ex 20
Then God spoke all these words, saying,

2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.
3 “You shall have no other gods before Me.
...
7 “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain.

Question. Do you think "do not take God's name in vain" is a commandment "just for Jews"??

Paul never quotes it. Nor does Christ in the NT.

Yet as almost all Bible scholars will admit - even the pro-Sunday ones -- the TEN Commandments are for Christians.. in fact they define sin for all mankind and are included in the moral law of God written on the heart.

Paul in Ephesians 6:2 specifically pulls in the TEN Commandments as having authority over the saints when he says that the 5th commandment is the "First commandment " in the still-valid-unit-of-TEN with a promise.

And even in the OT "from Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL mankind come before Me to worship" Isaiah 66:23 for all eternity after the cross in the New Earth.

Isaiah 56:1-8-- gentiles in the OT specifically blessed for keeping Sabbath.

Even Paul write in Hebrews 4 "there REMAINS therefore a Sabbath rest for the people of God"

While also stating "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19

And it is Paul who meets "every Sabbath" in the synagogue with BOTH Jews and gentiles preaching the Gospel and not one single statement in all of the NT of Paul saying to them "come those of you who are accepting the Gospel - join us TOMORROW in our weekly Christian worship service".. not not one.

Acts 17:3-4, Acts 13 -- also great examples of getting gentiles to come out on Sabbath and hear Paul preach the Gospel... in the NT.

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

Here is an idea -- send a copy of this post to your pastor friend - and ask him if he agrees with it.

Thanks for your help Bob; I'll just post two more points.

1--I'm may be a lay person; but not a novice at this Sabbath question as I have had a "Sunday is the Lord's day" type of thread up in a non-debate forum here for years; and have done a lot of research into it:

but both sides on the question are are set in there ways.
The only difference I have seen from the point of view of a neutral (as I hold the position that Apostle Paul stated--I hold all days as worship to the Lord):

is the Sunday day of rest people give the other side the "benefit of the doubt" while the Saturday contingent give no such leeway.

The Sabbath and the Law forum; may be my next stop; as I did not come to this; the P/M Adventist forum; to debate.

Thanks for you guys helping with my friends emails; I think I see a way of answering him; without stepping on his toes too much.

Peace in Jesus
mnorian

 

[mmksparbud]

I also have never heard any pastor say believe Paul or Jesus. The bible is the bible---it is all taken and Paul is not against the bible or Jesus.

 

[BobRyan]

Thanks for your help Bob; I'll just post two more points.

1--I'm may be a lay person; but not a novice at this Sabbath question

I am in the same boat as you on that one.

as I have had a "Sunday is the Lord's day" type of thread

Ditto - I have done that on the Sabbath-and-the-Law section of the board only my title was "Bible Sabbath vs week-day-1" since the Bible does not call it "sunday"

up in a non-debate forum here for years; and have done a lot of research into it:

Well I have posted in both areas -- but in general that is also my position.

but both sides on the question are are set in there ways.
The only difference I have seen from the point of view of a neutral (as I hold the position that Apostle Paul stated--I hold all days as worship to the Lord)

[/quote]

Paul was a Messianic Jew according to his own sworn testimony in the NT after becoming a Christian -- click here - Apr 26, 2015 #1

(and of course I don't clam to be Messianic Jew - I am gentile)

1. Paul never says "every say is the Sabbath"
2. Paul never says "do not keep the Commandments of God"
3. Paul never says "there no longer remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God"
4. Paul never evangelizes gentiles "week-day-1 after week-day-1"
5. Paul never says "please come back next week-day-1 and join us for worship"
There is not one verse in all of the NT saying "they came together to hear Paul preach every week-day-1".

But by contrast we DO find
"EVERY Sabbath" they met to hear Paul preach the Gospel ... both Jews and Gentiles Acts 18:4

And we do have Paul affirming all TEN of the TEN commandments in Ephesians 6:2 when he goes out of his way to affirm the 5th commandment by pointing out that it is in the TEN.

while the Saturday contingent give no such leeway.

because there is not one single week-day-1 is the Sabbath , nor even week-day-1 is the Lord's day... nor even "they met every week-day-1 to hear Gospel preaching" ,, nor even "from week-day-1 to week-day-1 shall all mankind come before Me to worship" nor even "the Son of man is LORD of week-day-1" ... in all of the Bible like there is for God's Sabbath "the Sabbath of the Lord thy God".

The Sabbath and the Law forum; may be my next stop;

I highly recommend it... in fact I have a thread there that compare "week-day-1" in the Bible to the Bible Sabbath. click here -- Sep 2, 2017 #1

And frankly I much prefer your approach to this topic than to a number over there who seem to prefer "deny all -- and don't confuse me with the Bible texts" responses.

 

[mnorian]

NM

 

[mnorian]

Sorry Bob;
but can't even comment as that would lead to a whole slew of comments and counter-comments and--->this is the wrong forum for that-->no debating when not member of the faith; ya know. But thanks for helping to sharpen my rhetorical debate axe!

 

[BobRyan]

Sorry Bob;
but can't even comment as that would lead to a whole slew of comments and counter-comments and--->this is the wrong forum for that-->no debating when not member of the faith; ya know. But thanks for helping to sharpen my rhetorical debate axe!

My suggestion is to go to one of the links in my post - to the "Sabbath and the Law" section...because there is absolutely no restriction on debates between SDA and non-SDA over there. (I spend far more time there in the "open ocean of debates" than on this section of the board) What is more I am happy to post that comment over there on a new thread if you are interested in the topic.

However having said that - I think there is a discussion section of the Adventist board area that allows debate with non-SDAs.

 

[mnorian]

My suggestion is to go to one of the links in my post - to the "Sabbath and the Law" section...because there is absolutely no restriction on debates between SDA and non-SDA over there. What is more I am happy to post that comment over there on a new thread if you are interested in the topic.

However having said that - I think there is a discussion section of the Adventist board area that allows debate with non-SDAs.

Progressive/Moderate Adventists Statement of Purpose:
Community Rules:
"In addition, if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against this group's theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic. All posts within this faith community must adhere to the site wide rules."

Well; thank you for the invite to debate; but as I already have my friends email to answer (an have been neglecting posting to him; so I could get some boiler plate from CF to help stop some of his more high-speed shells) and do have a few duties on CF; I'll have to take a rain check.

Maybe when (if?) things settle down in the debate department; here on CF; and the real world; we could have a go at a few rounds in the ring of reason & logic.

 

[BobRyan]

Progressive/Moderate Adventists Statement of Purpose:
Community Rules:
"In addition, if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against this group's theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic. All posts within this faith community must adhere to the site wide rules."

Well; thank you for the invite to debate; but as I already have my friends email to answer (an have been neglecting posting to him; so I could get some boiler plate from CF to help stop some of his more high-speed shells) and do have a few duties on CF; I'll have to take a rain check.

Maybe when (if?) things settle down in the debate department; here on CF; and the real world; we could have a go at a few rounds in the ring of reason & logic.

Fine - but I am always happy to discuss the topic and am not restricted to just talking about it in non-debate sections. Everybody wins when all the facts are on the table.

 

[Truthfrees]

MOD HAT

this thread is permanently closed as per op request