Bend it, break it or discard it?

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
So, why is it that your own denomination vehemently disagrees with the "Westminster Confession of faith" and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" and the Catholic Catechism

On the contrary we totally agree with them and with D.L. Moody as each of them affirm all TEN of the Ten Commandments included in the moral law of God known to Jeremiah and his readers in Jer 31:31-33 as he pens the scripture defining the New Covenant that has that Law of God .. written on the heart.
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
27,812
13,119
72
✟362,418.00
Faith
Non-Denom
On the contrary we totally agree with them and with D.L. Moody as each of them affirm all TEN of the Ten Commandments included in the moral law of God known to Jeremiah and his readers in Jer 31:31-33 as he pens the scripture defining the New Covenant that has that Law of God .. written on the heart.

Wow! So you do agree with the Westminster Confession of Faith. Speaking of the number ten, what do you think of this?

Chapter 10 Of Effectual Calling

1. All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation, by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and, by his almighty power, determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ: yet so, as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.

2. This effectual call is of God’s free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, who is altogether passive therein,until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.

3. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth: so also are all other elect persons who are uncapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.

4. Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet they never truly come unto Christ, and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men, not professing the Christian religion,be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the laws of that religion they do profess. And, to assert and maintain that they may is very pernicious, and to be detested.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
So, why is it that your own denomination vehemently disagrees with the "Westminster Confession of faith" and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" and the Catholic Catechism

On the contrary we totally agree with them and with D.L. Moody as each of them affirm all TEN of the Ten Commandments included in the moral law of God known to Jeremiah and his readers in Jer 31:31-33 as he pens the scripture defining the New Covenant that has that Law of God .. written on the heart.

Wow! So you do agree with the Westminster Confession of Faith.

Amazingly when two groups agree on one thing it does not require them to agree on all things.

I think we all knew that.

No "news" there.

What is "news" is that the "easy part" ... the part that is "sooooo easy" that BOTH sides admit to it -- is the part where some folks "get stuck".

I find that amazing... don't you ?
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
27,812
13,119
72
✟362,418.00
Faith
Non-Denom
On the contrary we totally agree with them and with D.L. Moody as each of them affirm all TEN of the Ten Commandments included in the moral law of God known to Jeremiah and his readers in Jer 31:31-33 as he pens the scripture defining the New Covenant that has that Law of God .. written on the heart.



Amazingly when two groups agree on one thing it does not require them to agree on all things.

I think we all knew that.

No "news" there.

What is "news" is that the "easy part" ... the part that is "sooooo easy" that BOTH sides admit to it -- is the part where some folks "get stuck".

I find that amazing... don't you ?

I note that you have willfully chosen to ignore my request on the following portion of the Westminster Confession of Faith. Are you this way with the Bible, as well - picking and choosing ten out of the multitude of commandments which you think suits you best?

Chapter 10 Of Effectual Calling

1. All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation, by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and, by his almighty power, determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ: yet so, as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.

2. This effectual call is of God’s free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, who is altogether passive therein,until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.

3. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth: so also are all other elect persons who are uncapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.

4. Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet they never truly come unto Christ, and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men, not professing the Christian religion,be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the laws of that religion they do profess. And, to assert and maintain that they may is very pernicious, and to be detested.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I note that you have willfully chosen to ignore my request on the following portion of the Westminster Confession of Faith. .

Because I responded to the basis of your quote - in full.

You argued that if two groups agree on "one detail" then surely they must agree on "all details" so you brought in section 10 of that document when I pointed to agreement in section 19. And as I pointed out then "just because two groups agree on one detail does not mean that they must agree on all details".

you knew that... we all knew that.

See? details matter... even when you choose to skip over the details in my post -- the reader "still" knows about them. see how that works?

we totally agree with them and with D.L. Moody as far as each of them affirm all TEN of the Ten Commandments included in the moral law of God known to Jeremiah and his readers in Jer 31:31-33 as he pens the scripture defining the New Covenant that has that Law of God .. written on the heart.

This is a key irrefutable detail - and I am glad you are finding ways to have this solution presented ... again.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
27,812
13,119
72
✟362,418.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Because I responded to the basis of your quote - in full.

You argued that if two groups agree on "one detail" then surely they must agree on "all details" so you brought in section 10 of that document when I pointed to agreement in section 19. And as I pointed then "just because two groups agree on one detail does not mean that they must agree on all details".

you knew that... we all knew that.

See? details matter... even when you choose to skip over the details in my post -- the reader "still" knows about them. see how that works?

we totally agree with them and with D.L. Moody as far as each of them affirm all TEN of the Ten Commandments included in the moral law of God known to Jeremiah and his readers in Jer 31:31-33 as he pens the scripture defining the New Covenant that has that Law of God .. written on the heart.

This is a key irrefutable detail - and I am glad you are finding ways to have this solution presented ... again.

Heh, heh, heh. Very cute. I suppose that I could cut and paste various quotations from Mrs. White which agree with some of my own ideas, but conflict with yours, but would that actually be ethical? The bottom line remains that you and your denomination have decided to pick and choose which morsels from either the Bible or other writings to believe and promulgate.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I note that you have willfully chosen to ignore my request on the following portion of the Westminster Confession of Faith. .

Because I responded to the basis of your quote - in full.

You argued that if two groups agree on "one detail" then surely they must agree on "all details" so you brought in section 10 of that document when I pointed to agreement in section 19. And as I pointed out then "just because two groups agree on one detail does not mean that they must agree on all details".

you knew that... we all knew that.

See? details matter... even when you choose to skip over the details in my post -- the reader "still" knows about them. see how that works?

we totally agree with them and with D.L. Moody as far as each of them affirm all TEN of the Ten Commandments included in the moral law of God known to Jeremiah and his readers in Jer 31:31-33 as he pens the scripture defining the New Covenant that has that Law of God .. written on the heart.

This is a key irrefutable detail - and I am glad you are finding ways to have this solution presented ... again.

Heh, heh, heh. Very cute. I suppose that I could cut and paste various quotations from Mrs. White which agree with some of my own ideas

True. If your point was to go to the SDA forum and state some view where you claim the very section in your post that SDAs complained about - is in fact the very section where Ellen White's statements agree with yours... well that would be "logical" for the context of the point you are trying to make. obviously

So then... just stating the obvious here .. but as I said above - I am very glad you offer more opportunities to bring this detail to light.

BTW : Your notion that highlighting areas of common ground "is not ethical" remains to be proven true.
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
27,812
13,119
72
✟362,418.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Because I responded to the basis of your quote - in full.

You argued that if two groups agree on "one detail" then surely they must agree on "all details" so you brought in section 10 of that document when I pointed to agreement in section 19. And as I pointed out then "just because two groups agree on one detail does not mean that they must agree on all details".

you knew that... we all knew that.

See? details matter... even when you choose to skip over the details in my post -- the reader "still" knows about them. see how that works?

we totally agree with them and with D.L. Moody as far as each of them affirm all TEN of the Ten Commandments included in the moral law of God known to Jeremiah and his readers in Jer 31:31-33 as he pens the scripture defining the New Covenant that has that Law of God .. written on the heart.

This is a key irrefutable detail - and I am glad you are finding ways to have this solution presented ... again.



True. If your point was to go to the SDA forum and state some view where you claim the very section in your post that SDAs complained about - is in fact the very section where Ellen White's statements agree with yours... well that would be "logical" for the context of the point you are trying to make. obviously

So then... just stating the obvious here .. but as I said above - I am very glad you offer more opportunities to bring this detail to light.

BTW : Your notion that highlighting areas of common ground "is not ethical" remains to be proven true.

How many of the 613 commandments in the Old Testament has your denomination decided to obey?
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
27,812
13,119
72
✟362,418.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
How many of the 613 commandments in the Old Testament has your denomination decided to obey?

How many of the 1050 commands of the NT has your denomination decided to obey?

1,050 New Testament Commands | Christian Assemblies International

A rather interesting game I have seen some Christians playing in recent years.

None. We are, at least, consistent in our theology.

So then taking God's name in vain and dishonor parents... pretty much "ok" in the view of your group?

I have to be honest about the fact that I don't find many Christians that will claim that. (As much as you folks don't like what the Baptist Confession of Faith - sectn 19 and the Westminster Confession of Faith sectn 19 says ... at least they will sign up for not taking God's name in vain for NT saints)
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
It is a pity that your Bible does not seem to contain such troubling books as Galatians and Hebrews.

you talk as if you have not even read the material we are discussing and don't know why those confessions of faith endorse the moral law of God written on the heart under the New Covenant
 
Upvote 0

eleos1954

God is Love
Supporter
Nov 14, 2017
9,698
5,614
Utah
✟713,703.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Any argument that Christians must keep any part of the Mosaic Law is just dishonest about the structure and implementation of the Old Testament law, and indicates a severe ignorance about its applications. There are 613 Commandments, all of which are equally important, and all of them must be kept. Or none of them. There is NO distinction in the Mosaic Law between "ritualistic" and "moral" law. Sabbattarian Christians conjure up that self-serving distinction purely out of convenience. They have picked a few of the 613 Commandments at random, based on the ones that happen to tickle their fancy. That is willfully dishonest to the intent of the Law.

If you were to approach an rabbinical expert on the Mosaic Law, and announce self-righteously that you are "keeping the Ten Commandments," they would look on you as though you are mentally deranged. Under Mosaic Law, there is no such a thing as the "Ten Commandments." What we know as the "Decalogue" is subsumed into the overall structure of the 613 Commandments. Judaism does not regard the ten commandments as anything particularly unique or special in relationship to the other 603 Commandments. They are merely ten among many other laws of equal importance.

Out of the mandatory 613 Mosaic laws, Sabbattarians pick and choose a tiny handful that happily coincide with their overall goals of preening self-righteousness over other Christians. They flatter themselves all too easily. If you understand the way the Mosaic law works, all they have merely done is make themselves looks bizarre and foolish. The Apostles repeatedly denounced such behavior as "Judaizing." The Apostles were experts on the Mosaic Law. Sabbattarians are not.

For Christians, Colossians 2:16-17 means what it says.

For Christians, the AD 50 Council of Jerusalem emphatically means what it says: Gentile Christians shall not be bound by the Mosaic law.

Any argument that the Sabbath is a memorial of Creation indicates an profound ignorance of the original Hebrew that both Genesis and Exodus were written in. The writer of the book of Genesis took great pains to make it clear that the Sabbath did not begin at the 7th day of Creation. Hebrew scholars have made that point absolutely clear. The Sabbath commandment was not given to the Children of Israel until at least a month after their delivery from Egyptian slavery. Meanwhile, they would have unintentionally broken the Sabbath at least four times during their crossing of the Sinai. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that anyone kept the Sabbath prior to Sinai. NONE!

Christians began worshiping on Sunday no later than 1 week after the Resurrection. Christ then Ascended on a Sunday. The Day of Pentecost, the Church's Birthday was on a Sunday. It would have been BIZARRE if the early Christians had continued to keep the Sabbath, given the impact those three events clearly would have had on them. Why were all the early Christians in one place on a Sunday when the Day of Pentecost took place? Because they had started doing so in honor of the Resurrection. By the Day of Pentecost, it was an entrenched Christian custom already.

The argument for keeping just one pet commandment out of the 613 of the Mosaic Law simply denigrates the obvious meaning of the crucifixion, the Resurrection, the Ascension and the Day of Pentecost. It is a Salvation by Works theory of "Partial Atonement." It is an argument that one must keep the entirety of the Mosaic Law, because Christ's sacrifice is not enough. Fortunately for Christians, even Christians who keep the Sabbath aren't even CLOSE to meeting that burden.

If you want to keep the Sabbath and have some integrity, you need to go through the full-scale conversion process to Judaism that is mandatory. It is extremely highly-unlikely any Sabbattarian Christian would do that. For an unconverted Gentile to keep the Sabbath is such a serious offense against God, an observant Jew is required the impose of the Death Penalty. Christians who keep the Sabbath are as bizarre as if they suddenly developed a yen to sacrifice some animals in their backyard temple.

The 10 Commandments set the basic principles of how man was to have a relationship with God and how man was to have a relationship with man.

Everything Jesus taught was based on these basic 10 principles/laws .... Jesus during His ministry gave us/taught us the immense depth of what those basic laws mean .... details.

Moses law (given by God) introduced the sanctuary system that pointed to our savior so they might understand the way to salvation is through Him and His sacrifice. The plan of salvation is in the sanctuary.

and yes ... Jesus is God and He kept the 7th Day Sabbath ... even in His death.

So ... regarding your remarks about His Sabbath and those who choose to keep it, wonder what He thinks about all that?

Mark 2:28

Then Jesus declared, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. 28 Therefore, the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”

Luke 9:35

And a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is my Son, my Chosen One; listen to him!”

For an unconverted Gentile to keep the Sabbath is such a serious offense against God ...

Baloney!

1 Peter 2:21

21 For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps.

Follow His footsteps???? Are they for the "gentiles" as well? yes ... of course.

Jesus kept the Sabbath ... Jesus was/is God ... He created everything ,knows everything and does everything perfectly.

In everything .... follow the Lamb!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BobRyan
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Any argument that Christians must keep any part of the Mosaic Law is just dishonest about the structure and implementation of the Old Testament law, and indicates a severe ignorance about its applications. There are 613 Commandments, all of which are equally important, and all of them must be kept. Or none of them. There is NO distinction in the Mosaic Law between "ritualistic" and "moral" law. Sabbattarian Christians conjure up that self-serving distinction purely out of convenience. They have picked a few of the 613 Commandments at random, based on the ones that happen to tickle their fancy. That is willfully dishonest to the intent of the Law.

If you were to approach an rabbinical expert on the Mosaic Law, and announce self-righteously that you are "keeping the Ten Commandments," they would look on you as though you are mentally deranged. Under Mosaic Law, there is no such a thing as the "Ten Commandments." What we know as the "Decalogue" is subsumed into the overall structure of the 613 Commandments. Judaism does not regard the ten commandments as anything particularly unique or special in relationship to the other 603 Commandments. They are merely ten among many other laws of equal importance.

Out of the mandatory 613 Mosaic laws, Sabbattarians pick and choose a tiny handful that happily coincide with their overall goals of preening self-righteousness over other Christians. They flatter themselves all too easily. If you understand the way the Mosaic law works, all they have merely done is make themselves looks bizarre and foolish. The Apostles repeatedly denounced such behavior as "Judaizing." The Apostles were experts on the Mosaic Law. Sabbattarians are not.

For Christians, Colossians 2:16-17 means what it says.

For Christians, the AD 50 Council of Jerusalem emphatically means what it says: Gentile Christians shall not be bound by the Mosaic law.

Any argument that the Sabbath is a memorial of Creation indicates an profound ignorance of the original Hebrew that both Genesis and Exodus were written in. The writer of the book of Genesis took great pains to make it clear that the Sabbath did not begin at the 7th day of Creation. Hebrew scholars have made that point absolutely clear. The Sabbath commandment was not given to the Children of Israel until at least a month after their delivery from Egyptian slavery. Meanwhile, they would have unintentionally broken the Sabbath at least four times during their crossing of the Sinai. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that anyone kept the Sabbath prior to Sinai. NONE!

Christians began worshiping on Sunday no later than 1 week after the Resurrection. Christ then Ascended on a Sunday. The Day of Pentecost, the Church's Birthday was on a Sunday. It would have been BIZARRE if the early Christians had continued to keep the Sabbath, given the impact those three events clearly would have had on them. Why were all the early Christians in one place on a Sunday when the Day of Pentecost took place? Because they had started doing so in honor of the Resurrection. By the Day of Pentecost, it was an entrenched Christian custom already.

The argument for keeping just one pet commandment out of the 613 of the Mosaic Law simply denigrates the obvious meaning of the crucifixion, the Resurrection, the Ascension and the Day of Pentecost. It is a Salvation by Works theory of "Partial Atonement." It is an argument that one must keep the entirety of the Mosaic Law, because Christ's sacrifice is not enough. Fortunately for Christians, even Christians who keep the Sabbath aren't even CLOSE to meeting that burden.

If you want to keep the Sabbath and have some integrity, you need to go through the full-scale conversion process to Judaism that is mandatory. It is extremely highly-unlikely any Sabbattarian Christian would do that. For an unconverted Gentile to keep the Sabbath is such a serious offense against God, an observant Jew is required the impose of the Death Penalty. Christians who keep the Sabbath are as bizarre as if they suddenly developed a yen to sacrifice some animals in their backyard temple.

You may be interested to know that Eph 6:2, Rom 13, James 2, Romans 7, Matthew 19, Mark 7... etc do not appear to endorse your statement about the Law of God.

As we see here -- Commandments of God are valid in the NT including the TEN

Christ speaks in the NT regarding the "Commandments of God"

Mark 7
“Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:


‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’
8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition.
10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.
 
Upvote 0

Bro. Dave Gardner

Active Member
Sep 9, 2019
199
62
57
New England
✟19,847.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I sure don't know how you could possibly put your faith in what the Baptists tell us. After all your church teaches that all other Protestantism is Babylon. And furthermore, I don't give one hoot concerning what churches proclaim, I go by what scripture says. Your continual Baptist example doesn't impress me one iota.
Pretty cushy situation being non-denom on an Internet forum, eh? You can insult everyone by jabbing hard at their church, while you're off-limits being independent and purely personal. Happy days.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: BobRyan
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Why do some think that when Jesus ratified the new covenant with His own blood that he was just ratifying the warmed-over old one? asks?

Nope... different covenants - same moral law of God as even the "Baptist Confession of Faith" and the "Westminster Confession of faith " freely admit.

Hence it is "still a sin" to take God's name in vain - even for saints.

so then... "the obvious"

I sure don't know how you could possibly put your faith in what the Baptists tell us....<obligatory rant deleted here>

ahh the "much expected" response to "Do not take God's name in vain" one can find now and then.


Pretty cushy situation being non-denom on an Internet forum, eh? You can insult everyone by jabbing hard at their church, while you're off-limits being independent and purely personal. Happy days.

Good point -- no risk of "side-track and derail thread" when responding to you so that the person can take time off to try and insult this or that denomination. :)
 
Upvote 0