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.
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
Wow! So you do agree with the Westminster Confession of Faith.
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. .
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.
I note that you have willfully chosen to ignore my request on the following portion of the Westminster Confession of Faith. .
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
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?
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.
How many of the 613 commandments in the Old Testament has your denomination decided to obey?
None. We are, at least, consistent in our theology.
It is a pity that your Bible does not seem to contain such troubling books as Galatians and Hebrews.
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.
For an unconverted Gentile to keep the Sabbath is such a serious offense against God ...
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.
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.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.
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?
I sure don't know how you could possibly put your faith in what the Baptists tell us....<obligatory rant deleted here>
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?