Go to thread Questions of Mormons, Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses.

[Mankin]

This thread is in Denomination Debate. I am thinking about starting a debate with a former Adventist over the Sabbath there. Adventists are being called a cultish organization on that thread. I am probably the only one there defending Adventicism.

 

[Mankin]

I am just asking for a little friendly debaters to help me with this one.

 

[ConfusedTom]

I had taken a good 35+ minutes to type a reply to that thread.. and the forum won't let me post in the Debate board until I've got 100 posts.

Then, hoping to at least put it here, I hit Paste only to get.... nothing.

I could almost cry, because I think that you and Eila are actually talking past each other.. that is, you're representing two perspectives on the same viewpoint.

Discouraged by the forum software,
-Tom

 

[TrustAndObey]

You didn't provide a link Mankin.

Tom, if I had a dollar for every time one of my posts just went POOF I'd be a rich gal right now!

And Mankin, if you're debating with Eila....save your breath.

 

[Mankin]

Is she really unreasonable? She seems impossible to convince.

 

[Mankin]

It is the topic questions about Seventh Day Adventists Mormons and Jehovah's witness. It is at the top of the Denominational Formal Debate Forum. It is in the Congregation section.

 

[Mankin]

You didn't provide a link Mankin.

Tom, if I had a dollar for every time one of my posts just went POOF I'd be a rich gal right now!

And Mankin, if you're debating with Eila....save your breath.

You are so right. It is almost a waste of breath debating with her.

 

[ConfusedTom]

You are so right. It is almost a waste of breath debating with her.

I still maintain that the two of you were simply talking past each other re: law fulfilled vs. the law is still in effect.

The crux of my statement was that a law fulfilled is not necessarily a law rescinded.

I doubt Eila thinks that Christ's fulfillment of the law rescinded the law, else murder et. al are now not sinful. She quoted in that thread that sin is the transgression of the law. If the law was rescinded, it is no longer in effect. So if Christ's coming to fulfill the law means that law was also rescinded, then murder is no longer sinful.

She, of course, doesn't believe this, and so your viewpoint and hers are more similar than either of you were realizing in the debate.

I feel happy to have found this forum.

-Tom

 

[Mankin]

Yeah, that does make sense. Welcome to the forums by the way!

 

[ConfusedTom]

Welcome to the forums by the way!

Thanks! I'm glad to be here!

 

[higgs2]

Just a reminder, let's try not to speak unkindly of others, even those not frequenting SDA regularly.

 

[Mankin]

Okay sorry about that.

 

[Mankin]

Help! I am under a lot of attack from Lutherans and other people. They are using the Adventist is a cult thing.

 

[Mankin]

I am holding my own as well as I can but I could use some support.

 

[LightBearer]

I still maintain that the two of you were simply talking past each other re: law fulfilled vs. the law is still in effect.

I doubt Eila thinks that Christ's fulfillment of the law rescinded the law, else murder et. al are now not sinful. She quoted in that thread that sin is the transgression of the law. If the law was rescinded, it is no longer in effect. So if Christ's coming to fulfill the law means that law was also rescinded, then murder is no longer sinful.

-Tom

Hi,

I hope you dont mind me popping in here. Previously this forum was closed to me.

Just a thought, but this persons argument above (Highlighted in red) doesn't really hold up. If they feel that the rescinding of The Law of Moses no longer makes Murder sinful then they must also conclude that prior to the Law of Moses murder was not a sin. We know this not to be the case. Gen 9:6

Regards,

LB.

 

[Mankin]

That was Ellia that basically said that. I know, she used some sorta of ministry of the Spirit stuff to support that.