I've Failed At Diplomacy!!!!!

[Stryder06]

1st your question was;
What law was that? Were the strangers not required to keep the ten commandments?

Answers: The strangers who sojourned with the COI was required to keep the ten commandments when it was given.

Ok

Your #2 Issue is the usual argument about where SDA will argue to no end that the words law means the ten commandments.

In my understnding in Ex 18 needs to be read and understood in context. Moses was settling disputes and establishing rules (statutes) going forward. He spent all day hearing each case and making righteous judgements. Yes, I agree that God was giving Moses direction and laws for the people to live by.

So you agree that God was giving them laws to live by. What laws were those?

 

[Cribstyl]

Ok



So you agree that God was giving them laws to live by. What laws were those?

Well, from the time God freed the Children of Israel we can read what His commands was from Ex12 on...you can read and identify them.

 

[Cribstyl]

Why is it when I look into socalled SDA truths I see a string attached to man's ability to live by the ten commandment?

Why does it seem like the gospel of Jesus Christ is not the SDA message to the world?

 

[Stryder06]

Why is it when I look into socalled SDA truths I see a string attached to man's ability to live by the ten commandment?

Why does it seem like the gospel of Jesus Christ is not the SDA message to the world?

Because you're looking at it according to how you understand it, and not according to how it's taught.

As far as the gospel is concerned, that's what we teach. You just don't see judgment as part of the gospel, where as we do.

 

[Cribstyl]

Because you're looking at it according to how you understand it, and not according to how it's taught.

As far as the gospel is concerned, that's what we teach. You just don't see judgment as part of the gospel, where as we do.

Would you say "present truth " is the same as the gospel taught by Paul to the Gentiles?
Does the gospel contain doctrines about "the law of God," the three angels message, the sabbath, investigative judgment?

 

[Stryder06]

Would you say "present truth " is the same as the gospel taught by Paul to the Gentiles?
Does the gospel contain doctrines about "the law of God," the three angels message, the sabbath, investigative judgment?

I'm not big on the term "present truth". Still don't know why it's used or what it's suppose to mean. I consider all truth to be "present truth".

As far as the rest of your statement, Paul was not the singular authority in regards to the gospel message. The gospel does indeed contain all that you mentioned above. The sabbath is included in the law, which you believe has been done away with. The IJ is a term given to explain what Christ is currently doing in the MHP. The three angels message is God's last proclimation to a sinful world to get it together.

So in other words we have the law of God - repentance, and judgment, which are all apart of the gospel.

 

[JohnMarsten]

Present truth is a big problem, because it makes all truth relative.

Lets say Jesus said not to worry about what we eat, then why do we worry about health reform, I guess because one could argue that people have forgotten about healthy living, so lets make that the major topic...

 

[Stryder06]

Present truth is a big problem, because it makes all truth relative.

Lets say Jesus said not to worry about what we eat, then why do we worry about health reform, I guess because one could argue that people have forgotten about healthy living, so lets make that the major topic...

How about we understand what Jesus said in context, and not use it as an excuse to do what we ought not to do. Not worrying about what you eat is within the context of those things which are acceptable.

Kind of like if your parents tell you you can do what you want when you go out, that's within the context of those things which are already acceptable.

 

[Cribstyl]

I'm not big on the term "present truth". Still don't know why it's used or what it's suppose to mean. I consider all truth to be "present truth".

As far as the rest of your statement, Paul was not the singular authority in regards to the gospel message. The gospel does indeed contain all that you mentioned above. The sabbath is included in the law, which you believe has been done away with. The IJ is a term given to explain what Christ is currently doing in the MHP. The three angels message is God's last proclimation to a sinful world to get it together.

So in other words we have the law of God - repentance, and judgment, which are all apart of the gospel.

Present truth and the Pillars

The early Adventists emphasized the concept of "present truth" -- see 2 Peter 1:12 (NKJV). James White explained, “The church [has] ever had a present truth. The present truth now, is that which shows present duty, and the right position for us…” ”Present truth is present truth, and not future truth, and the Word as a lamp shines brightly where we stand, and not so plainly on the path in the distance.” Ellen White pointed out that “present truth, which is a test to the people of this generation, was not a test to the people of generations far back.”[8] The founders of the SDA church had a dynamic concept of what they called present truth, opposed to creedal rigidity, and had an openness to new theological understandings that built upon the landmark doctrines, or Pillars of Adventism that had made them a people.[9]




These foundations, pillars, and landmarks are:

• the investigative judgment,
• the sanctuary that brings this judgment to light,
• the three angel’s messages of Revelation,
• the law of God,
• the faith of Jesus,
• the Sabbath,
• the state of the dead, and
• the special gift of prophecy.[10]

Still, the possibilities of dynamic change in Seventh-day Adventist beliefs are not unlimited.[11] Those landmark doctrines are non-negotiables in Adventist theology. Collectively they have provided the Seventh-day Adventists with an identity.[12] The pillars of their faith—the Bible doctrines that define who they are as a people—have been thoroughly studied out in the Scripture and have been attested to by the convicting power of the Holy Spirit. As Ellen White put it, "When the power of God testifies as to what is truth, that truth is to stand forever as the truth. ... Men will arise with interpretations of Scripture which are to them truth, but which are not truth. The truth for this time, God has given us as a foundation for our faith.[13] Robert Johnston noted, “Without repudiating the past leading of the Lord, it [the Seventh-day Adventist church] seeks even to understand better what that leading was. It is always open to better insights to learn—to seek for truth as for hid treasure. … Adventists are still pilgrims on a doctrinal journey who do not repudiate the way marks, but neither do they remain stopped at any of them.”[14] Ellen further said that there is more truth to be revealed and that true doctrine will stand close investigation.[15] But there is a solid foundation to build new truth upon.[16]

Seventh-day Adventist theology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Cribstyl]

I'm not big on the term "present truth". Still don't know why it's used or what it's suppose to mean. I consider all truth to be "present truth".

As far as the rest of your statement, Paul was not the singular authority in regards to the gospel message. The gospel does indeed contain all that you mentioned above. The sabbath is included in the law, which you believe has been done away with. The IJ is a term given to explain what Christ is currently doing in the MHP. The three angels message is God's last proclimation to a sinful world to get it together.

So in other words we have the law of God - repentance, and judgment, which are all apart of the gospel.

I'm used to you and some other defending what I present as if I dont know what I'm talking about.

Denial does not establish truth. Every SDA know that their membership is based primarily on Sabbathkeeping and the ten commandments.

SDA gospel often begins by asking someone "What day is the Sabbath?"
The fact is, this and other questions are designed to undermind biblical truth (Rom14) about days a man may worship. This is just wrong.
Many SDA pastors and members give their testimony of why they switch churches. It seem it me that SDA have the questions and the answers to help them see the light .


I selected Paul because Christ appeared to him chose him as the apostle to the gentiles. His epistles contain all the doctrines that Christians should hold.
Rom 1:15 So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also.
Rom 1:16¶For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
Rom 1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.




1Cr 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
1Cr 1:18¶For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.






Gal 1:6¶I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Gal 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

 

[Stryder06]

I'm used to you and some other defending what I present as if I dont know what I'm talking about.

Denial does not establish truth. Every SDA know that their membership is based primarily on Sabbathkeeping and the ten commandments.

And we're used to you talking to us as if we don't know what we're talking about. Tis a vicious cycle isn't it?

SDA gospel often begins by asking someone "What day is the Sabbath?"
The fact is, this and other questions are designed to undermind biblical truth (Rom14) about days a man may worship. This is just wrong.
Many SDA pastors and members give their testimony of why they switch churches. It seem it me that SDA have the questions and the answers to help them see the light .

Not completely following you here. You say "biblical truth" as if the keeping of the sabbath isn't in the bible. That is just wrong. Trying to randomly distinguish gentiles from jews is just wrong. Saying Gentiles don't have to keep the sabbath, but ignoring the fact that they did keep the sabbath is just wrong. Speaking about the law of God as done away with, when John saw the Ark of His Testament (the law) while in vision, is just wrong.

I selected Paul because Christ appeared to him chose him as the apostle to the gentiles. His epistles contain all the doctrines that Christians should hold.

His epistles do contain doctrine for all Christians. This would include those Jews who followed Christ. The same Jews who were given the sabbath as a perpetual covenant. The same Jews who were "this flock" which would be combined with gentile "sheep" to from one flock.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

These foundations, pillars, and landmarks are:

• the investigative judgment,
• the sanctuary that brings this judgment to light,
• the three angel’s messages of Revelation,
• the law of God,
• the faith of Jesus,
• the Sabbath,
• the state of the dead, and
• the special gift of prophecy.[10]

Still, the possibilities of dynamic change in Seventh-day Adventist beliefs are not unlimited. Those landmark doctrines are non-negotiables in Adventist theology. Collectively they have provided the Seventh-day Adventists with an identity.

Thank you for quoting this Crib....

It goes to my point to all those that claim to be Adventist (not you Crib, I know your situation) but don't hold to the doctrines, the pillars or the platform... why do you call yourself Adventist when you don't believe their doctrine on even a fundamental level?

 

[Cribstyl]

And we're used to you talking to us as if we don't know what we're talking about. Tis a vicious cycle isn't it?

That's not true at all. Why would I want answers from people who dont know what they're talking about?
You're changing my inquisiton to arguments about just what you denied that SDA truths are.
The scripture say one thing and commentary underminds truth. I wont settle for nothing but biblical truth.

Not completely following you here. You say "biblical truth" as if the keeping of the sabbath isn't in the bible. That is just wrong........

Therein lies the confusion, sabbath is not an issue taught. If so post the reference without added commentary.

I am not againts sabbathkeeping. Who is said it's not in the bible?
You cant prove that it's commanded to Christians so we'll get nothing but confusion from you.
Biblical truth proves that worship can be any day.

..... Trying to randomly distinguish gentiles from jews is just wrong. Saying Gentiles don't have to keep the sabbath, but ignoring the fact that they did keep the sabbath is just wrong.......

The bible distinguishes Jews from Gentiles because it is the prophetic times of the Gentiles. The Jews were broken off until the Gentiles comes in.
Claiming that Gentiles kept sabbath is not a taught lesson. Scriptures dont teach it and the argument is unproven.
Phl 3:9And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

Speaking about the law of God as done away with, when John saw the Ark of His Testament (the law) while in vision, is just wrong.

Too many issues can quickly turn a discussion into a argument.

His epistles do contain doctrine for all Christians. This would include those Jews who followed Christ. The same Jews who were given the sabbath as a perpetual covenant. The same Jews who were "this flock" which would be combined with gentile "sheep" to from one flock.

This is where you'll try to sell me that the old covenant is the new covenant, right?

 

[Cribstyl]

Thank you for quoting this Crib....

It goes to my point to all those that claim to be Adventist (not you Crib, I know your situation) but don't hold to the doctrines, the pillars or the platform... why do you call yourself Adventist when you don't believe their doctrine on even a fundamental level?

Maybe because these people thought they were chosing to be followers of Jesus Christ.

 

[Cribstyl]

Why is it when I look into socalled SDA truths I see a string attached to man's ability to live by the ten commandment?

Why does it seem like the gospel of Jesus Christ is not the SDA message to the world?

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Maybe because these people thought they were chosing to be followers of Jesus Christ.

Yes, possibly but there are a myriad of other protestant denominations that support that. Ours faith is unique in our desire for prophetic understanding and obviously the Sabbath, state of the dead understanding etc...

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Why is it when I look into socalled SDA truths I see a string attached to man's ability to live by the ten commandment?

Where you see a string we see loving obedience...

[quoteWhy does it seem like the gospel of Jesus Christ is not the SDA message to the world?[/quote]

We think it is... the first angels message, especially, is the gospel message. The message also of the great controversy between Jesus and Satan shows the gospel message in a broader, deeper sense, imo.

 

[Stryder06]

I am not againts sabbathkeeping. Who is said it's not in the bible?
You cant prove that it's commanded to Christians so we'll get nothing but confusion from you.
Biblical truth proves that worship can be any day.

This is where the actual confusion comes in. The first Christians were Jews. The Jews were given the sabbath. So yes, I can show you where Christians were told to keep the sabbath, since it was already part of their understanding. You try to seperate Christians from Jews as if the two weren't one in the same in the days of the apostles. They didn't have "gentile" Christians and then "Jewish" Christians. There was to be one fold, just as Christ said. That fold was to include gentiles that were to be brought in.

The bible distinguishes Jews from Gentiles because it is the prophetic times of the Gentiles. The Jews were broken off until the Gentiles comes in.
Claiming that Gentiles kept sabbath is not a taught lesson. Scriptures dont teach it and the argument is unproven.

You know, I've never been able to follow this "time of the gentiles" prophetic thing. You do realize that in Revelation, when it talks about the court being given over to the Gentiles, that it's talking about the wicked right?

Too many issues can quickly turn a discussion into a argument.
This is where you'll try to sell me that the old covenant is the new covenant, right?

I won't try to sell you on anything. I would like you to explain to me what it is that John saw in Revelation 11:19

 

[Princessdi]

ECR, the bolded portion of your statement is incorrect. You only need to look to the more than popular Left Behind book series to know that. We might not agree with the doctrine, but doctrine it is a far more detailed than ours.

For the state of the dead you are correct no as many believe as we do, but there are some. As for the Sabbath, we first have to consider the Jews who do it a bit differently, but still first, and then the myriad of other "Seventh day" denoms. Soooo we are some what unique if not totally........I guess with us also the Bible is true when it says "there is nothing new under the sun"?

Yes, possibly but there are a myriad of other protestant denominations that support that. Ours faith is unique in our desire for prophetic understanding and obviously the Sabbath, state of the dead understanding etc...

 

[Stryder06]

ECR, the bolded portion of your statement is incorrect. You only need to look to the more than popular Left Behind book series to know that. We might not agree with the doctrine, but doctrine it is a far more detailed than ours.

What is incorrect about the bolded portion of his statement?