Lies about the Sabbath.

[VictorC]

Now show us where the bible says that Christians are to cease from work on the seventh day??? (I don't expect a direct response)

Elder111 didn't respond to your challenge. Neither of us seem too surprised...

 

[from scratch]

VictorC reminds Elder111 of the many posts he has ignored. I opened the Bible for you to see that the seventh day God rested preceded the Sabbath 'made for man' thousands of years later. Elder111's contention is with Scripture, and not an individual member of the forum.

Jesus is more than an example; He is our Redeemer, our propitiation, and our Savior - and not an excuse to argue for reversion to the old covenant.

I wonder why God waited for so many years before He said the Sabbath was made for man as the they promote from MK 2.

 

[from scratch]

Have no idea what you are referring to.

Of course. I wouldn't expect otherwise. OTH you refuse to consider what other are saying here in this forum.

 

[Sophrosyne]

I wonder why God waited for so many years before He said the Sabbath was made for man as the they promote from MK 2.

I have a hard time thinking God stopping creation is the same thing as Sabbath being made for man. I don't see stopping something the same as "making" something but stopping the making of something instead thus making the contention that the sabbath that was made can't be the sabbath of "quit being made". In other words the two "sabbaths" would seem to somewhat contradict each other in nature if one leaned heavily on that one scripture that sabbath promoters do.

 

[from scratch]

The contention is that Jesus broke the Sabbath. Is it true that if a man saves a life on the Sabbath it is work? To heal is to brake the Sabbath? Is that what the bible says?
When the Sabbath comes is it like "freeze" where you are?
Were the hundreds of persons that died because they kept the Sabbath deserving of death?
Because 3 billion persons kept Sunday and rejected God's Sabbath for 2000 years mean that which God ordained from creation becomes null and void?
Who should we follow, the "church fathers" or Christ who said call no man father?
I glory in Christ and in His Holy Blessed and Hallowed Sabbath. I glory in His blessed command to keep it holy. Precious is the time spent in worship and ceasing from daily toil.All He requires of me is to accept His gift of grace and salvation and to walk in obedience to His law.
O blessed saviour kind and true,
Every Sabbath I will give to you.
Is that clear.

Please explain how telling a person to hold out their hand is work.

 

[VictorC]

I wonder why God waited for so many years before He said the Sabbath was made for man as the they promote from MK 2.

This has been discussed so many times that there doesn't remain a reason to wonder anymore. Adventism injects a preconceived theological package into their reading of Scripture, and for the most part Adventists don't stop to read the passage itself. Mark 2:27-28 not only refutes the Adventist prescription of replacing God's rest with the Sabbath, but it also shows Jesus making a clear claim to His divinity. He is Lord (owner) of the Sabbath because He isn't among the 'man' it was made for.

When an Adventist stops to read the Bible without forcing Ellen's theology into their reading, they become former Adventists. I've seen statistics published that suggest this is happening to the tune of 300,000 times a year at the individual level.

 

[from scratch]

Dogs would keep the Sabbath BETTER than they have

Love it!!!!!

 

[Cribstyl]

Elder111 didn't respond to your challenge. Neither of us seem too surprised...

It's probably best.... He's responses are predictably questions that shuffles the issues.

 

[LarryP2]

Elder111 didn't respond to your challenge. Neither of us seem too surprised...

Adventists are not on here to discuss doctrines that they may or may not have in common with Christianity. They are missionaries sent here to convert the Heathen to their non-christian cult ideology. That is why they dodge questions, ignore points and mono-focus only on the Sabbath, which in reality is the only doctrine of theirs that really matters. They have outright rejected or severely denigrated all of the main doctrines of Christianity. The Resurrection could not possibly mean less. For the first 100 years of the Church, pure open rejection of the Divinity of Christ was taught, and even now if you read "between the lines" in the Great Controversy, it is obvious they still do. Their official statements of belief mean almost nothing. They were designed specifically to throw off the "cult hunters," and to get the persistent Walter Martin off their back. The Church long taught that the Trinity was a Pagan doctrine, and nowadays teaches a "trinity" that really is tri-theism. In no way does it comport with Christianity's teaching.

So that is why they do not respond: They are missionaries sent here to convert us Heathen into their anti-Christian Salvation by Perfect Sabbath Keeping theology.

When an Adventist stops to read the Bible without forcing Ellen's theology into their reading, they become former Adventists. I've seen statistics published that suggest this is happening to the tune of 300,000 times a year at the individual level.

There is simply NOTHING substantive behind ANYTHING that Adventists teach. Pure and simple, Adventism features a "Pope" that always has had and always will have FAR FAR greater unchallenged authority than ANY Catholic Pope could ever DREAM of having. In fact, the Catholic doctrine of "Papal Infallibility" is a complete laughable joke next to the powers that were wielded by Ellen White, and which continue to completely dominate the Church. When the Pope speaks in his "infallible" mode, you can be sure it almost certainly has the unanimous agreement with Catholic Bishops.

I think Adventism is losing more than 300,000 a year. The internet and its "hive mind" have been utterly catastrophic.

 

[Sophrosyne]

I think Adventism is losing more than 300,000 a year. The internet and its "hive mind" have been utterly catastrophic.

They would be better off to leave CF for good than showing how their doctrinal position cannot be defended thus anyone interested will be discouraged instead of encouraged.

 

[LarryP2]

They would be better off to leave CF for good than showing how their doctrinal position cannot be defended thus anyone interested will be discouraged instead of encouraged.

There will always be some delusional whack-job that fantasizes themselves a modern-day Old Testament Prophet, and tries to reestablish some sort of a cult so that they can behave like King David. There is pretty much a solid mountain of anti-Sabbath and anti-Seventh Day Adventist webpages out there. Anyone that fails to do due diligence research before they join the cult probably deserves whatever they get.

It's hilarious: There are around 5 anti/ex-Adventist "mega-churches" clustered around the leading Adventist "ghettos:" Loma Linda, California, Battle Creek Michigan, Washington DC, Phoenix, Arizona. The combined total membership in these Big-5 Anti-Adventist churches is larger than the worldwide membership of Seventh Day Baptists!

And even among the more liberal Seventh Day Adventist Churches (probably around 50 percent of the total) the churches "distinctive doctrines" are seen as embarrassing anachronisms. They go to Church on Saturdays more as a lingering cultural artifact than anything else, and do not really believe they are "Keeping the Sabbath." Their Saturday (most don't even call it "The Sabbath") resembles the way Baby Boomers commit billions of dollars to buying up cultural artifacts from the 60's. Liberal Adventists have completely jettisoned Ellen White and the lunatic Sanctuary Doctrine.

So the nuts that come on here to argue the Sabbath are definitely what Walter Martin called "the lunatic fringe."

 

[Sophrosyne]

There will always be some delusional whack-job that fantasizes themselves a modern-day Old Testament Prophet, and tries to reestablish some sort of a cult so that they can behave like King David. There is pretty much a solid mountain of anti-Sabbath and anti-Seventh Day Adventist webpages out there. Anyone that fails to do due diligence research before they join the cult probably deserves whatever they get.

It's hilarious: There are around 5 anti/ex-Adventist "mega-churches" clustered around the leading Adventist "ghettos:" Loma Linda, California, Battle Creek Michigan, Washington DC, Phoenix, Arizona. The combined total membership in these Big-5 Anti-Adventist churches is larger than the worldwide membership of Seventh Day Baptists!

And even among the more liberal Seventh Day Adventist Churches (probably around 50 percent of the total) the churches "distinctive doctrines" are seen as embarrassing anachronisms. They go to Church on Saturdays more as a lingering cultural artifact than anything else, and do not really believe they are "Keeping the Sabbath." Their Saturday (most don't even call it "The Sabbath") resembles the way Baby Boomers commit billions of dollars to buying up cultural artifacts from the 60's. Liberal Adventists have completely jettisoned Ellen White and the lunatic Sanctuary Doctrine.

So the nuts that come on here to argue the Sabbath are definitely what Walter Martin called "the lunatic fringe."

I sometimes go to church on Saturday myself.... and it confuses adventists as they are unsure what to say. My church has services 3 days a week

 

[LarryP2]

I sometimes go to church on Saturday myself.... and it confuses adventists as they are unsure what to say. My church has services 3 days a week

Good Grief, even the Catholics are going to church on Saturday! The megachurch near here offers no less than 11 services over the weekend, starting Friday night.

 

[from scratch]

Good Grief, even the Catholics are going to church on Saturday! The megachurch near here offers no less than 11 services over the weekend, starting Friday night.

Gotta get em all in somehow.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Good Grief, even the Catholics are going to church on Saturday! The megachurch near here offers no less than 11 services over the weekend, starting Friday night.

Yup.... the more services the more offerings they can take. I wonder if having church on saturday confuses adventists allowing them to go visit other churches not knowing they won't talk about sabbath at all

 

[LarryP2]

The contention is that Jesus broke the Sabbath. Is it true that if a man saves a life on the Sabbath it is work? To heal is to brake the Sabbath? Is that what the bible says?

Not the "saving a life." But Jesus commanding "pick up your bed and walk" is definitely breaking the Sabbath. "Thou shalt not do any work" seems to be pretty clear, and "picking up your bed" is obviously work that was completely unnecessary on the Sabbath.

Who should we follow, the "church fathers" or Christ who said call no man father?

That is a smarmy, dishonest, vicious slur on Christianity, once again. You obviously have no problem with your Church Councils making decisions on doctrine that are directly contrary to the Bible. I have listed the 3 times when the Seventh Day Adventists openly acknowledged their doctrines had no basis in the Bible or in history. As per your normal procedure, you have not responded to that post. Second, the "church fathers" could immediately distinguish between Law and Grace, and that the keeping the Sabbath was contrary to Christianity, besides the fact it was impossible for Gentiles. They were doing EXACTLY as the Apostles told them to do. Your church, on the other hand, strongly disagrees with Christianity and the decisions it rightly made in its Councils.

The question remains: What are you doing on a Christian website reading and posting, when clearly you are at complete odds with historical Christianity? Are you here to proselytise? Your founding prophet could not be clearer: She HATED Christianity with a passion, after it spurned her laughable predictions on Christ's return. In a fit of rage she made up evil, anti-Christian doctrines in a decade's-long temper tantrum at organized Christianity.

When the Sabbath comes is it like "freeze" where you are?

No it was the day when the Temple ceremonies were performed. The Sabbath is not "Holy" without the other ceremonies. It is all tied up in one unitary package. Which is obviously the reason for the decision in Acts 15: Sabbath Keeping was already impossible for Gentiles, before the destruction of the Temple. They were already prohibited from Keeping the Sabbath, on pain of death.

Were the hundreds of persons that died because they kept the Sabbath deserving of death?

It certainly distinguished the Children of Israel from all the other Nations, which was the precise point of the Sabbath, and why it was given ONLY to the Children of Israel. Several times, the Children of Israel refused to defend themselves when invaded by foreign empires on the Sabbath. The foreign Emperors quickly realized the overwhelming advantage of attacking Israel on the Sabbath. Either you believe that God will save your nation, or you don't. The Sabbath was their national sign of their special relationship with God.

Because 3 billion persons kept Sunday and rejected God's Sabbath for 2000 years mean that which God ordained from creation becomes null and void?

Two lies you just told: Nobody I know "keeps Sunday." And Hebrew linguists are UNANIMOUS that the Sabbath was not a creation ordinance. No Gentile has "rejected God's Sabbath," since the Sabbath never had anything to do with them in the first place. Gentiles were under only the 7 Noahide Commandments, which was a parallel legal system that was enforced by the Sanhedrin, along with the Mosaic laws that applied to Jews.

I glory in Christ and in His Holy Blessed and Hallowed Sabbath. I glory in His blessed command to keep it holy.

No you don't. You don't come even close to keeping the Sabbath holy. Your post reeks of complete ignorance of the rudimentary requirements of keeping it holy.

Precious is the time spent in worship and ceasing from daily toil.All He requires of me is to accept His gift of grace and salvation and to walk in obedience to His law.

Grace and the Law are incompatible. Your last sentence is hopelessly confused. You understand neither Grace nor Law, that much is obvious. And your approach is contrary to Christianity, which decided thousands of years ago that Sabbath Keeping was a heresy that must be expelled from Christianity. Again, why are you posting and reading on a Christian website, since you are in open, public disagreement with basic Christian doctrine?

O blessed saviour kind and true,
Every Sabbath I will give to you.

No you don't. You pretend to "give" an Americanized, unbiblical, dishonest version of what you THINK the Sabbath is. It has nothing to do with the real Sabbath.

 

[Elder 111]

Not the "saving a life." But Jesus commanding "pick up your bed and walk" is definitely breaking the Sabbath. "Thou shalt not do any work" seems to be pretty clear, and "picking up your bed" is obviously work that was completely unnecessary on the Sabbath.

If was not "work". What was the motive? The man was not doing so for money! It is not that he could have done it before and refused to do so until the Sabbath. The Sabbath is not about doing nothing full stop. Jesus demonstrated how to keep the Sabbath and what it is about, you and others want to corrupt that image to bring the Sabbath into dispute.

That is a smarmy, dishonest, vicious slur on Christianity, once again. You obviously have no problem with your Church Councils making decisions on doctrine that are directly contrary to the Bible. I have listed the 3 times when the Seventh Day Adventists openly acknowledged their doctrines had no basis in the Bible or in history. As per your normal procedure, you have not responded to that post. Second, the "church fathers" could immediately distinguish between Law and Grace, and that the keeping the Sabbath was contrary to Christianity, besides the fact it was impossible for Gentiles. They were doing EXACTLY as the Apostles told them to do. Your church, on the other hand, strongly disagrees with Christianity and the decisions it rightly made in its Councils.

The doctrine of SDA's are not contrary to the bible for many sincere Christians and will continue to be so. The church that was at the forefront for the pass 2000 years is not God's church. That is for certain. Revelation 12 clearly demonstrate that the "Woman," God church, was in hiding for a while, in the wilderness. So the "woman", the church, that was obvious during that period was definitely an imposter (harlot). So her councils are not and was not directed by God. That conclusion is based on biblical fact.

The question remains: What are you doing on a Christian website reading and posting, when clearly you are at complete odds with historical Christianity? Are you here to proselytise? Your founding prophet could not be clearer: She HATED Christianity with a passion, after it spurned her laughable predictions on Christ's return. In a fit of rage she made up evil, anti-Christian doctrines in a decade's-long temper tantrum at organized Christianity.

For those who may not know. None of the doctrines of the SDA church originated with E.G. White. In particular she was shown that she had to keep the Sabbath. The Sabbath came to SDAs by a Seventh Day Baptist. Those who are willing to know the truth can research it. Early Adventist all kept Sunday until shown differently.

No it was the day when the Temple ceremonies were performed. The Sabbath is not "Holy" without the other ceremonies. It is all tied up in one unitary package. Which is obviously the reason for the decision in Acts 15: Sabbath Keeping was already impossible for Gentiles, before the destruction of the Temple. They were already prohibited from Keeping the Sabbath, on pain of death.

God made the Sabbath Holy not the ceremonies! No decision was made in Acts 15 about the Sabbath not being for the Gentles. As a matter of fact the Apostle knew that Sabbath was being kept and said nothing about the Sabbath not being for the Gentles, NOTHING!
19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.


28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;
29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
Where is the admonition not to keep the Sabbath after stating that it was being kept? Where?

It certainly distinguished the Children of Israel from all the other Nations, which was the precise point of the Sabbath, and why it was given ONLY to the Children of Israel. Several times, the Children of Israel refused to defend themselves when invaded by foreign empires on the Sabbath. The foreign Emperors quickly realized the overwhelming advantage of attacking Israel on the Sabbath. Either you believe that God will save your nation, or you don't. The Sabbath was their national sign of their special relationship with God.

So God blessed and hallowed the Sabbath in Adam's first full day of life so that Jews could be unique? The Sabbath is a sign no the sign for all God children! Only the Jews can be Sanctified? Eze 20:12 Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them.

Two lies you just told: Nobody I know "keeps Sunday." And Hebrew linguists are UNANIMOUS that the Sabbath was not a creation ordinance. No Gentile has "rejected God's Sabbath," since the Sabbath never had anything to do with them in the first place. Gentiles were under only the 7 Noahide Commandments, which was a parallel legal system that was enforced by the Sanhedrin, along with the Mosaic laws that applied to Jews.

In other words there is no day that "christians" set aside to worship God! In other words a God who gave His life for us does not deserve our complete attention on the Sabbath/Sunday, it is too much for Him. OK, if you say so.

No you don't. You don't come even close to keeping the Sabbath holy. Your post reeks of complete ignorance of the rudimentary requirements of keeping it holy.

The Sabbath is not to be kept according to VictorC. As far as you are concern I am breaking the Sabbath all like now. To discus God's word on the Sabbath on the internet is breaking the Sabbath. Jesus put it well, Is it evil to do good on the Sabbath?

Grace and the Law are incompatible. Your last sentence is hopelessly confused. You understand neither Grace nor Law, that much is obvious. And your approach is contrary to Christianity, which decided thousands of years ago that Sabbath Keeping was a heresy that must be expelled from Christianity. Again, why are you posting and reading on a Christian website, since you are in open, public disagreement with basic Christian doctrine?

Grace is described as unmerited favor. Why do I or anyone need Grace if there is no law to violate? Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
"Christianity" decided to kill people for having the bible too. "Christianity" decided to take money for souls in purgatory and to confess to priest and call men"father". The very things that Jesus forbid. The little education I got in Barbados a long time ago, even before becoming a Christian, taught me those times.

 

[VictorC]

If was not "work". What was the motive? The man was not doing so for money! It is not that he could have done it before and refused to do so until the Sabbath. The Sabbath is not about doing nothing full stop. Jesus demonstrated how to keep the Sabbath and what it is about, you and others want to corrupt that image to bring the Sabbath into dispute.

You admit that Jesus wasn't advocating the Sabbath. Don't attempt to redefine the Sabbath into something noncompliant with the Law that ordained it.

The doctrine of SDA's are not contrary to the bible

We've already seen from your own history that you can't help but contradict Scripture at each attempt to retain Adventist distinctives. This claim you have repeated before is completely false.

The church that was at the forefront for the pass 2000 years is not God's church. That is for certain. Revelation 12 clearly demonstrate that the "Woman," God church, was in hiding for a while, in the wilderness. So the "woman", the church, that was obvious during that period was definitely an imposter (harlot). So her councils are not and was not directed by God. That conclusion is based on biblical fact.

I recognize the allusion to Revelation 12. I also recognize your inability to identify the woman pregnant with "a male Child who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron".
That wasn't the church. This woman carried the man Child before the church even existed! The church is generally symbolized by a 'bride', which is a subset of 'woman'. See? You contradicted Scripture by forcing an interpretation instead of allowing apocalyptic literature to speak for itself.

For those who may not know. None of the doctrines of the SDA church originated with E.G. White.

Fully 2/3 of the Fundamental Beliefs published by the SDA church contain at least some language sourced exclusively from Ellen White, which supplants and in some instances contradicts Scripture. Your claim is false.

In particular she was shown that she had to keep the Sabbath. The Sabbath came to SDAs by a Seventh Day Baptist. Those who are willing to know the truth can research it. Early Adventist all kept Sunday until shown differently.

Here you admit the SDA church imported their view on the Sabbath from an ecclesiastical group's mistakes already documented earlier in this thread. And if my memory serves, it was Joseph Bates who imported that mistake which was merely endorsed by Ellen White.

God made the Sabbath Holy not the ceremonies!

What a weird way of saying the Law wasn't holy. Don't bother making mention of Romans 7:12 anymore if you're going to contradict it.

No decision was made in Acts 15 about the Sabbath not being for the Gentles. As a matter of fact the Apostle knew that Sabbath was being kept and said nothing about the Sabbath not being for the Gentles, NOTHING!
19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.


28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;
29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
Where is the admonition not to keep the Sabbath after stating that it was being kept? Where?

Here you admit the Gentiles never had the Sabbath conveyed to them. We know they never had it before this event, and now you know they never had it afterword either.

So God blessed and hallowed the Sabbath in Adam's first full day of life

This has been shown to be a lie so many times it is clear you aren't going to accept the Biblical record showing the Sabbath ordained during Moses' life.

The Sabbath is a sign no the sign for all God children!

Rubbish.
You've been tasked dozens of times to show where and when God's adopted children were ever given the Sabbath shown to be exclusive to the children of Israel in the Law.

Only the Jews can be Sanctified? Eze 20:12 Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them.

We aren't among the 'them' addressed in this passage, and you know it.

In other words there is no day that "christians" set aside to worship God! In other words a God who gave His life for us does not deserve our complete attention on the Sabbath/Sunday, it is too much for Him. OK, if you say so.

This comes across as a lame excuse to turn away from God's redemption, just because God doesn't fit in your pathetic box your sect constructed for Him.

The Sabbath is not to be kept according to VictorC.

Personal vendetta noted. Your contention is and has always been with Scripture.

As far as you are concern I am breaking the Sabbath all like now. To discus God's word on the Sabbath on the internet is breaking the Sabbath. Jesus put it well, Is it evil to do good on the Sabbath?

You've never kept the Sabbath holy according to the Law. You don't even have access to a Levitical priesthood requisite to officiate the rites demanded on the Sabbath. Because you have rejected the Law, it follows that you've rejected the rites it contains.

Grace is described as unmerited favor. Why do I or anyone need Grace if there is no law to violate? Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Of course you conveniently forgot Romans 3:31 identifies the Law the author establishes as accurate in its testimony by quoting it - but, you couldn't be bothered to read three verses later to find he establishes the Law 430 years before the Ten Commandments -and the Sabbath- existed. And the Law's record shows that Abraham was accounted righteous by faith, and not by works.

Just as the same author identified the Law we've been delivered by quoting it in Romans 7:6-7: the Ten Commandments.

Context is Adventism's enemy, the reason their posts consist of sound bites they hope the forum audience doesn't bother to read for themselves. The inspired author doesn't contradict himself in the same epistle.

"Christianity" decided to kill people for having the bible too. "Christianity" decided to take money for souls in purgatory and to confess to priest and call men"father". The very things that Jesus forbid. The little education I got in Barbados a long time ago, even before becoming a Christian, taught me those times.

Ah, yes - replacing Biblical Christianity with the peculiar doctrines of the Roman Catholic church. That doesn't help you when you realize Purgatory and Adventism's Investigative Judgment both share a common rejection of Hebrews 9:15, which shows the Messiah's redemption of our transgressions under the first covenant -the Ten Commandments- and He is the Mediator of the new covenant. Adventism relies on the unBiblical doctrines of ecclesiastical groups (SDB and RCC), and you admit that your distinctives don't come from the Bible.

 

[Elder 111]

I recognize the allusion to Revelation 12. I also recognize your inability to identify the woman pregnant with "a male Child who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron".
That wasn't the church. This woman carried the man Child before the church even existed! The church is generally symbolized by a 'bride', which is a subset of 'woman'. See? You contradicted Scripture by forcing an interpretation instead of allowing apocalyptic literature to speak for itself.

What is this nonsense that you have manufactured?

1. The bible plainly speaks of the church long before the "man child". Acts 7:38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:
2. The symbol of a woman was always used for God people and church.

cor. 11: 2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. Isa. 54: 6 For the Lord hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou wast refused, saith thy God. Eze. 23:The word of the Lord came again unto me, saying, 2 Son of man, there were two women, the daughters of one mother:
3 And they committed whoredoms in Egypt; they committed whoredoms in their youth: there were their breasts pressed, and there they bruised the teats of their virginity.
4 And the names of them were Aholah the elder, and Aholibah her sister: and they were mine, and they bare sons and daughters. Thus were their names; Samaria is Aholah, and Jerusalem Aholibah.

Fully 2/3 of the Fundamental Beliefs published by the SDA church contain at least some language sourced exclusively from Ellen White, which supplants and in some instances contradicts Scripture. Your claim is false.

But not originating with her. That is the point. She did not form the doctrines just confirmed or agreed.

Here you admit the SDA church imported their view on the Sabbath from an ecclesiastical group's mistakes already documented earlier in this thread. And if my memory serves, it was Joseph Bates who imported that mistake which was merely endorsed by Ellen White.

Then you confirmed what I have said. The doctrines were not of E G White.

Here you admit the Gentiles never had the Sabbath conveyed to them. We know they never had it before this event, and now you know they never had it afterword either.

No I did not.

 

[VictorC]

What is this nonsense that you have manufactured?

1. The bible plainly speaks of the church long before the "man child". Acts 7:38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:
2. The symbol of a woman was always used for God people and church.

cor. 11: 2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. Isa. 54: 6 For the Lord hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou wast refused, saith thy God. Eze. 23:The word of the Lord came again unto me, saying, 2 Son of man, there were two women, the daughters of one mother:
3 And they committed whoredoms in Egypt; they committed whoredoms in their youth: there were their breasts pressed, and there they bruised the teats of their virginity.
4 And the names of them were Aholah the elder, and Aholibah her sister: and they were mine, and they bare sons and daughters. Thus were their names; Samaria is Aholah, and Jerusalem Aholibah.

The only reason you could become obsessive over a non-essential topic is because of the convoluted model of eschatology the SDA church conjured. The result of embracing Adventist interpretation is an inability to read the Bible for what it actually says, and calling the Biblical message "nonsense".

Here you would force your view of a symbolic woman equaling the church, regardless of how its used. You force the notion that the church is a prostitute in your example above. You also forced the church's existence before it was established, during the tenure of the old covenant the church didn't exist within. You've started some threads that fixate on known errors in your pet English translation ('Why not Jesus?' thread comes to mind), and here you again rely on a faulty translation in order to prop up a theological impossibility. Here's what your selected text from Acts 7 reads like, with some context that reveals who the woman is:

37 “This is that Moses who said to the children of Israel, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren. Him you shall hear.’
38 “This is he who was in the congregation in the wilderness with the Angel who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our fathers, the one who received the living oracles to give to us, 39 whom our fathers would not obey, but rejected. And in their hearts they turned back to Egypt, 40 saying to Aaron, ‘Make us gods to go before us; as for this Moses who brought us out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him.’[l] 41 And they made a calf in those days, offered sacrifices to the idol, and rejoiced in the works of their own hands.​

The 'he' referenced in v.38 was Moses, who testified according to v.37 that the Prophet to come would originate from "your brethren", meaning the children of Israel. Revelation 12 opens with the woman who gave birth to the Messiah, and both of these are the same corporate entity: Israel (Judah, specifically). There is no 'church' mentioned in your pet verse that comes from a faulty translation.

Fully 2/3 of the Fundamental Beliefs published by the SDA church contain at least some language sourced exclusively from Ellen White, which supplants and in some instances contradicts Scripture. Your claim is false.

But not originating with her. That is the point. She did not form the doctrines just confirmed or agreed.

Someone needs to shock you back to reality: Ellen White wrote Ellen White's publications, and her writings contradict Scripture. These doctrines contrary to Scripture are codified in the SDA Fundamental Beliefs. Ellen is the source of Ellen, and your 'point' is fallacious at best.

Here you admit the SDA church imported their view on the Sabbath from an ecclesiastical group's mistakes already documented earlier in this thread. And if my memory serves, it was Joseph Bates who imported that mistake which was merely endorsed by Ellen White.

Then you confirmed what I have said. The doctrines were not of E G White.

I don't see how admitting your doctrines originate from Joseph Bates and Ellen White helps your latest contention.

Here you admit the Gentiles never had the Sabbath conveyed to them. We know they never had it before this event, and now you know they never had it afterword either.

No I did not.

You're like an emotional basket case throwing a tantrum because you can't retract the admission you already made.