Lies about the Sabbath.

[from scratch]

God never promise to abolish the Ten commandments and Jesus absolutely did not testify to that!

The fact that a New Covenant was issued to replace the old one is all the proof that is needed to prove the law is history.

Not according to... doesn't mean exactly like nor does anything in the often quoted passage of Jeremiah say anything about movement.

Heb 8 says based on promises - not law.

Besides you ignore another prophet and can't show restoration.

Jesus said very clearly a New Covenant is in effect.

For your statement to hold any water your have to deny what is recorded in the Gospels.

 

[pyramid33]

The fact that a New Covenant was issued to replace the old one is all the proof that is needed to prove the law is history.

Suggesting that it is now okay to steal and kill is still against God.

 

[Elder 111]

The ten commandments are the Old Covenant. You need to read and accept that....

Exo 34:28
And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.
Deu 4:13
And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.

Heb 8:13
In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

What is the reason for the new covenant as given in Hebrews? Give me that and we can talk.

 

[Elder 111]

That's correct, Judaism still keeps them. That's who they were written for, not Christians under the New Covenant. More Resurrection Denial here. Do you even the slightest conception of how terrible your Adventist Sabbath Product®©™ Fetish/Resurrection Denial looks like? Why this is allowed on a Christian website is just amazing. Your particular anti-Christian heresy was vigorously denounced, renounced and excommunicated by the heroic Church Fathers in the First Century. History is clear on that. Seventh Day Adventism is just a revival of the Ebionite Heresy, complete with Sabbath Keeping and Vegetarianism.



In case you haven't noticed, Christianity is a different religion than Judaism. Furthermore, there was NO "removal of the law." That is a ridiculous, ugly and slanderous smear that was dreamed up by your false prophet. Paul articulated all kinds of do's and don'ts for Christians that actually apply to them, that were actually written by an inspired Apostle, chosen by God, to articulate the new Christian way of living. Furthermore, you really ARE NOT worried about the Ten Commandments. You are only worried about huckstering and scamming the Adventist Sabbath Product®©™, since you are fully-invested in Resurrection Denial. You can pretend that you follow the Ten Commandments and proclaim your self-righteousness for doing so, but Christianity has always defined itself very well without your help, thank you very much. What you're peddling is NOT Christianity. Nobody here believes you when you proclaim that you keep the Sabbath, because you don't. You THINK you do, but you don't. You aren't even CLOSE to keeping it. Nor will you EVER be able to keep it. Your Adventist Sabbath Product®©™ in no way resembles the Sabbath as defined in the Old Testament.

Christianity = The Resurrrection

Adventism = The Adventist Sabbath Product®©™

Choose wisely.

I have. Jesus did states in John 4: 22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

 

[Elder 111]

The fact that a New Covenant was issued to replace the old one is all the proof that is needed to prove the law is history.

Not according to... doesn't mean exactly like nor does anything in the often quoted passage of Jeremiah say anything about movement.

Heb 8 says based on promises - not law.

Besides you ignore another prophet and can't show restoration.

Jesus said very clearly a New Covenant is in effect.

For your statement to hold any water your have to deny what is recorded in the Gospels.

What is interesting is that you contend that to break one law makes us guilty off all but you also contend that there is no law. Which is it? Where is guilt without law? Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
It also says there is one God I should worship. Without that law, how can I be condemned for idolatry?

 

[LarryP2]

Suggesting that it is now okay to steal and kill is still against God.

And just as soon as you can find me a verse in the Epistles that it is okay to steal and kill, I will believe what you just now said. Or find ANY Christian denomination that has stated: "Now that the Ten Commandments are no longer in effect, go out and kill, steal and murder all you want!"

REALLY? The ONLY reason you manage to stifle yourself from stealing and killing is because the Ten Commandments forbid it? REALLY? How often do you have those overwhelming urges that are only barely stifled by the existence of the Ten Commandments? I would encourage you to go and get professional help in dealing with those urges.

God help you!

 

[LarryP2]

I have. Jesus did states in John 4: 22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

Let's drop the scripture sculpting of sentence fragments and isolated texts and look at what the actual surrounding verses say:

John 4:15-29
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
15 The woman *said to Him, “[a]Sir, give me this water, so I will not be thirsty nor come all the way here to draw.” 16 He *said to her, “Go, call your husband and come here.” 17 The woman answered and said, “I have no husband.” Jesus *said to her, “You have correctly said, ‘I have no husband’; 18 for you have had five husbands, and the one whom you now have is not your husband; this you have said truly.” 19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. 20 Our fathers worshiped in this mountain, and you people say that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.” 21 Jesus *said to her, “Woman, believe Me, an hour is coming when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. 22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. 24 God is [c]spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.” 25 The woman *said to Him, “I know that Messiah is coming (He who is called Christ); when that One comes, He will declare all things to us.” 26 Jesus *said to her, “I who speak to you am He.”

27 At this point His disciples came, and they were amazed that He had been speaking with a woman, yet no one said, “What do You seek?” or, “Why do You speak with her?” 28 So the woman left her waterpot, and went into the city and *said to the men, 29 “Come, see a man who told me all the things that I have done; this is not [d]the Christ, is it?”

You can always tell when a Seventh Day Adventist is lying (other than when their lips are moving): whenever they post a text taken completely out of context to prove a point, you know that they are lying.

Did you happen to notice that word "but?" I helpfully underlined, boldfaced, and italicized it it for you so that you cannot miss it this time. Generally, in the English language that leads off a sentence with that word is to tip you off that the sentence either explains the previous one, or is an argument AGAINST what the previous one said! And yet you used that verse without supplying the following verse, which HEAVILY modifies the previous one! You CANNOT get more dishonest and deceitful that what you have done with that text! Did you really think that I wouldn't look up the entire surrounding verses to see what that sentence fragment that you posted really means?

It is just fascinating how Seventh Day Adventists revere a "prophet" who has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be a pathological liar and a colossal literary thief, yet they still THINK that they are heroic defenders of the Ten Commandments!

Isn't that just FASCINATING?

And yet, they smear Christians who would NEVER take advantage of people by lying and stealing from them, and deceitfully insinuate that that is why Christians believe the Ten Commandments were nailed to the cross. So that they can "lie and steal and murder with impunity." Yes, and I bet you can find a Church on Sunday where the preacher says "Now that the Ten Commandments have been nailed to the Cross, y'all can go right out and steal, kill, murder and fornicate to your hearts content! ENJOY! Cuz without the Ten Commandments, their ain't NOTHING in the Bible that prohibits those things!"

Just like Ellen White did!

Isn't that just incredibly FASCINATING?

 

[from scratch]

Suggesting that it is now okay to steal and kill is still against God.

Where did I even remotely suggest that? Its the pro law people trying to put words in the mouths of those who've accepted God's free gift. None of them promote sin. The law didn't invent sin.

For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.


Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

I don't see the word only in the above passage. Do you?

 

[from scratch]

What is the reason for the new covenant as given in Hebrews? Give me that and we can talk.

Its OK with most of us if you don't want to participate in the New Covenant. But its a problem with us for others to try and convince others to forsake it.

 

[from scratch]

I have. Jesus did states in John 4: 22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

Now where does the Bible say one must become a Jew to possess salvation?

 

[LarryP2]

Where did I even remotely suggest that? Its the pro law people trying to put words in the mouths of those who've accepted God's free gift. None of them promote sin. The law didn't invent sin.

For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.


Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

I don't see the word only in the above passage. Do you?

All those belonging to the misunderstood advocacy group that promotes Stealing Killing, and murdering based on Ten Commandments' abolition, raise your hands and say "EYE!"

In fact, I would like the email address of Churches that teach that fornication, murder, theft and lying are now okay since the Ten Commandments are no longer in effect. Lately, I have fiercely resented my church, since it condemns fornication harshly, while at the same time I have been stifling my overwhelming unmet needs for it. And there are people I would really like to murder, but I just can't get past Paul's and the Noahide Law's condemnation of it, so I would appreciate help finding a Church that would permit it based on the lack of the Ten Commandments. I have people in my life that need killing. I want proof the abolition of the Ten Commandments simultaneously abolished the Noahide Laws, passages in the Epistles that strongly condemn murder, and the State and Federal laws that penalize it.

 

[from scratch]

What is interesting is that you contend that to break one law makes us guilty off all but you also contend that there is no law. Which is it? Where is guilt without law? Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
It also says there is one God I should worship. Without that law, how can I be condemned for idolatry?

That's exactly correct according to James. He's speaking to those who think they're keeping the law. Since the New Covenant doesn't include the law its impossible for its adherents to violate it.

I don't contend there's no law. You're trying to put words in my mouth and you don't understand being led by the Holy Spirit. Its not logical nor supportable from the Bible that God set us free from the law only to send us back into its bondage and hopelessness.

 

[Cribstyl]

What is the reason for the new covenant as given in Hebrews? Give me that and we can talk.

The things that you talk about cant be proven with scriptures. You should ashamed of yourself for using these deceptive tactics.
The fact is: your false claims are easily defeated by scriptures. Then you ignore our responses and make more wild claims. Your questions are creatively twisted.

HERE IS YOUR ANSWER
The first reason for the New Covenant is given in Jeremiah and repeated in Hebrews. The Children of Israel broke the Old Covenant by breaking the commandments within it. Rather than death for breaking the letter of the law given Moses, God promised to give a New covenant with a forgiveness of sin clause. Heb 8:12 Heb 8:9 Heb 8:8

God said He would give a New one unlike the one given at Sinai. Heb 8:13
Scriptures proves that the Old one is the law given Moses at Sinai.
Scriptures proves a New one does not mean the Old written on your heart.
Scriptures say clearly what happens to the Old Covenant? Heb 8:7 Does the words "wax old", "decay" means written on your heart?

 

[VictorC]

What is interesting is that you contend that to break one law makes us guilty off all but you also contend that there is no law. Which is it? Where is guilt without law? Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
It also says there is one God I should worship. Without that law, how can I be condemned for idolatry?

Lying by omission is still bearing false witness.
Did you really think Romans 7:7 refers to a different Law than verse 6 does?
A quote found only in Exodus 20:17 and Deuteronomy 5:21 shows that the Law we have been delivered from is none other than the covenant from Mount Sinai, the Ten Commandments. Regardless of the effort the whacko Adventists in Barbados and elsewhere attempt to re-define the old covenant, it shows a uniform rejection of Scripture on their part. The motive stems from a rejection of Christianity.

 

[VictorC]

What is the reason for the new covenant as given in Hebrews? Give me that and we can talk.

The things that you talk about cant be proven with scriptures. You should ashamed of yourself for using these deceptive tactics.
The fact is: your false claims are easily defeated by scriptures. Then you ignore our responses and make more wild claims. Your questions are creatively twisted.

HERE IS YOUR ANSWER
The first reason for the New Covenant is given in Jeremiah and repeated in Hebrews. The Children of Israel broke the Old Covenant by breaking the commandments within it. Rather than death for breaking the letter of the law given Moses, God promised to give a New covenant with a forgiveness of sin clause. Heb 8:12 Heb 8:9 Heb 8:8

God said He would give a New one unlike the one given at Sinai. Heb 8:13
Scriptures proves that the Old one is the law given Moses at Sinai.
Scriptures proves a New one does not mean the Old written on your heart.
Scriptures say clearly what happens to the Old Covenant? Heb 8:7 Does the words "wax old", "decay" means written on your heart?

I had posted a similar message on this same topic to another member, to show the overall narrative of the epistle to the Hebrews.

The Greek metathesis that is rendered as 'change' in Hebrews 7:12 shows a principle meaning of 'transferred from one location to another'. This same Greek term is used in Hebrews 12:27, where it "indicates the removal of those things that are being shaken".

The inspired author equated the first covenant with the Law, and the overall narrative addresses the 'change' consistently with the principle meaning of moving the Law's location, another way of indicating a change in jurisdiction:

• The first covenant demanded change (Hebrews 7:12)
• It was annulled (v.7:18)
• It was charged with a fault that called for a new covenant (v.8:7)
• It was rendered obsolete and ready to vanish away (v.8:13)
• Jesus redeemed our transgressions under the first covenant and is now the Mediator of the new covenant (v.9:15)
• He took the first covenant away by His own Hand, in order to establish that new covenant (v.10:9)

The animal sacrifices -burnt offerings + offerings for sin- are driven by the individual ordinances contained in the old covenant Law. The only way to end those sacrifices is to end the ordinances that drove them. That is the context surrounding the last bullet (v.10:9), and God's disposition was to end the entire first covenant those ordinances are found in.

Elder111 doesn't want to perceive a reason for the new covenant in the Blood of Christ. This is the reason for his wild claims.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Suggesting that it is now okay to steal and kill is still against God.

Apparently your knowledge of the New Testament is rather lacking

1 John 3:15 Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer; and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.

 

[LarryP2]

Apparently your knowledge of the New Testament is rather lacking

1 John 3:15 Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer; and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.

Man, you know how to ruin my day! I had just asked him for the web pages of the Churches that say murder is just fine, now that the Ten Commandments have been abolished. I have some people currently in my life that desperately "need killin'," and some proof that after the Ten Commandments were "nailed to the cross," the Noahide Commandments, the repeated injunctions against murder in the Epistles, and millions of state and federal laws were similarly "Nailed to the Cross."

They have promised me that we make the "nailed to the Cross" argument based on our unmet needs to get away with murder. I just want proof of that.

 

[SAAN]

Murder has always been wrong, you dont need the 10 Commandments to tell you that or the Noahide commands. Cain killed Abe land there was no command not to, but he knew he was wrong.

 

[LarryP2]

Murder has always been wrong, you dont need the 10 Commandments to tell you that or the Noahide commands. Cain killed Abe land there was no command not to, but he knew he was wrong.

But you have repeatedly claimed that anyone saying the Ten Commandments have been "nailed to the cross" equals "lawlessness." My argument has always been that the entire Mosaic Law was "nailed to the Cross," including the Ten Commandments. But at the same time, I have repeatedly pointed out to you that the Noahide Commandments prohibited "fornication, theft, lying and murder" for several hundred years before Moses received the law on Sinai. And after the cross abolished the Mosaic Law, the Epistles are riddled with condemnation of "fornication, theft, lying and murder." Yet you accuse me of advocating "lawlessness." And in Acts 15, it is clear the Council of Jerusalem reaffirmed the Noahide Commandments.

So can you please defend what Ellen White meant when she said that when Christians say the Ten Commandments were abolished, they are doing so because they are in favor of "fornication, theft, murder and lying?" And lawlessness?

 

[Sophrosyne]

Man, you know how to ruin my day! I had just asked him for the web pages of the Churches that say murder is just fine, now that the Ten Commandments have been abolished. I have some people currently in my life that desperately "need killin'," and some proof that after the Ten Commandments were "nailed to the cross," the Noahide Commandments, the repeated injunctions against murder in the Epistles, and millions of state and federal laws were similarly "Nailed to the Cross."

They have promised me that we make the "nailed to the Cross" argument based on our unmet needs to get away with murder. I just want proof of that.

Yeah I know... I just slapped a wrong way do not enter sign on the Christians can now murder because there is no 10 commandments for them argument for good.