Sabbath should not be discussed in SDA specific forums

[1John2:4]

LOL, so ironic folks talk THEIR Sabbath WORKS on the Sabbath but NEVER GOD'S WORKS on the Sabbath and of the Sabbath.

I'm sorry I don't really understand what you are saying. I am not trying to be ugly but your posts are difficult to understand.

 

[Haramis]

Kindness that like a fashion dress assumingly conceals but unassumingly parades human character in all it's pretentiousness.

Covert false doctrine is best sold by 'Christian kindness' -- call it 'love'! In this case the merchandise is the myriads of false 'sabbaths'. "We keep ..." smile ... and it is Truth out through the backdoor!

It must be very burdensome to feel like you have to battle with people over their ideas and somehow bring them to a spiritual understanding that they can only reach through God.
Why do you attempt to do this? If you are right, and this person(or people) are wrong, how do you think you can intercede?

I'm actually of the belief that the Sabbath was never moved from Saturday(but I am not an Adventist). And I think observing the Sabbath is useful. I think God laid out rules for our sake, not His. God attempts to guide us so that we can grow and improve. He never gives us instructions as a form of control. The purpose of the Sabbath was to ensure everyone took the time to stay connected with their families and God. A day to set aside everything else in the word and focus on those important things without distraction. I think that's useful, and I think the people who do it, have stronger family and spiritual bonds than if they didn't.

But I'm not going to fight with people who see no merit in a Sabbath. In all of my life, I don't think I have *ever* changed one of my spiritual views through conflict. I have however, seen powerful personal statements of edification and it has inspired me to seek in a new direction. Sometimes, I then grow in a new direction. That's exactly how I came to follow a Sabbath.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

It must be very burdensome to feel like you have to battle with people over their ideas and somehow bring them to a spiritual understanding that they can only reach through God.
Why do you attempt to do this? If you are right, and this person(or people) are wrong, how do you think you can intercede?

I'm actually of the belief that the Sabbath was never moved from Saturday(but I am not an Adventist). And I think observing the Sabbath is useful. I think God laid out rules for our sake, not His. God attempts to guide us so that we can grow and improve. He never gives us instructions as a form of control. The purpose of the Sabbath was to ensure everyone took the time to stay connected with their families and God. A day to set aside everything else in the word and focus on those important things without distraction. I think that's useful, and I think the people who do it, have stronger family and spiritual bonds than if they didn't.

But I'm not going to fight with people who see no merit in a Sabbath. In all of my life, I don't think I have *ever* changed one of my spiritual views through conflict. I have however, seen powerful personal statements of edification and it has inspired me to seek in a new direction. Sometimes, I then grow in a new direction. That's exactly how I came to follow a Sabbath.

This post says it all--about the big 'I' and about how I must feel like I have to battle with people over their ideas and how I must somehow bring them to a spiritual understanding that they can only reach through God anyway.

Why do you anyway attempt to do this? Do you think you can intercede between them and God? Meanwhile you aimed this at me? (Mind your own interference, as my deceased Boer uncle used to say!)

I fought with no one. I fought with all Christianity.

But I am going to fight with people who see no merit in THE Sabbath. In all its existence it never changed. It has one merit, that "the day The Seventh Day is Sabbath of the LORD GOD". It has one powerful attribute that has inspired "prophets in times past". Throughout the Word of God and time it has been the eschatological Word of God "concerning the Christ, how that He had to suffer and RISE THE THIRD DAY" -- the great and terrible day of the LORD -- the day of Christ's actual rising from the dead which in the Last Day will again be the day of the rising of the dead.

That's exactly how I came to believe The Sabbath is the Lord's Day -- our Lord Jesus' Day of Resurrection from the dead and Day of Triumph over the last enemy, death.

 

[Haramis]

Note how haughty you get, even though I'm even in agreement with you on the value of the Sabbath.

Promoting it positively is a lot more effective than trying to do it through conflict. We don't beat people into faith, we witness to them.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

beat

add "L"
https://www.google.com/search?q=bleating+sheep&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I'm sorry I don't really understand what you are saying. I am not trying to be ugly but your posts are difficult to understand.

Sometimes
this
happens
because
of
a
gag
order
.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Note how haughty you get, even though I'm even in agreement with you on the value of the Sabbath.

Promoting it positively is a lot more effective than trying to do it through conflict. We don't beat people into faith, we witness to them.

I got haughty with having posted, "I am going to fight with people who see no merit in THE Sabbath. In all its existence it never changed. It has one merit, that "the day The Seventh Day is Sabbath of the LORD GOD". It has one powerful attribute that has inspired "prophets in times past". Throughout the Word of God and time it has been the eschatological Word of God "concerning the Christ, how that He had to suffer and RISE THE THIRD DAY" -- the great and terrible day of the LORD -- the day of Christ's actual rising from the dead which in the Last Day will again be the day of the rising of the dead.

That's exactly how I came to believe The Sabbath is the Lord's Day -- our Lord Jesus' Day of Resurrection from the dead and Day of Triumph over the last enemy, death."?

Boastful in the Lord Jesus Christ for having raised from the dead "on the Sabbath", yes! But <arrogant>?

I should be more bold, you're right!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Yeah I think sticking with the SDA forums, where people actually encourage each other when they share truth instead of arguing about everything.

Show me those forums!

I have shown one SDA forum here on CF where people actually encourage each other when they share the biggest lot of humbug instead of arguing about anything of Scriptural substance. In fact mostly the conversations or threads are of such low standard and so Christ-less and unscriptural that I stay out of the discussions and often cannot even read the stuff so superstitious, superficial, shallow, empty and bloated with typical SDA vulgarity are they.

Needless to say, it usually does not take long before I get banned.

 

[Paul Yohannan]

Let's face the facts, Sunday is Roman idolatry rampant throughout Christianity.

No, it's not. Your argument might have more merit the ancient churches of the East, as far away from Rome as India, had a history of Sabbatarianism, but alas they do not.

Ultimately what it comes down to is whether or not one prioritizes the Mosaic legislation or the life of our Lord, especially including His resurrection, which Sunday denotes.

 

[Paul Yohannan]

There is only ONE day that He Hallowed and Sanctified however.. the seventh day.

If you do not steal, do not commit adultry, do not covet your neighbours stuff and "observe" any of the other Commandments, then what right do you have to segregate the 4th as "works"? Are you not doing works, or better yet, showing works when you don't steal? How is that different than observing the Sabbath as God intended us to, incommunion with Him sepreate fro the goings on in the secular world? We are merely showing good works because of our love for God and being obedient to what He has asked... just like you when you don't sleep around on your wife, or even lust after another woman.

But this argument lacks credibility if one denies the deity of our Lord in contradiction to John 1:1.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

The law makes you sinful beyond measure. (Romans 7:13)

Who is going to eat this up for Scripture, the Word of God?

Because it is the word of man, <Major 1>, the highest, the almighty, exalted "far above all principality ... and every name that is named". So Major is this man and First, who "thinks above what is written", who "shall think to change times and Law of the Most High". For he that "changes times and seasons", is god.

 

[Paul Yohannan]

Who is going to eat this up for Scripture, the Word of God?

Because it is the word of man, <Major 1>, the highest, the almighty, exalted "far above all principality ... and every name that is named". So Major is this man and First, who "thinks above what is written", who "shall think to change times and Law of the Most High". For he that "changes times and seasons", is god.

John 1:1-14 clearly identifies our Lord as the incarnate Word. And by the way, @Major1 did in fact quote actual scripture. Any reference to the law has to consider NT commentary on the subject, and in this case such consideration seems elusive.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

No, it's not. Your argument might have more merit the ancient churches of the East, as far away from Rome as India, had a history of Sabbatarianism, but alas they do not.

Ultimately what it comes down to is whether or not one prioritizes the Mosaic legislation or the life of our Lord, especially including His resurrection, which Sunday denotes.

<<… the ancient churches of the East, as far away from Rome as India, had a history of Sabbatarianism…>>>

Irrelevant, bad history. Therefore useless as far as what I said, is concerned, which is the status quo 2016, “Sunday is Roman idolatry rampant throughout Christianity.”


<<… whether or not one prioritizes the Mosaic legislation or the life of our Lord…>>


Unnecessary and inappropriate. One should not <prioritize> but compare and interpret Scripture with Scripture. As far as I am concerned, that is eschatology and Christology and soteriology, in other words, proper and honest exegetical and hermeneutic theology and doctrine. In other words, plain good old Christian Reformed Protestant Faith accepting Old and New Testaments for God’s unfailing truthful Word. Which means, I am no Roman Catholic that takes the word of popes and the myths of RC tradition for the infallible only and lasting Word of God.


<<… His resurrection, which Sunday denotes…>> never!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

But this argument lacks credibility if one denies the deity of our Lord in contradiction to John 1:1.

Who, here, denies the deity of our Lord or contradicts John 1:1?!

 

[Paul Yohannan]

<<… the ancient churches of the East, as far away from Rome as India, had a history of Sabbatarianism…>>>

Irrelevant, bad history. Therefore useless as far as what I said, is concerned, which is the status quo 2016, “Sunday is Roman idolatry rampant throughout Christianity.”

Merely characterizing it is irrelevant or "bad history" does not make it so. If you have a specific argument against the historical witness of the Eastern churches, that can be considered. However, merely trashing that history without a stated reason for doing so entirely unconvincing.

<<… whether or not one prioritizes the Mosaic legislation or the life of our Lord…>>


Unnecessary and inappropriate.

Inappropriate how?

One should not <prioritize> but compare and interpret Scripture with Scripture.

The Gospel is the central message of our Lord; all other scripture is sacred, but our Lord clearly demonstrated how the Mosaic legislation was being abused, and the Christian perspective was further clarified by St. Paul.

As far as I am concerned, that is eschatology and Christology and soteriology,

Your major bone to pick here is perhaps soteriological, but your argument is not in my opinion either based on eschatological or Christological reasoning. It is in part hamartiological, and in part ecclesiological, or perhaps anti-ecclesiological, but it is not Christological especially insofar as the Sabbatarian position disregards the Incarnation and the specific context and meaning of the Sabbath in light of our Lord's repose on that day before His resurrection on the 8th day.

in other words, proper and honest exegetical and hermeneutic theology and doctrine.

Proper and honest according to what standard?

In other words, plain good old Christian Reformed Protestant Faith

Hardly "old" considering the Reformation was a mere 500 years ago, but beyond that, hardly Protestant or Reformed either given that the Magisterial reformers such as Luther, Calvin and Cranmer entirely rejected Sabbatarianism.

accepting Old and New Testaments for God’s unfailing truthful Word.

Such a view would require us to ignore the definiton of the Word contained in John 1:1-14.

Which means, I am no Roman Catholic that takes the word of popes and the myths of RC tradition for the infallible only and lasting Word of God.

Neither am I, and for that matter, neither were Luther, Calvin and Cranmer, for their various faults, or Wesley even, who was somewhat less disagreeable, if still quite wrong on several key points.

I would hate for you to suffer from the misconception that the holy Orthodox Church is in some way a component or apparatus of the Roman Pontiff. We objected to Papal Supremacy before ir was fashionable to do so.

<<… His resurrection, which Sunday denotes…>> never!

Let us not conflate emotion with reason shall we?

 

[Paul Yohannan]

Who, here, denies the deity of our Lord or contradicts John 1:1?!

The post in question was not in reply to you. That said, I do get rather nervous when chaps talk about the Word as referring exclusively to Scripture, which is an icon of the Word but not the incarnate Word according to John 1:1-17.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

But this argument lacks credibility if one denies the deity of our Lord in contradiction to John 1:1.

I don't deny the Diety of Jesus Christ... if you think so because I don't believe the trinity narrative, then you don't understand the relationship betwenn the Father and Son.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Maybe this thread needs to be moved.

 

[Major1]

Show me those forums!

I have shown one SDA forum here on CF where people actually encourage each other when they share the biggest lot of humbug instead of arguing about anything of Scriptural substance. In fact mostly the conversations or threads are of such low standard and so Christ-less and unscriptural that I stay out of the discussions and often cannot even read the stuff so superstitious, superficial, shallow, empty and bloated with typical SDA vulgarity are they.

Needless to say, it usually does not take long before I get banned.

I hear you!

My experience on Christian forum web sites is as you described. The unscriptural comments and dialog is so self centered that it is a challenge to read most of it without gagging.

It does require a lot of patience to keep ones anger under control.

Actually I consider it a really good tool to help me stay calm under pressure.

 

[Major1]

I don't deny the Diety of Jesus Christ... if you think so because I don't believe the trinity narrative, then you don't understand the relationship betwenn the Father and Son.

Question........
how can you claim to be a Christian and NOT believe in the Trinity?