Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Stop right there.mmksparbud,
I agree with your above post and I do my best not be rising up and being defensive.
It is a hard row to hoe as self keeps urging retaliate but as true Christians we take
You've rejected the Law's requirements for the Sabbath, and none of you have furnished a commandment for the unholy rendition you've replaced it with. This has been explained to you at least a dozen times.<snip> We're continually told we don't keep the Sabbath that we proclaim to keep<snip>
Yes and I mistakenly thought you'd relate it to your post I quoted. I understand not being able to follow a conversation, but you take the cake.
Do I need to post from the dictionary what intimidation means?
Yes there is. Wonder who's throwing it?
You've no clue what the Bible says. I point you to Gal 5:4. Do I need to quote your prophetess again? OK -
"It means eternal salvation to keep the Sabbath holy unto the Lord" {6T 356.4}
The Sabbath is the golden clasp that unites God and His people.
It means eternal salvation to keep the Sabbath holy unto the Lord.
From My Life Today - Page 292
Ellen G. White Estate: Daily Devotional - My Life Today
Do you want more?Yes I do. The problem seems to be the belief if a lie is used often enough people believe it to be true. That 's exactly what being done here by your comrades.No, no its just that you can't use them with out breaking the 4th commandment.Do you know anything about Loma Linda, CA? I do.Bull!!! Loma Linda , CA is a mighty fine example.You're being extremely absurd and argumentative resulting from hurt that we don't accept the SDA truth.Who started this thread? Are you saying you really want no response from those being attacked? Your poor me pity SDA ploy stuff is very old hat around here. We're used to it. No not really, you all reach out and grab it with gusto!You have your posters mixed up. A sabbatarian introduced the idea, not the pro grace camp.Again you're mixed up. Not a single one of us have ever made that clam. I've quoted and even parsed the appropriate passage. It just gets thrown out like trash. That's simply not the deal. You refuse to believe Moses, the prophets, the Gospels, Jesus and Paul. You're very quiet about all of the above by omission and usually holler loudly about Paul. Paul says things like -
Now we are delivered from the law Rom 7:6
And tells us to throw out the law in Gal 4:30. You can say anything you want. It would help quite a bit if you were consistent. See my quotes above from your prophetess.Are you now telling me to sin by dancing when you clearly do?
That's right I don't. The SDA have done me no spiritual nor physical harm. I've never been an SDA either. I'm also not responding in an emotional state. Yeah I pretty sure you're SDA. You can deny that all you want.Oh, Scratch! And you don't have a vendetta? I find the church of Adventists should have taken more with EG White of the council she gave them.
That's right I don't. The SDA have done me no spiritual nor physical harm. I've never been an SDA either. I'm also not responding in an emotional state. Yeah I pretty sure you're SDA. You can deny that all you want.
Then are you really a professional shill (troll)? You're defending them way to much for me and others to believe there's not a connection of some sort.You are welcome to check their book of membership and you will find I am not in it. I do know Adventism theology well as I do many of the denominations as I made a thorough study of many to see if I could be a part.
Adventism fell away after 1888 and left off in continuing reform. Reform for all of us must be a continuing program.
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck......Then are you really a professional shill (troll)? You're defending them way to much for me and others to believe there's not a connection of some sort.
Then are you really a professional shill (troll)? You're defending them way to much for me and others to believe there's not a connection of some sort.
I have yet to see you stop repeating and drop out and don't think you will either I also don't think that you are here to speak your piece and move on. We see you as just another adventist preacher on another old stale soapbox harping away the same old stale rhetoric that really has no place in mainstream Christianity. You hope beyond hope you can land someone who doesn't have an iota of logical sense to read all the arguments here and fall for this legalist hocus pocus pulling the Sabbath out of a hat and placing it upon the heads of Christians so they too can join the tiny crowd of those condemning us here for our unwillingness to adhere to a practice that is wholly tied to Judaism and nothing else.I find there is times a repeat is needed but when it is seen it is being ignored it is time to put in furthering admonition or drop out.
It certainly means it needs to be investigated for its duckness and rejected if it is as such. If you hear a quack like a duck are you going to think it is a chicken at first thought?That does not mean it is a duck...........
It may be something that looks and quacks like a duck.....
Have you ever played the game "duck, duck, goose"?
What a curious statement. What happened in 1888 with regard to Adventist theology? Oh, my...You are welcome to check their book of membership and you will find I am not in it. I do know Adventism theology well as I do many of the denominations as I made a thorough study of many to see if I could be a part.
Adventism fell away after 1888 and left off in continuing reform. Reform for all of us must be a continuing program.
I came from a MJ background myself. None of us are going to entertain your straw man argument that the Sabbath was changed to another day (excluding devotees to the Too Long in the Sun pamphlet rife with the same errors you adhere to). Becoming more aware of the extent of the Gospel's message of redemption causes me to look upon your bewilderment over the Sabbath being a 'thorn' as another fallacy when we look at the Law describing who and when the Sabbath was given to. It doesn't include you. This reminds me of my very first post to you, which you could never respond in kind to:I am at a loss as to why the Sabbath is such a thorn to so many. I find it a day of peace.
There are many Messianic Jews and they see no inkling of it being changed to the Sunday.
How many here have heard or read much of their testimony? I find it to be just pretty straight.
Well, you have the liberty to observe the former shadow of the Sabbath, but bear in mind that such observance isn't keeping the Sabbath Holy according to the Law that ordained it (the Levitical priesthood requisite for the burnt offerings doesn't serve you). Many of us concede God's redemption, and acknowledge entrance into His rest that the Sabbath was designed to lead those under the Law towards. Once we have the permanent reality of God's rest, what use is the shadow that led us there?
Galatians 3Acknowledging God's redemption in Jesus Christ shows our state of faith having come to fruition. The Law designed to drive us there has served its purpose and doesn't retain us any longer.
21 Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law. 22 But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. 23 But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. 24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.
I see you aren't SDA. Good. Did you know the SDA church relies on a mistranslation in the KJV? Granted, reliance on any English translation in how it renders another language isn't a good idea.
You do realize that Ellen White was a false prophet who condemned herself with her various theological statements, don't you? Did you know she 'prophesied' about a third covenant to be made with people God declared don't exist, passing over God's redeemed in the new covenant (the second covenant) altogether?I find the church of Adventists should have taken more with EG White of the council she gave them.
{1SG 201.1} said:I saw the saints leaving the cities and villages, and associating in companies together, and living in the most solitary places. Angels provided them food and water; but the wicked were suffering with hunger and thirst. Then I saw the leading men of earth consulting together, and Satan and his angels were busy around them. I saw a writing, and copies of it scattered in different parts of the land, giving orders, that unless the saints should yield their peculiar faith, give up the Sabbath, and observe the first day, they were at liberty, after such a time, to put them to death. But in this time the saints were calm and composed, trusting in God, and leaning upon his promise, that a way of escape would be made for them. In some places, before the time for the writing to be executed, the wicked rushed upon the saints to slay them; but angels in the form of men of war fought for them. Satan wished to have the privilege of destroying the saints of the Most High; but Jesus bade his angels watch over them, for God would be honored by making a covenant with those who had kept his law in the sight of the heathen round about them; and Jesus would be honored by translating the faithful, waiting ones, who had so long expected him, without their seeing death.
I have yet to see you stop repeating and drop out and don't think you will either I also don't think that you are here to speak your piece and move on. We see you as just another adventist preacher on another old stale soapbox harping away the same old stale rhetoric that really has no place in mainstream Christianity. You hope beyond hope you can land someone who doesn't have an iota of logical sense to read all the arguments here and fall for this legalist hocus pocus pulling the Sabbath out of a hat and placing it upon the heads of Christians so they too can join the tiny crowd of those condemning us here for our unwillingness to adhere to a practice that is wholly tied to Judaism and nothing else.
Repeating this worn-out straw man doesn't garner sympathy. You need to show that the former shadow was resurrected with the old covenant it was part of before it could be changed. Existence is a prerequisite to change.People just need true and solid thus saith the Lord that Sabbath that He changed it, Sabbath to Sunday. Solid ground is needed on this to stand on!
I agree, instead of proving the Sabbath was for Christians they try and go in the back door equating Sunday "observance" is the Sabbath then they say it is wrong because it is not Saturday. I see no biblical reference to Sunday being akin to the Sabbath to begin with such that you could play leapfrog over it to get back to Saturday.Repeating this worn-out straw man doesn't garner sympathy. You need to show that the former shadow was resurrected with the old covenant it was part of before it could be changed. Existence is a prerequisite to change.
I agree, instead of proving the Sabbath was for Christians they try and go in the back door equating Sunday "observance" is the Sabbath then they say it is wrong because it is not Saturday. I see no biblical reference to Sunday being akin to the Sabbath to begin with such that you could play leapfrog over it to get back to Saturday.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?