Seventh-day Adventist affirm God's Ten Commandments - who else does?

[BobRyan]

I am as motivated as anyone else to promote the benefits of the Seventh-day Adventist church as I show here -- Aug 9, 2005 #1

But I freely admit that we have many non-SDAs on this section of CF that keep the Bible Sabbath AND that boldly state that they affirm all TEN of the TEN Commandments.

Yet a number of threads that speak about upholding rather than downsizing the TEN Commandments -- quickly reduce to those very active posts that attack the Ten Commandments - simply attacking SDAs or bringing up Ellen White as if all those who affirm the Ten Commandments are just SDA.

What is more a very tiny few -- occasionally post that they affirm the Ten Commandments but keep Sabbath on Sunday -- so were they to actually post on this board area regularly it would also be unfair to them as well - to keep insisting that only SDAs are affirming God's Ten Commandments.

Now when we look at General Theology for topics like "infant baptism" or "sola scriptura" or "Vicar of Christ" or "infallibility" or "Jewish Apocrypha" you can get people coming back time after time after time - no matter how many different threads there are on those subjects - to re-engage on that subject.

But when it comes to the Commandments of God - which define what sin is - in 1 John 3:4 ... and which spoken by God Himself at Sinai -- there is often "hushed silence" on the part of "some" as that Law is challenged time after time by those who claim that it is abolished, downsized etc.

It is then left up to Bible Sabbath groups ALONE - (be they SDA or not) to defend the LAW of God - since their affirmation of it apparently constitutes the only group taking the "affirmative" position seriously. OR at least "As seriously" as --- the Jewish Aprocrypa subject is taken by others, ... or "Purgatory" is taken by others on GT who will repeated engage on those subjects with great enthusiasm.

Thoughts?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[bugkiller]

We have many non-SDAs on this section of CF that keep the Bible Sabbath AND that boldly state that they affirm all TEN of the TEN Commandments.

Yet a number of threads that speak about upholding rather than downsizing the TEN Commandments -- quickly reduce to those very active posts that attack the Ten Commandments - simply attacking SDAs or bringing up Ellen White as if all those who affirm the Ten Commandments are just SDA.

What is more a very tiny few -- occasionally post that they affirm the Ten Commandments but keep Sabbath on Sunday -- so were they to actually post on this board area regularly it would also be unfair to them as well - to keep insisting that only SDAs are affirming God's Ten Commandments.

Now when we look at General Theology for topics like "infant baptism" or "sola scriptura" or "Vicar of Christ" or "infallibility" or "Jewish Apocrypha" you can get people coming back time after time after time - no matter how many different threads there are on those subjects - to re-engage on that subject.

But when it comes to the Commandments of God - which define what sin is - in 1 John 3:4 ... and which spoken by God Himself at Sinai -- there is often "hushed silence" on the part of "some" as that Law is challenged time after time by those who claim that it is abolished, downsized etc.

It is then left up to Bible Sabbath groups ALONE - (be they SDA or not) to defend the LAW of God - since their affirmation of it apparently constitutes the only group taking the "affirmative" position seriously. OR at least "As seriously" as --- the Jewish Aprocrypa subject is taken by others, ... or "Purgatory" is taken by others on GT who will repeated engage on those subjects with great enthusiasm.

Thoughts?

in Christ,

Bob

Well you're back.

Its you that makes this and SDA issue. Its people like you that are posting SDA doctrine that won't stand the test of Scripture. Its people like you who refuse to accept even the Book of the Law, much less the rest of the Bible. Its people like you who take so many things out of context making them say something they don't mean to convey. MK 2:27 is a perfect example. Of course your most favorite passage from John 14:15 is on that list. You simply can't explain away John 15:10. With your view point your in trouble no matter what you say about the verse. It alone invalidates your whole argument. John isn't influenced by Paul either.

Your picking on SDA people is self inflicted. We're not conducting a pity party here.

Look we can agree that I JN 3:4 defines sin. What you refuse to believe is a little 4 letter word "also" which means sin is more than disobedience to the law. Sin was before the law Rom 5:13 and Gal 3:19, but you have the law creating sin. You simply refuse to believe Moses' statement in the Book of the Law. You also refuse to believe the prophet Jeremiah. You also refuse to believe the Gospels. Do you really believe the Bible?

As for downsizing the law you do it yourself while abusing Mat 5. So Uncle!!!!!

You can defend the law all you want while I and others here will defend grace which alone provides salvation. The law only provides death because no one keeps the law. The OT says so in at least 3 places.

So you keep your death and I'll keep my life as I've already passed the judgment according to Jesus in JN 5:24. M rest is also found solely in Jesus as I accepted His offer found in Mat 11:28-30.

I'll make you a deal. You stick to the Scriptures and I'll do the same.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

.

bugkiller

 

[BobRyan]

Look we can agree that I JN 3:4 defines sin. What you refuse to believe is a little 4 letter word "also" which means sin is more than disobedience to the law.

A. Quote 1 John 3:4
B. Show that it says "ALSO" in a way to suggest that sin is at times not transgression -- "Sin can ALSO be transgression of the Law in addition to other things" etc. At this point you "quote you".

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

The text says whoever is sins is also transgressing the law - FOR sin IS transgression of the law.

It does not say "for at times sin can also be transgression of the Law"

 

[BobRyan]

Well you're back.

Its you that makes this and SDA issue.

Just not in real life.

on the contrary - I point out time after time that many non-SDAs affirm all TEN of the TEN Commandments - it is in my signature line with EVERY post!

I point out that even pro-Sunday scholarship affirms this point even though they bend the Sabbath Commandment after the cross to re-point it via man-made-tradition to weed-day-1.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Just not in real life.

on the contrary - I point out time after time that many non-SDAs affirm all TEN of the TEN Commandments - it is in my signature line with EVERY post!

I point out that even pro-Sunday scholarship affirms this point, even though they bend the Sabbath Commandment after the cross to re-point it via man-made-tradition to weed-day-1.

Yeah, there outta be a law....is that the ones 2Peter 3:16 is talking about?

http://www.herealittletherealittle.net/index.cfm?page_name=Lazarus
Jesus and Paul vs the OC Jewish rulers

John 5:39
"Ye are searching the Writings that ye are seeming in them life age-during to be having,
and those are the ones-testifying about Me".

2Peter 3:16
As also/and in all the letters, speaking in them about these-things; in which are difficult to understand any which the unlearned and unsteadfast are wresting/twisting, as also the rest of Writings,
toward the own of them destruction/apwleian <684>.
[# 684 used reve 17:8, 11]

Reve 17:
8 The beast which you perceived was, and not is, and is being about to be ascending out of the abyss, and into destruction/apwleian <684> it is going away.
11 And the beast which was, and not is, and he an-eighth is, and out of the seven is, and into destruction/apwleian <684> is going away.


.

 

[BobRyan]

The two choices for attacking God's Sabbath commandment are:
1. Declare it dead -
2. Declare it edited/changed - via man-made tradition

the 'good news' about those in failing group 1 -- is that they at least admit that the Commandment cannot be "edited".

the "good news" about those in failing group 2 -- is that they at least admit that it continues to be binding on all the saints.

 

[BobRyan]

I'll make you a deal. You stick to the Scriptures and I'll do the same.

bugkiller

huhh??? you're making that deal after all the snip and snipe posts??

You are welcome to join me in posting texts "instead" any time.

Better late than never.

 

[bugkiller]

The two choices for attacking God's Sabbath commandment are:
1. Declare it dead -
2. Declare it edited/changed - via man-made tradition

the 'good news' about those in failing group 1 -- is that they at least admit that the Commandment cannot be "edited".

the "good news" about those in failing group 2 -- is that they at least admit that it continues to be binding on all the saints.

That's bad news.

bugkiller

 

[Sophrosyne]

The two choices for attacking God's Sabbath commandment are:
1. Declare it dead -
2. Declare it edited/changed - via man-made tradition

the 'good news' about those in failing group 1 -- is that they at least admit that the Commandment cannot be "edited".

the "good news" about those in failing group 2 -- is that they at least admit that it continues to be binding on all the saints.

That puts you in group 2

 

[Bob S]

The 10 didn't resolve the problem for the Israelites, so what makes you thing they will resolve anything in the lives of Christians.

The 10 are history along with the rest of book of the law. Christians have a better covenant, praise the Lord.

 

[Sophrosyne]

The 10 didn't resolve the problem for the Israelites, so what makes you thing they will resolve anything in the lives of Christians.

The 10 are history along with the rest of book of the law. Christians have a better covenant, praise the Lord.

This I agree with..... Israel had the 10 since Sinai and the only part of the 10 that truly dealt with lawlessness was the death penalty for breaking the Law it certainly didn't stop David from committing Murder and Adultery

 

[BobRyan]

The 10 didn't resolve the problem for the Israelites, so what makes you thing they will resolve anything in the lives of Christians.

So then having a Law about not murdering, not committing adultery, Love your neighbor as yourself Lev 19:18, Love God with all your heart Deut 6:5 did not work in the OT for the saints of Heb 11 (supposedly) - so they will not work in the NT for the saint either even though "the saints KEEP the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus" Rev 14:12.

Is your argument to that effect supposed to be compelling? If so... how?

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

This I agree with..... Israel had the 10 since Sinai and the only part of the 10 that truly dealt with lawlessness was the death penalty for breaking the Law it certainly didn't stop David from committing Murder and Adultery

The new covenant hasn't stopped Christians from continuing to sin either... what's your point?

 

[BABerean2]

Some are placing the focus on commandment keeping, instead of the Promise made to Abraham.


Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

The promise made to Abraham was made to Christ.


Gal 3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

The law was added 430 years after the Promise made to Abraham.
It cannot disannul the promise made to Abraham.

Gal 3:18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

The inheritance does not come through the law. It comes through the Promise made to Abraham.

Gal 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

The law was "added" because of sin, until the Seed would come to whom the Abrahamic Promise was made.


Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

The inheritance comes through Christ, not through attempting to keep the commandments, which no one but Christ has ever done.



Gal 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
(Paul compares the Sinai covenant to bondage.)

Gal 4:25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.



Gal 4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
(We are to cast out the Sinai covenant of bondage.)

Gal 4:31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.
(We are children of the New Covenant, not the Sinai covenant of bondage.)




Act 20:7 And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

 

[Salem]

When a group asks, of Christians, who else does, could this question have deeper significance, if Christendom down the ages doesn't accept some teaching? If, more importantly, inspired scripture teaches differently? If the question is, "Who else does?", maybe the next appropriate question is, therefore, a very serious one, "Are we a cult?"

Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Colossians 2:16-17

One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's. For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living. But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. Romans 14:5-10

 

[Bob S]

So then having a Law about not murdering, not committing adultery, Love your neighbor as yourself Lev 19:18, Love God with all your heart Deut 6:5 did not work in the OT for the saints of Heb 11 (supposedly) - so they will not work in the NT for the saint either even though "the saints KEEP the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus" Rev 14:12.

Is your argument to that effect supposed to be compelling? If so... how?

Here I thought you started a thread on the 10 commandments. Why did you add in your post the law of love? Is it because there is nothing about love on the 10, which you have refused to admit?

Is there anything in Rev 14 that would indicate John was referring to the 10 commandments? I have repeatedly referred you to 1Jn3: as to what John was referring to when he wrote "commandments" yet you refuse to acknowledge my posts, instead you add old covenant scripture to your belief system that Christians are not subject to. I praise the Lord that I found the real truth and am no longer under laws that do not pertain to living a Christian life.

1Jn 3:19 This is how we know that we belong to the truth and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence: 20 If our hearts condemn us, we know that God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything. 21 Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God 22 and receive from him anything we ask, because we keep his commands and do what pleases him. 23 And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. 24 The one who keeps God’s commands lives in him, and he in them. And this is how we know that he lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us.

Need I write all the other scripture that proves we are not under the 10 commandments? You have been presented the real truth, what are you and all the other 10 commandment pitchers going to do about it? You can read all of ellen's threats and admonition on Sabbath observance, but John was there in the beginning and I trust him with my future and not some self made false prophet or any group that makes a pitch for the Sabbath.

Do you see all the question marks????? How about answering each one.

 

[BobRyan]

The 10 didn't resolve the problem for the Israelites, so what makes you thing they will resolve anything in the lives of Christians.

So then having a Law about not murdering, not committing adultery, Love your neighbor as yourself Lev 19:18, Love God with all your heart Deut 6:5 did not work in the OT for the saints of Heb 11 (supposedly) - so they will not work in the NT for the saint either even though "the saints KEEP the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus" Rev 14:12.

Is your argument to that effect supposed to be compelling? If so... how?

Here I thought you started a thread on the 10 commandments. Why did you add in your post the law of love?

Because in Matt 22 Christ said that ALL the "LAW AND the prophets" rest on the immovable mosaic Law in Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbor as yourself" And Deut 6:5 "Love God with all your heart" -- and even the Jews pre-cross, in Christ day admitted that this is indeed the pre-cross Truth - not just post-cross.

So also did Christ group them together in Matt 19.

So also does Paul in Romans 13.

So also does James - in James 2.

Some would love to contradict Christ and claim that the Law of love not only is not the foundation-of or embodiment of - the TEN but in fact they have nothing at all to do with each other so Christ was just plain wrong.

there is nothing about love on the 10, which you have refused to admit?

hey! Maybe we have one of those people here!!

Sorry but I will be taking the Bible "instead" of contradicting Christ on that point.

 

[BobRyan]

When a group asks, of Christians, who else does, could this question have deeper significance, if Christendom down the ages doesn't accept some teaching? If, more importantly, inspired scripture teaches differently? If the question is, "Who else does?",

The reason for the thread is that we have so many non-SDAs that are affirming the Bible-Sabbath AND the TEN Commandments on this part of the board - and "yet" there are those who are at war with God's TEN Commandments on the area of the board who very frequently post "as if" they ignore the fact that both SDA and non-SDA posts are affirming God's Commandments - and so they pretend that if you agree with the Bible in affirming the TEN Commandments you are "SDA".

This thread calls that wild speculation into question.

 

[MoonofIsaiah]

I am as motivated as anyone else to promote the benefits of the Seventh-day Adventist church as I show here -- Aug 9, 2005 #1

But I freely admit that we have many non-SDAs on this section of CF that keep the Bible Sabbath AND that boldly state that they affirm all TEN of the TEN Commandments.

Yet a number of threads that speak about upholding rather than downsizing the TEN Commandments -- quickly reduce to those very active posts that attack the Ten Commandments - simply attacking SDAs or bringing up Ellen White as if all those who affirm the Ten Commandments are just SDA.

What is more a very tiny few -- occasionally post that they affirm the Ten Commandments but keep Sabbath on Sunday -- so were they to actually post on this board area regularly it would also be unfair to them as well - to keep insisting that only SDAs are affirming God's Ten Commandments.

Now when we look at General Theology for topics like "infant baptism" or "sola scriptura" or "Vicar of Christ" or "infallibility" or "Jewish Apocrypha" you can get people coming back time after time after time - no matter how many different threads there are on those subjects - to re-engage on that subject.

But when it comes to the Commandments of God - which define what sin is - in 1 John 3:4 ... and which spoken by God Himself at Sinai -- there is often "hushed silence" on the part of "some" as that Law is challenged time after time by those who claim that it is abolished, downsized etc.

It is then left up to Bible Sabbath groups ALONE - (be they SDA or not) to defend the LAW of God - since their affirmation of it apparently constitutes the only group taking the "affirmative" position seriously. OR at least "As seriously" as --- the Jewish Aprocrypa subject is taken by others, ... or "Purgatory" is taken by others on GT who will repeated engage on those subjects with great enthusiasm.

Thoughts?

in Christ,

Bob

I'd say the ten commandments are the moral foundation of Judaism and Christianity.