The trully Amazing Facts

[honorthesabbath]

Don't ya just love it HTS when they get so smart about the topic they have chosen to discuss that they begin to make our arguments for us? We went from Adam not having the Ten Commandments to Adam having a "covenant" with God and Adam being considered a "father" of the Israelites.

Now they have to concede that ADAM was given the 10c's even without it being recorded for us because now we have a text that says Adam & God had a covenant that is not recorded either! Oh the beauty of it all!

And did you also notice that not once did WE use any extra-biblical material but AT did--SHAME de SHAME!

The truth ALWAYS prevails.

 

[honorthesabbath]

Well AT--can you show us then where and when this covenant with Adam took place? How was it ratified? What did it concern?

AT--at your earliest convenience, could you please answer the 3 questions I posed to you last night? Thank you.

 

[honorthesabbath]

7. They like men have transgressed. Or, “like Adam they have transgressed.

What did Adam transgress? What law? About not eating from a specific tree? If that was the only ‘law’ in force at the time, when did the transgression of murder (Cain) enter the picture?

”

In His supreme love for His children, God placed Adam in the Garden of Eden to be His representative on earth, and to have dominion over it (Gen. 1:26), but our first father violated God’s command not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 3:6, 22–24; Isa. 59:1, 2). Like Adam, Israel and Judah had been given a dwelling place by God;

This paragraph simply says that like Adam, God gave the COI a “DWELLING PLACE”.

like Adam, they had broken God’s covenant with them through iniquity; and like Adam, they would be driven out of the Land of Promise.

And BOTH through iniquity (LAWLESSNESS) lost their habitations.

Having “treacherously” “transgressed the covenant,” Israel was no longer God’s people—

Adam WAS God’s child up until Adam broke the relationship—so when then did this supposed ‘covenant’ between he and God take place? Before or after the fall?

a fact implied in the name Lo-ammi (see on chs. 1:9; 2:23). Israel’s treachery is illustrated in a variety of ways (see chs. 6:4; 7:8, 11, 16).
chs. chapters

Nichol, F. D. (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary : The Holy Bible with exegetical and expository comment. Commentary Reference Series (Ho 6:7). Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association.

 

[Adventtruth]

No, I'm merely asking you a question.



And you have what scriptures available to prove this point AT? I'll suggest all day long Adam had a verbal contract with God, a verbal "covenant" but it was based on God's Holy, just and perfect law, not based on works.

I mean honestly AT if we cannot be saved by our works what makes you think that God deals with other's in a different way?

Perhaps you need to understand something. It would do you good to do a study on the covenants of God in salvation histroy.



When I say it was a covenant based on works, that means that He was to do as asked or commanded. Thats all. Unlike the New Covenant where its based on Gods grace, Adams covenant with God was based on Adam's obedience not grace before the fall. Grace entered in when Adam broke that covenant.

God told Adam to be fruitful and multiply, to have dominion over all the earth, and to not eat from the tree. That was the things to be performed perfectly by Adam. The last command carried a great penalty for dis-obedience which was death. The bible tells us and your own churches commentary tells us that Adam broke that covenant. But you and HTS wont even believe the bible, and then you compound the situation by reporting free, rather than discussing it with him.

I'm starting to think:

1)You won't be humble and truthful to the plain reading and integrity of scripture.

2) That you are not mature enough in the word of God to understand certain concepts as covenants, law, and bible history.

3) That I can't trust you for fear of you reporting as a weapon when you can't win an argument becasue of your bias.

4)That you don't know what it means or how to lay your bias aside to look for truth.

5) That you have no idea how your carnal nature can be very deceptive in manipulating you.


AT

 

[Adventtruth]

Are you speaking of the SDA Bible Commentary? No one interested in true non-partisan scholarship quotes that work.

Only adventist who are loyal to the Adventist faith.

AT

 

[Adventtruth]

AT--at your earliest convenience, could you please answer the 3 questions I posed to you last night? Thank you.

Now hts, what makes you think I will give you more bible truth, if you wont believe the scriptures. You wont believe the plain reading of scripture!

When you start believing what the bible says, maybe we can talk, but if you continue to conjure up your own ideas of scripture and reality and not the integrity of scripture, it will do me no good. If you understood the bible and that scripture about Adam, you would not be asking such a question becasue that scripture says it all.

AT

 

[Adventtruth]

What did Adam transgress? What law? About not eating from a specific tree? If that was the only ‘law’ in force at the time, when did the transgression of murder (Cain) enter the picture?

”

This paragraph simply says that like Adam, God gave the COI a “DWELLING PLACE”.

like Adam, they had broken God’s covenant with them through iniquity; and like Adam, they would be driven out of the Land of Promise.

And BOTH through iniquity (LAWLESSNESS) lost their habitations.

Having “treacherously” “transgressed the covenant,” Israel was no longer God’s people—

Adam WAS God’s child up until Adam broke the relationship—so when then did this supposed ‘covenant’ between he and God take place? Before or after the fall?

a fact implied in the name Lo-ammi (see on chs. 1:9; 2:23). Israel’s treachery is illustrated in a variety of ways (see chs. 6:4; 7:8, 11, 16).
chs. chapters

Nichol, F. D. (1978). The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary : The Holy Bible with exegetical and expository comment. Commentary Reference Series (Ho 6:7). Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association.

Thanks for proving my point!

If you go back and read the bible text again, and then go to your room, get into your bed and just be still and think about it, you may gain understanding and wisdom. This is soooo hard for you But take heart, we all have to grow.

Psalm 4:4 Stand in awe, and sin not: commune with your own heart upon your bed, and be still. Selah.



AT

 

[freeindeed2]

Free--no one is preaching another gospel-this is baptist rhetoric crapola.

I hope you will put up with a little more of my foolishness. Please bear with me. For I am jealous for you with the jealousy of God himself. I promised you as a pure bride to one husband—Christ. But I fear that somehow your pure and undivided devotion to Christ will be corrupted, just as Eve was deceived by the cunning ways of the serpent. You happily put up with whatever anyone tells you, even if they preach a different Jesus than the one we preach, or a different kind of Spirit than the one you received, or a different kind of gospel than the one you believed. 2 Cor 11

'Baptist rhetoric crapola'?

Again, I'll stick with the Bible.

And if you are accusing me of reporting you-I'll thank you to stop your false accusing. I DIDN'T DO IT!

I didn't know who reported.

In Christ alone...

 

[RND]

Perhaps you need to understand something. It would do you good to do a study on the covenants of God in salvation histroy.



When I say it was a covenant based on works, that means that He was to do as asked or commanded. Thats all.

And still through all these years, nothing has changed. God has always saved by grace and still commanded that His rules and ways be obeyed.

Unlike the New Covenant where its based on Gods grace, Adams covenant with God was based on Adam's obedience not grace before the fall. Grace entered in when Adam broke that covenant.

That's a typical mistake that so many people make AT. God doesn't save out of grace the non-obedient. People aren't save just because they "believe" in Christ, the devils "believe" and tremble. What your are promoting is "cheap" grace, where we accept and do nothing in return.

God told Adam to be fruitful and multiply, to have dominion over all the earth, and to not eat from the tree. That was the things to be performed perfectly by Adam. The last command carried a great penalty for dis-obedience which was death. The bible tells us and your own churches commentary tells us that Adam broke that covenant. But you and HTS wont even believe the bible, and then you compound the situation by reporting free, rather than discussing it with him.

And how does this differ with the covenants God established with Abraham or the COI or the "New" covenant?

I'm starting to think:

1)You won't be humble and truthful to the plain reading and integrity of scripture.

Wow, you gathered all that in a discussion about Adam and whether he had the Ten Commandments?

2) That you are not mature enough in the word of God to understand certain concepts as covenants, law, and bible history.

Can you show me any covenant that Gos established that WASN'T based on His commandments, i.e. law? Just one.

3) That I can't trust you for fear of you reporting as a weapon when you can't win an argument becasue of your bias.

As long as you are respectful and don't name call or falsely insinuate I take positions that clearly I don't we should be fine. AT, you're so fun to debate with because you contradict so many of your points you never know whether you are coming or going. Keep up the...er, good work!

4)That you don't know what it means or how to lay your bias aside to look for truth.

Hmmm, this coming from a guy that denies the probability that Adam had been verbally given the Ten Commandments. Sounds as if you're the one that won't look in every corner.

5) That you have no idea how your carnal nature can be very deceptive in manipulating you.

Look, I'm very aware of the carnal nature of man. I'm also aware that denying what is true because one won't look at all sides of an issue is the very essence or pride and self. AT, I can see this in the fact that many times you are asked direct questions and never answer them. Never. I have asked you several direct questions that you have never answered and won't answer because to do so would gore your sacred ox....in the heart.

 

[RND]

Now hts, what makes you think I will give you more bible truth, if you wont believe the scriptures. You wont believe the plain reading of scripture!

When you start believing what the bible says, maybe we can talk, but if you continue to conjure up your own ideas of scripture and reality and not the integrity of scripture, it will do me no good. If you understood the bible and that scripture about Adam, you would not be asking such a question becasue that scripture says it all.

AT

Choke!

AT, just admit you put you theological foot in your mouth and you'll be fine! The indigestion won't last long. That is, until you do it again.

 

[RND]

Thanks for proving my point!

If you go back and read the bible text again, and then go to your room, get into your bed and just be still and think about it, you may gain understanding and wisdom. This is soooo hard for you But take heart, we all have to grow.

Psalm 4:4 Stand in awe, and sin not: commune with your own heart upon your bed, and be still. Selah.



AT

Why noty just answer the questions that HTS asked AT?

"What did Adam transgress? What law? About not eating from a specific tree? If that was the only ‘law’ in force at the time, when did the transgression of murder (Cain) enter the picture?"

This is where you prove just how theologically immature you are because you won't even attempt to glean any type of understanding.

 

[Adventtruth]

Why noty just answer the questions that HTS asked AT?

Because it would be better if she would feed off the bible alone. That was a big problem when I was Adventist...people would not read and understand the bible. But give them the SOP and they would eat it up!

"What did Adam transgress? What law? About not eating from a specific tree? If that was the only ‘law’ in force at the time, when did the transgression of murder (Cain) enter the picture?"

These are answers you and her both know, or can find very easily your self.

This is where you prove just how theologically immature you are because you won't even attempt to glean any type of understanding.

Oh I understand. Its you and hts that have no clue. Hey listen RND. I may have been born at night, but not last night! You can't fool and bait me I know the game after being in it for years.

The truth of the matter is that you and her are unskilled in the bible. You both regurgitate what you have learned as Adventist, rather than studying for self. You need bible 101 and you can get that by going to your own room and praying, reading, and meditating on what you read, and also get some good bible helps as well. It will do your inner man well to be fed of the Spirit for a while.

AT

 

[RND]

Because it would be better if she would feed off the bible alone. That was a big problem when I was Adventist...people would not read and understand the bible. But give them the SOP and they would eat it up!

Funny thing is AT HTS hasn't quoted EGW here. I know I haven't. She's used the Bible a bit though. So did I. So, let me get this straight. You aren't going to answer HTS because she isn't 'reading' the Bible the way you want her to?

Taking your ball and going home?

These are answers you and her both know, or can find very easily your self.

Yes, we have the "answers" thanks for your admission finally. I'm sure I can speak for HTS when I say we appreciate you acknowledging we have the proper answers.

Still AT it would be nice to know where your coming from and see you actually answer a question once in a while.

Oh I understand. Its you and hts that have no clue. Hey listen RND. I may have been born at night, but not last night! You can't fool and bait me I know the game after being in it for years.

You are apparently as paraniod as some other's around here and use this type of rhetoric to obfuscate the obvious truths that the questions we have asked seem to indicate.

The truth of the matter is that you and her are unskilled in the bible.

Not like you, huh AT?

You both regurgitate what you have learned as Adventist, rather than studying for self.

I guess that can be indicated by our willingness to answer questions we are asked. Unlike you, huh AT?

You need bible 101 and you can get that by going to your own room and praying, reading, and meditating on what you read, and also get some good bible helps as well.

I think we've both graduated from Bible 101 AT. It appears that you're the one still bouncing around the "Romper Room."

It will do your inner man well to be fed of the Spirit for a while.

1 Peter 3:15
But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and [be] ready always to [give] an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:


Peter was right, huh AT?

 

[freeindeed2]

Your suggestion and conclusion that the sabbath is at the center of my individual gospel was unnecessary, rude and completely uncalled for.

There is only ONE true Gospel of Jesus Christ. Anything else is a counterfeit.

You are making assumptions that are neither true nor fair to make considering the stands I have taken for the Gospel on this board.

I only have your words that YOU present to work with.

In Christ alone...

 

[RND]

There is only ONE true Gospel of Jesus Christ. Anything else is a counterfeit.

Are you suggesting again that I have stated something different?

I only have your words that YOU present to work with.

Well, comprehension would be nice.

 

[freeindeed2]

Are you suggesting again that I have stated something different?

Let's find out. Is the Sabbath part of the Gospel?

Well, comprehension would be nice.

LOL!

 

[RND]

Let's find out. Is the Sabbath part of the Gospel?

Of course it is. Do you deny the sabbath being mentioned in the Gospel?

 

[freeindeed2]

Of course it is. Do you deny the sabbath being mentioned in the Gospel?

I don't deny the Sabbath being mentioned in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. But that's not what we're talking about here.

 

[RND]

I don't deny the Sabbath being mentioned in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. But that's not what we're talking about here.

That's what I'm talking about because I have never stated, not once here or in any other thread that the Gospel of Christ is centered around the sabbath commnadment.

This is why I reported you. You are making things up about what I have said and believe. You do it rudely and with much malice in your words.

Your comment was unnecessary and uncalled for.

Now, if you think that I am going to somehow admit that the sabbath is at the center of the Gospel of Jesus Christ you would be sadly mistaken. The sabbath is no more at the center of Christ Gospel than the the prohibitation of murder is. Abiding with Christ means to listen, here and do those things as God commands, namely to Love God and man through the power of abiding with Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.

If you would stop trying to put words in the mouths of myself and others you would clearly see that neither I nor they preach a different Gospel other than Jesus Christ crucified.

 

[sentipente]

Of course it is. Do you deny the sabbath being mentioned in the Gospel?

This question shows that you are confusing the Gospel with the Gospel story. They are not the same. The Gospel says nothing about the Sabbath.