Please address the content only without making accusations about anyone who thinks differently to you as listening to "religious voices" etc. It is not friendly and uncalled for. Stick to the point you're making. Thanks.You are preaching to the world that Jesus broke God' s Sabbath Commandment. This is a false teaching. A teaching that could not exist except for the "other religious voice" in the garden. You are just regurgitating centuries old false teaching.
Rather than act as if you didn't just get corrected by a loving brother, and say thank you, you just moved on to the next wind of doctrine.
John 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. 38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
John 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
John 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. 38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
This is the second time you have taken the word of the Pharisees over the actual Words of the Christ Himself. They accused HIM of many things. ALL their accusations were lies.
I hope you might reconsider some of your religious views.
Let's hope that you post the scripture concerning Abraham and the Pharaoh and Abraham's willful deception of Pharaoh. And not some unrelated text from the scripture that has nothing to do with Abraham, and his premeditated, deceptive behavior towards the ruler of Egypt.I am glad you are not my judge. But just so folks can see what truly happened according to the actual Scriptures, I will post the account.
Your opinion is irrelevant and so is mine. The scripture will tell us if Abraham deceived the Pharaoh.And I will remind you that Abraham is not a liar in the God's Eyes, your eyes maybe, but not God's.
As I said the scripture will tell us if Abraham willfully deceived Pharaoh.So therefore, he is not a liar in my eyes. You can place your judgment on him if you like, it is a common practice among religious men. As for me, God's Judgment is good enough for me.
That quotation is eight chapters later in Genesis. Your quotation has nothing to do with Abraham and Pharaoh.Gen. 20:1 And Abraham journeyed from thence toward the south country, and dwelled between Kadesh and Shur, and sojourned in Gerar.
2 And Abraham said of Sarah his wife, She is my sister: and Abimelech king of Gerar sent, and took Sarah.
3 But God came to Abimelech in a dream by night, and said to him, Behold, thou art but a dead man, for the woman which thou hast taken; for she is a man's wife.
4 But Abimelech had not come near her: and he said, Lord, wilt thou slay also a righteous nation?
5 Said he not unto me, She is my sister? and she, even she herself said, He is my brother: in the integrity of my heart and innocency of my hands have I done this.
6 And God said unto him in a dream, Yea, I know that thou didst this in the integrity of thy heart; for I also withheld thee from sinning against me: therefore suffered I thee not to touch her.
7 Now therefore restore the man his wife; for he is a prophet, and he shall pray for thee, and thou shalt live: and if thou restore her not, know thou that thou shalt surely die, thou, and all that are thine.
8 Therefore Abimelech rose early in the morning, and called all his servants, and told all these things in their ears: and the men were sore afraid.
9 Then Abimelech called Abraham, and said unto him, What hast thou done unto us? and what have I offended thee, that thou hast brought on me and on my kingdom a great sin? thou hast done deeds unto me that ought not to be done.
10 And Abimelech said unto Abraham, What sawest thou, that thou hast done this thing?
11 And Abraham said, Because I thought, Surely the fear of God is not in this place; and they will slay me for my wife's sake.
12 And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife.
13 And it came to pass, when God caused me to wander from my father's house, that I said unto her, This is thy kindness which thou shalt shew unto me; at every place whither we shall come, say of me, He is my brother.
14 And Abimelech took sheep, and oxen, and menservants, and womenservants, and gave them unto Abraham, and restored him Sarah his wife.
15 And Abimelech said, Behold, my land is before thee: dwell where it pleaseth thee.
16 And unto Sarah he said, Behold, I have given thy brother a thousand pieces of silver: behold, he is to thee a covering of the eyes, unto all that are with thee, and with all other: thus she was reproved.
17 So Abraham prayed unto God: and God healed Abimelech, and his wife, and his maidservants; and they bare children.
18 For the LORD had fast closed up all the wombs of the house of Abimelech, because of Sarah Abraham's wife.
Please address the content only without making accusations about anyone who thinks differently to you as listening to "religious voices" etc. It is not friendly and uncalled for. Stick to the point you're making. Thanks.
You just insulted people againI appreciate the reply and I will take it to heart and be more sensitive in my replies.
I get fired up when religious men further such false teachings like "Jesus broke God's Sabbath Commandment" or any Commandment for that matter. It is untrue, and actually quite insulting and damaging to others if they listen to such a voice.
straight after stating that you would be more sensitive to replies.I get fired up when religious men further such false teachings
Let's hope that you post the scripture concerning Abraham and the Pharaoh and Abraham's willful deception of Pharaoh. And not some unrelated text from the scripture that has nothing to do with Abraham, and his premeditated, deceptive behavior towards the ruler of Egypt.
Your opinion is irrelevant and so is mine. The scripture will tell us if Abraham deceived the Pharaoh.As I said the scripture will tell us if Abraham willfully deceived Pharaoh.
That quotation is eight chapters later in Genesis. Your quotation has nothing to do with Abraham and Pharaoh.
I knew you would be forced to deflect and make accusations.
You cannot accept what the scripture tells you about Abraham in chapter 12. You refuse to accept that Abraham told Sarah to deceive the Pharaoh into thinking she was not married to Abraham.
Your post was a firm declaration that you cannot truthfully admit that Abraham, willfully deceived the Egyptians to save his own neck!
Details matter Bob.Gentiles were not circumcised that kept the Sabbath - in Acts 13, Acts 17:1-5 , Acts 18:4-9 etc
There is no requirement that gentiles be circumcised in OT or NT
The scripture plainly states that Abraham deceived the Pharaoh by concealing his marriage to Sarah. The scripture (Genesis 12) is firm on this point.Yes, let it be known today before all men that I will never Judge Abraham as a liar, or a deceiver, nor will I look on his nakedness, nor will I Judge any of those Holy Servants of God as a deceiver.
Abraham was a sinner just like everyone else, to even hint that Abraham did not sin is pure blasphemy. No one in God's eyes is righteous and all have fallen. Abraham desperately needed Jesus the same as you and everyone else.Nor will I judge God's Word as insufficient or lacking in integrity regarding such a Great Friend of God as Abraham, and God's Declaration that Abraham obeyed God's Laws, Statutes, Judgments and Laws.
Like every other follower of the SDA you depart when you realize you are wrong.You are free to do so if you so desire.
Thanks for the exchange.
All Abraham's offspring were circumcised.
.
Do you believe a person must become physically circumcised and keep the law of Moses to be saved?
JLB
Details matter Bob.
You must read the scripture.
Gentiles were circumcised in the O.T .
What has that got to do with the price of eggs?No requirement in OT or NT that gentiles could not be saved unless they were circumcised -- that is strictly an Acts 15:1-4 heresy refuted by the Apostles
so what?
Is it your belief that all mankind had perished except for the offspring of Abraham in the OT?
Yet there is a clear requirement that Gentiles be circumcised in the Old Testament.There is no requirement that gentiles be circumcised in OT or NT
You just insulted people again straight after stating that you would be more sensitive to replies.
I'm sure that you can love others just try and make the effort.
On the unrelated topic of Acts 15. The debate concerned whether the Gentiles needed to be subject to the law which included circumcision.There is no command NT or OT that gentiles be circumcised in order to be saved..
That is an Acts 15:1-5 heresy to claim otherwise and the Apostles refuted it.
And in Acts 16:1-6 we see Timothy agrees to be circumcised.
But that does not mean gentiles could not be saved in the NT without being circumcised.
Just as the side detail that "some gentiles" in the OT were circumcised does not mean that "gentiles could not be saved in the NT without being circumcised"
The scripture plainly states that Abraham deceived the Pharaoh by concealing his marriage to Sarah. The scripture (Genesis 12) is firm on this point.Abraham was a sinner just like everyone else, to even hint that Abraham did not sin is pure blasphemy. No one in God's eyes is righteous and all have fallen. Abraham desperately needed Jesus the same as you and everyone else.
Christ was not a sinner but all Adam's descendants were sinners.Like every other follower of the SDA you depart when you realize you are wrong.
Gentiles were circumcised in the O.T .
On the unrelated topic of Acts 15. The debate concerned whether the Gentiles needed to be subject to the law which included circumcision.
I thought you said that you were leaving?Allowing Lies and falsehoods about Jesus to go unchallenged just to be liked is a cowards path and does not even resemble the "Love" the Christ had for His People.
This is unrelated to the discussion.Some men consider the truth about God's Word as God's Love, and they readily accept it as correction. The Bible calls these men "wise". Others consider Biblical Truth insulting and unfriendly, and refuse to be corrected by it. These men are considered unwise. I can show you the Scriptures which support this belief if you want.
This is from a much earlier post. Jesus was the great High Priest and was not bound by the Sabbath commandment, to rest on the Sabbath.The question is; "Did Jesus Transgress HIS Fathers Sabbath Commandment".
As I just said. Jesus was the great High Priest and was not required to rest on the Sabbath.The Biblical truth is HE did not Transgress.
Still insulting people, 'religious man'.If this Truth insults a religious man, that is certainly nothing new.
More accusations.Shall God's Biblical Truths be stopped, and silenced because some religious men are insulted by it?
Your in denial of the exemption of Jesus to the Sabbath commandment to rest.In my view, the answer to that question is no. But I am open to hear any Scriptures which suggest otherwise.
No.
Allowing Lies and falsehoods about Jesus to go unchallenged just to be liked is a cowards path and does not even resemble the "Love" the Christ had for His People.
Some men consider the truth about God's Word as God's Love, and they readily accept it as correction. The Bible calls these men "wise". Others consider Biblical Truth insulting and unfriendly, and refuse to be corrected by it. These men are considered unwise. I can show you the Scriptures which support this belief if you want.
The question is; "Did Jesus Transgress HIS Fathers Sabbath Commandment".
The Biblical truth is HE did not Transgress. If this Truth insults a religious man, that is certainly nothing new. Shall God's Biblical Truths be stopped, and silenced because some religious men are insulted by it?
In my view, the answer to that question is no. But I am open to hear any Scriptures which suggest otherwise.
As Paul says:
Rom. 3:3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
Jesus did not insult the Mainstream preachers of His Time. He exposed them by telling the truth. At least that is my understanding.
Thanks for the exchange.
I thought you said that you were leaving?
Why do you ignore this verse?There is no command NT or OT that gentiles be circumcised in order to be saved..
That is an Acts 15:1-5 heresy to claim otherwise and the Apostles refuted it.
And in Acts 16:1-6 we see Timothy agrees to be circumcised.
But that does not mean gentiles could not be saved in the NT without being circumcised.
Just as the side detail that "some gentiles" in the OT were circumcised does not mean that "gentiles could not be saved in the NT without being circumcised"
failing to actual quote the text of Acts 15:1 ... so we can all see just how related it is to the idea that "gentiles must be circumcised to be saved" as "if" that were OT or NT doctrine... we find this.
Acts 15:1
Some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”
That would be heresy -- NT or OT.. you seem to think it is pretty good bible doctrine for gentiles possibly in the OT
At last there is agreement between us. Studyman don't depart!Amen!
So studyman I hope you see what you should NOT do -- you should NOT leave!
Keep up the good focus on Bible truth!!
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?