Attack of the seventh day adventists
- Thread starter RickShafer
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
D
The unforeseen impacts of obeying even a part of the Mosaic or levitical law means you must obey all of it. You can not claim to be under the new covenant while you are honoring the old. So if you claim to abstain from unclean foods, you are severed from Christ. If you obey the Sabbath as law then you have no part in the new covenant.
John does not mention the 10 commandments. He simply says we must believe in Jesus Christ and love one another. He never affirms Sabbath keeping or abstaining from unclean food.
JESUS DEFENDED THAT COMMANDMENT MORE THAN ANY OTHER COMMANDMENT AS HE WAS ESTABLISHING HIS CHURCH AND TEACHING OF how it would be going forward.
If you don't trust JESUS, OR GOD in Genesis 2/3, then I dunno what to tell you. Putting your hopes over their statements is a bit hubristic to my view.
You can tell I'm a stickler for the debate and want to pick at it until I have it all down and understand it? I mean, it's all in the learning process for me, but I GET how I come across, I challenge everything. If you are right the challenge doesn't hurt, if you are wrong, you probably needed to know yo uwere wrong, we should all win.
Anyway, I grew up Southern Baptist. What does that tell you of my first thirty years of theological belief? HOW do you think I was taught to treat the Sabbath?
Now, when I got in an argument with a dear friend who has one of the most exemplary walks with God I know of, who is seventh day adventist, but not an EG WHITE sycophant, just a student of the Bible, SHE drove me over TWO WHOLE AND COMPLETE YEARS to have to change my views to fit scripture.
Sorry but this part is just your attempt to justify Sabbath keeping thru your own reasoning. Sabbath keeping was law under the Mosaic laws. The Sabbath is not confirmed as being required in the new testament. Instead we see Christians in Acts Honoring Sunday, "The Lord's Day", not Sabbath.
John does not mention the 10 commandments. He simply says we must believe in Jesus Christ and love one another. He never affirms Sabbath keeping or abstaining from unclean food.
JESUS DEFENDED THAT COMMANDMENT MORE THAN ANY OTHER COMMANDMENT AS HE WAS ESTABLISHING HIS CHURCH AND TEACHING OF how it would be going forward.
If you don't trust JESUS, OR GOD in Genesis 2/3, then I dunno what to tell you. Putting your hopes over their statements is a bit hubristic to my view.
You can tell I'm a stickler for the debate and want to pick at it until I have it all down and understand it? I mean, it's all in the learning process for me, but I GET how I come across, I challenge everything. If you are right the challenge doesn't hurt, if you are wrong, you probably needed to know yo uwere wrong, we should all win.
Anyway, I grew up Southern Baptist. What does that tell you of my first thirty years of theological belief? HOW do you think I was taught to treat the Sabbath?
Now, when I got in an argument with a dear friend who has one of the most exemplary walks with God I know of, who is seventh day adventist, but not an EG WHITE sycophant, just a student of the Bible, SHE drove me over TWO WHOLE AND COMPLETE YEARS to have to change my views to fit scripture.
Sorry but this part is just your attempt to justify Sabbath keeping thru your own reasoning. Sabbath keeping was law under the Mosaic laws. The Sabbath is not confirmed as being required in the new testament. Instead we see Christians in Acts Honoring Sunday, "The Lord's Day", not Sabbath.
Are you dishonest or really didn't understand, or didn't even read?
Your answer is totally unrelated to what the "unforseen impacts" of your comments were. SO YOU JUST RAN WITH YOUR TAIL TUCKED to evade facing having to answer that objection. NOTED.
ODD how there were about 6 or 9 covenants the Jews held with GOd. The decalogue wasn't done away with when the Aaronic, or Levitical laws were passed down. But with your words, they must have been.
Psalm 110 says you are wrong, because the Priesthood of Melchizedek had zero laws, and that is the model/church that Christ's priesthood is under. DO YOU THINK THAT MEANS you can murder? I hate to ask such a stupid childish question, but if you take out the LOVE GOD/KEEP HIS SABBATH DAY HOLY as HE requested to ADAM, but claim to keep the other 9 yo uhave broken that whole covenant. YOU BROKE IT. GOD never broke it. JESUS defended the Sabbath, not do away with it.
I bet he sure is happy to have you here to correct his screwups. :=I
UNCLEAN FOODS is a separate covenant. That's the one PAUL discussed when he was talking circumcision, because THAT ONE REQUIRED CIRCUMCISION. The Decalogue did not require circumcision of the individuals.
Unclean foods, in a conversation about the Sabbath is like saying APples are Tomatoes because they are both on the produce aisle.
I gave specific arguments that have already countered this statement. WHY ARE YOU SO DANG RUDE YOU IGNORE THEM and just repeat the same thing over and over? Is that how YOU think a respectful conversation should happen? Let's just sit here and say NU UH MY WAY! over and over and over and over. How adult.
>>>>>JESUS DEFENDED........my views to fit scripture. <<<<<<<
If you said anything in there, you deleted it. You just screwed up on the posting format I think. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Ya know Dan, I might check myself if you were refuting my comments. But you aren't. You are being petulant. You are just ranting and wanting it your way. ..
I'm not justifying anything but what the Bible says. And so far the things I have shown you in the Bible you do not comment back on. Do you know you are wrong and are trying to not admit to it?
Why won't you engage?
I gave scripture from acts showing the early church kept the Sabbath.
You are very disrespectful, and words I probably shouldn't say.
You have nothing to say but repeating yourself, so stop speaking please. UNLESS of course you have answers for the comments you JUST IGNORED
Your answer is totally unrelated to what the "unforseen impacts" of your comments were. SO YOU JUST RAN WITH YOUR TAIL TUCKED to evade facing having to answer that objection. NOTED.
ODD how there were about 6 or 9 covenants the Jews held with GOd. The decalogue wasn't done away with when the Aaronic, or Levitical laws were passed down. But with your words, they must have been.
Psalm 110 says you are wrong, because the Priesthood of Melchizedek had zero laws, and that is the model/church that Christ's priesthood is under. DO YOU THINK THAT MEANS you can murder? I hate to ask such a stupid childish question, but if you take out the LOVE GOD/KEEP HIS SABBATH DAY HOLY as HE requested to ADAM, but claim to keep the other 9 yo uhave broken that whole covenant. YOU BROKE IT. GOD never broke it. JESUS defended the Sabbath, not do away with it.
I bet he sure is happy to have you here to correct his screwups. :=I
UNCLEAN FOODS is a separate covenant. That's the one PAUL discussed when he was talking circumcision, because THAT ONE REQUIRED CIRCUMCISION. The Decalogue did not require circumcision of the individuals.
Unclean foods, in a conversation about the Sabbath is like saying APples are Tomatoes because they are both on the produce aisle.
I gave specific arguments that have already countered this statement. WHY ARE YOU SO DANG RUDE YOU IGNORE THEM and just repeat the same thing over and over? Is that how YOU think a respectful conversation should happen? Let's just sit here and say NU UH MY WAY! over and over and over and over. How adult.
>>>>>JESUS DEFENDED........my views to fit scripture. <<<<<<<
If you said anything in there, you deleted it. You just screwed up on the posting format I think. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Ya know Dan, I might check myself if you were refuting my comments. But you aren't. You are being petulant. You are just ranting and wanting it your way. ..
I'm not justifying anything but what the Bible says. And so far the things I have shown you in the Bible you do not comment back on. Do you know you are wrong and are trying to not admit to it?
Why won't you engage?
I gave scripture from acts showing the early church kept the Sabbath.
You are very disrespectful, and words I probably shouldn't say.
You have nothing to say but repeating yourself, so stop speaking please. UNLESS of course you have answers for the comments you JUST IGNORED
D
The issue Paul was dealing with was about circumcision as the Judaizers wanted to keep circumcision as a law. However, Galatians chapter 5:1-12 has wider ramifications, that if you obey any of the old covenant, you are cutting yourself off from salvation. We can never blend old wine skins with new wine. This alone makes the messianic movement of today so dangerous. If they blend the obsolete with with the new law of grace and love, they are literally risking their eternal fate.
Some sabbatarians claim the Sabbath is present law we must obey and they are making the same basic mistake as the Judaizers did in Paul's day. They clearly violate Col. 2:16. Those who keep the Sabbath to remind them of the Sabbath are not violating the new covenant. I have participated in Passover celebrations and I love it. However, I never engage in it out of a sense of law. There is no compulsion for us to make any day sacred.
Some sabbatarians claim the Sabbath is present law we must obey and they are making the same basic mistake as the Judaizers did in Paul's day. They clearly violate Col. 2:16. Those who keep the Sabbath to remind them of the Sabbath are not violating the new covenant. I have participated in Passover celebrations and I love it. However, I never engage in it out of a sense of law. There is no compulsion for us to make any day sacred.
D
You were the one asking me questions and I simply responded. Long posts which contain multiple points are ineffective as I will then select one or two main points. Short posts that only deal with a single point or two get more people to respond than a wall of text.
Sorry you are angry and believe I am not answering you correctly. I am trying to get you to see the truth. We are not under the yoke/slavery of the Levitical laws.
Sorry you are angry and believe I am not answering you correctly. I am trying to get you to see the truth. We are not under the yoke/slavery of the Levitical laws.
Please don't rewrite the Bible. I'll get in a corner with you if you want on this, but Paul talks about the LAWS of the circumcision. He is talking the whole covenant. That is the Levitical laws. NOT just circumcision. The people who wanted to have people circumcised were trying to gtell people they still had to live under the law, THAT WAS WHY THEY WERE PUSHING THE CIRCUMCISION.
5:1 the yoke of slavery was to the whole covenant. Look at the explanation in the end of 4 and verify. He's not discussing A LAW,
You can start here.>>>>
[TABLE="class: bibleTable, width: 614"]
[TR]
[TD]But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under fnthe Law,
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
That is not discussing circumcision as a woman isn't circumcised in the Jewish faith.
5:2 Receiving circumcision put them under the whole of the law. There was no reason to get circumcised if NOT to be under the whole law.
5:3 vs 3 confirms that the issue is the whole law.
5:4 you are severed from the benefit of CHRIST if you are trying to be under the law. Now, circumcision alone never justified anyone, so again, it's not JUST the male SNIP.
I can't disagree with much of this... At least we have SOMETHING to agree on.
Yeah, I know. That doesn't' condemn the Sabbath Day, it condemns their thinking and understanding.
So, God making the day holy for Adam to recognize and we learn later, remember Him, is not important.
I've asked the question, NO ONE has answered it.
You keep your children's birthdays as a special day because you love them.
You keep your anniversary special because you love your wife.
God asked for you to keep a day holy, but you just edit that out and disregard it. How much love are you showing GOD?
I also asked, the decalogue was it's own independent covenant, so according to Paul if you violate ONE part, you violate the whole of it.
No one has answered that either.
I also pointed out, Jesus defended the Sabbath more than any other commandment. IF HE was going to see it changed, why did he not say something. The answer here is, because he wasn't, HE loved GOd, and HE believed in remembering HIM and keeping it HOLY. HE simply tried to help the pharisees learn how to keep it holy.
Any one of these arguments makes the conversation over.
Not a person has attempted to answer them in all of this.
Is it accepted behavior to just ignore things like this out of respect to ....... I dunno, it's not respectful to those of us making the comments to see you just spit on them and move on. Not saying it was YOU, you, personally. Using the You in the general sense.
5:1 the yoke of slavery was to the whole covenant. Look at the explanation in the end of 4 and verify. He's not discussing A LAW,
You can start here.>>>>
[TABLE="class: bibleTable, width: 614"]
[TR]
[TD]But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under fnthe Law,
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
That is not discussing circumcision as a woman isn't circumcised in the Jewish faith.
5:2 Receiving circumcision put them under the whole of the law. There was no reason to get circumcised if NOT to be under the whole law.
5:3 vs 3 confirms that the issue is the whole law.
5:4 you are severed from the benefit of CHRIST if you are trying to be under the law. Now, circumcision alone never justified anyone, so again, it's not JUST the male SNIP.
I can't disagree with much of this... At least we have SOMETHING to agree on.
Yeah, I know. That doesn't' condemn the Sabbath Day, it condemns their thinking and understanding.
So, God making the day holy for Adam to recognize and we learn later, remember Him, is not important.
I've asked the question, NO ONE has answered it.
You keep your children's birthdays as a special day because you love them.
You keep your anniversary special because you love your wife.
God asked for you to keep a day holy, but you just edit that out and disregard it. How much love are you showing GOD?
I also asked, the decalogue was it's own independent covenant, so according to Paul if you violate ONE part, you violate the whole of it.
No one has answered that either.
I also pointed out, Jesus defended the Sabbath more than any other commandment. IF HE was going to see it changed, why did he not say something. The answer here is, because he wasn't, HE loved GOd, and HE believed in remembering HIM and keeping it HOLY. HE simply tried to help the pharisees learn how to keep it holy.
Any one of these arguments makes the conversation over.
Not a person has attempted to answer them in all of this.
Is it accepted behavior to just ignore things like this out of respect to ....... I dunno, it's not respectful to those of us making the comments to see you just spit on them and move on. Not saying it was YOU, you, personally. Using the You in the general sense.
This argument isn't getting anywhere... just share what you believe in and back it up with the scriptures only way to resolve this argument since we love each other and we got different theories of what is right it wouldn't hurt to share what you believe and why you believe it with your fellow brothers and sisters and if whatever is the truth and isn't accepted by whatever is false just say God bless you and agree to disagree and let it be, i've shared what i believe and prove it by the scripture of what i was saying is the truth but whoever has an ear to hear let them hear, please go ahead. i'm actually gonna make a thread about this, this is an interesting topic but please go ahead share what you believe is the right doctrine and prove it with the word of God
You didn't read ANY of it, I guess. Your answer didn't address what I said. You answered a comment I didn't make, trying to repaint my point to something else. You made a move to divert attention from you, back at me. At least I own my mistakes. I don't evade them.
You want short points, here you go, tell me if this is MORE polite.
1) You answered a question, I didn't ask, and made a passive aggressive lie about my argument doing so.
2) You ignored the relevant points, 3 moderate paragraphs, answering 3 of the things you said.
3) you are either not capable, or deliberately avoiding.
4) If you can't risk being wrong, why enter a conversation and PRETEND you are doing anything but just trying to lecture the world?
If you were worried about the truth, you'd stop running from anything that made your positions foolish. YOu can dodge them, and disrespect me all day long. The facts are still there, the questions remain unanswered, and your proclamation you hold the truth makes you nothing but an arrogant man.
No one can proclaim victory, when there are a half dozen arguments that defeat their claims unanswered that they flee.
That's short. Was it still too long? It's also accurate.
You will cry name calling, I will say that's a cop out. It's a cowards way out. When you get busted in your behavior, to try to dismiss it as the one catching you is not legit but is name calling, it's bunk.
What do you want to do, continue to just repeat the same thigns???? Rent a bill board. Don't pretend to converse.
You want short points, here you go, tell me if this is MORE polite.
1) You answered a question, I didn't ask, and made a passive aggressive lie about my argument doing so.
2) You ignored the relevant points, 3 moderate paragraphs, answering 3 of the things you said.
3) you are either not capable, or deliberately avoiding.
4) If you can't risk being wrong, why enter a conversation and PRETEND you are doing anything but just trying to lecture the world?
If you were worried about the truth, you'd stop running from anything that made your positions foolish. YOu can dodge them, and disrespect me all day long. The facts are still there, the questions remain unanswered, and your proclamation you hold the truth makes you nothing but an arrogant man.
No one can proclaim victory, when there are a half dozen arguments that defeat their claims unanswered that they flee.
That's short. Was it still too long? It's also accurate.
You will cry name calling, I will say that's a cop out. It's a cowards way out. When you get busted in your behavior, to try to dismiss it as the one catching you is not legit but is name calling, it's bunk.
What do you want to do, continue to just repeat the same thigns???? Rent a bill board. Don't pretend to converse.
You are right. The questions left unanswered on the table are there for anyone to say. I'm checking out. I've had less crap thrown at me vising the chimp cages at the downtown zoo.
I respect people with other views. I don't respect someone ranting they are right and are here to save me from my errors, when they lay waste upon what I say, ignore it, can't answer it, and it refutes their claim.
They get offended that I don't let them do that anyway....
Enjoy.
This is what comes of partial truths. If you want to obey ANY law in order to be saved, you must obey all of it. Why are you picking on just one law? This does not, however tell us not to listen to any law. When you read it that way you are ignoring much of what God tells us, as many love to do. What this is saying is that we need Christ for no one can obey all law.
It upsets me to hear people so twist God. Can it be that God isn't upset over it?
It upsets me to hear people so twist God. Can it be that God isn't upset over it?
D
I think we are more in agreement than not. Gal 5:1-12 is clear that we if honor one aspect of levitical law, we must obey all of it. I stand by every word I posted. Paul was specifically addressing the issue of circumcision and how spiritually deadly the Judiazers are. He accused them of being severed from Christ as they were obey a portion of levitical and adding it to the new covenant.
I believe those who claim we must abstain from pork and even those who claim the Sabbath is current law are guilty of making the same type of mistake as the Judaizers made. You can not alter the new covenant by adding or subtracting from it. Old wine skins can not hold new wine or they will burst.
It seems to be a matter of balance in reading scripture, for we both read and listen. Paul didn't say it was deadly to obey any suggestion God ever made, Paul said it was deadly to do it for the wrong purpose. There is a BIG difference. I think when the church gathers up anything the Jews did and just say it is wrong are not understanding what God is saying.
Look at how they went to temple with their sacrifice, God asked them to do that in love for Him, in putting Him first in their life, in asking for salvation from their sins. Instead they often did it just like the pagans around them did, they paid it in exchange for good crops. It was useless for that, God didn't want those sacrifices. That doesn't mean that it was wrong to do what God asked of them, just as it is not wrong for us to go to Christ with our sins, for that was a symbol of that. But it was wrong to do it as a work in exchange for what God would give.
I think you are doing the same thing with how you see abstaining from pork sort of things. You are labeling the work of it and God is talking about the reason for the work.
Look at how they went to temple with their sacrifice, God asked them to do that in love for Him, in putting Him first in their life, in asking for salvation from their sins. Instead they often did it just like the pagans around them did, they paid it in exchange for good crops. It was useless for that, God didn't want those sacrifices. That doesn't mean that it was wrong to do what God asked of them, just as it is not wrong for us to go to Christ with our sins, for that was a symbol of that. But it was wrong to do it as a work in exchange for what God would give.
I think you are doing the same thing with how you see abstaining from pork sort of things. You are labeling the work of it and God is talking about the reason for the work.
Just as Jesus' sacrifice fulfilled the ceremonial and sacrificial law once and for all, Jesus fulfills the Sabbath, present tense, when we abide in Him. However, that does not mean that New Testament believers are exempt from fulfilling the moral law. The 10 Commandments are every bit as relevant to the life of a modern believer as they were to the Old Testament believer.
Contrary to much modern teaching, Jesus did not do away with the moral law. He merely changed the manner in which the law is fulfilled. Romans 13:10 states that "love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law."
Galatians 5:22 Apostle Paul writes "the fruit (attributes, behavior) of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness...".Notice that the very first characteristic of the indwelling Holy Spirit is love. Earlier in the chapter Paul states in Galatians 5:16; "walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh." The Apostle Peter mentions in the first chapter of his 2nd Epistle, verses 3 & 4; "(God's) divine power has given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires."
When we abandon all sense of self (selfish desires & selfish ambition) in favor of abiding (resting) in Christ (walking in the Spirit), the Holy Spirit manifests the character of Christ (fruit of the Spirit) in us and through us thus enabling us to fulfill the moral law.
Contrary to much modern teaching, Jesus did not do away with the moral law. He merely changed the manner in which the law is fulfilled. Romans 13:10 states that "love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law."
Galatians 5:22 Apostle Paul writes "the fruit (attributes, behavior) of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness...".Notice that the very first characteristic of the indwelling Holy Spirit is love. Earlier in the chapter Paul states in Galatians 5:16; "walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh." The Apostle Peter mentions in the first chapter of his 2nd Epistle, verses 3 & 4; "(God's) divine power has given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires."
When we abandon all sense of self (selfish desires & selfish ambition) in favor of abiding (resting) in Christ (walking in the Spirit), the Holy Spirit manifests the character of Christ (fruit of the Spirit) in us and through us thus enabling us to fulfill the moral law.
D
Actually Paul did say that those who are following part(s) of the law (circumcision) means you are cut off from Christ. Christ fullfilled the law and we are now not under the law.
Here Paul says we are set from the slavery of the law in verse 1. We are set free of it in Christ.
Furthermore, Paul says that those who are being justified by the law and by Christ, will be cut off from Christ. If you want to obey the jewish law or even one part of it, you are in error and risk your own salvation.
Here Paul says we are set from the slavery of the law in verse 1. We are set free of it in Christ.
Furthermore, Paul says that those who are being justified by the law and by Christ, will be cut off from Christ. If you want to obey the jewish law or even one part of it, you are in error and risk your own salvation.
Modern believers are not "under law" because the cross has given us access to the only one who has or who ever will have the ability to fulfill the law, the indwelling Christ. The law was given to reflect the biblical standard which is nothing short of God's own divine character which man can not nor ever could hope to fulfill through human effort. Scripture states that man's own righteousnesss (best efforts) are as dirty rags to God. God's solution to the problem: He has given us His Spirit, that same Spirit which empowered Christ to live a life pleasing unto the the Father, the same Spirit which gave Him power over death and the grave. We too now have possession of all that is need to fulfill the biblical standard, that is, if we set aside all sense of self and allow the Holy Spirit to manifest Christ in us and through us.
Not once did God ever remove the standard. Rather, He has given us the only means to fulfill it. He has given us Himself. No longer need we strive to be something we can live up to. Now we can simply rest in perfect peace knowing that He has given us all things to live a life please unto Him, that is, if we position ourselves to believe it through faith.
To sum things up: the indwelling Christ is the New Testament equivalent of the Sabbath. The only thing a new Testament believer is called to do is to abide (rest) in Him thus allowing Him to work His divine will in us and through us.
Not once did God ever remove the standard. Rather, He has given us the only means to fulfill it. He has given us Himself. No longer need we strive to be something we can live up to. Now we can simply rest in perfect peace knowing that He has given us all things to live a life please unto Him, that is, if we position ourselves to believe it through faith.
To sum things up: the indwelling Christ is the New Testament equivalent of the Sabbath. The only thing a new Testament believer is called to do is to abide (rest) in Him thus allowing Him to work His divine will in us and through us.
Last edited:
Hmmm galatians2-20.
gosh your words sound pretty. hard to critique them, but alas truth and scripture define us all.
You kinda' had me until the end..."To sum things up: the indwelling Christ is the New Testament equivalent of the Sabbath. The only thing a new Testament believer is called to do is to abide (rest) in Him thus allowing Him to work His divine will in us and through us."
It amazes me how little people place on the new testament, yet mention it as if they hold some strong understanding.
Let me ask you to answer(without looking)? Who is the new Testament for?
See? You have no verses showing that you have any part in it. Of course that is assuming you have no part in Judaism nor claim to have no part of Israel.
now let us actually think about the New Covenant/Testament. what is it that separates the old from the new? "modern day"
Christians/believers, (as u mentioned), are not under the law.
If you pay closer attention to the subject, that is exactly what believers are still under. He has now placed the same laws which were written on the tables of stone upon the tables of our heart. And he used the Holy Spirit to write them upon our heart.
Why? Because the previous writing upon stone by the finger of God was infereior to that which the Holy Spirit wrote upon our hearts. It is literally engraved into our heart.
gosh your words sound pretty. hard to critique them, but alas truth and scripture define us all.
You kinda' had me until the end..."To sum things up: the indwelling Christ is the New Testament equivalent of the Sabbath. The only thing a new Testament believer is called to do is to abide (rest) in Him thus allowing Him to work His divine will in us and through us."
It amazes me how little people place on the new testament, yet mention it as if they hold some strong understanding.
Let me ask you to answer(without looking)? Who is the new Testament for?
See? You have no verses showing that you have any part in it. Of course that is assuming you have no part in Judaism nor claim to have no part of Israel.
now let us actually think about the New Covenant/Testament. what is it that separates the old from the new? "modern day"
Christians/believers, (as u mentioned), are not under the law.
If you pay closer attention to the subject, that is exactly what believers are still under. He has now placed the same laws which were written on the tables of stone upon the tables of our heart. And he used the Holy Spirit to write them upon our heart.
Why? Because the previous writing upon stone by the finger of God was infereior to that which the Holy Spirit wrote upon our hearts. It is literally engraved into our heart.
Hi John
Just saw your post and thought would jump in.
I have some dealings with the SDA and find them to be nice people. Apart from the fact I had to take my own coffee lol their coffee is awful.
Of course they did try to convert me but in the nicest way possible. I lost a very very good friend of mine who was SDA about five years ago.
Although I myself do not wish to follow their teachings I do not find them nearly as bad as some others who try a forceful conversion .
I was welcome in their homes etc and was even offered help and a job a while back when I needed one. But of course that would have meant I had to convert. Which I had no intention of doing.
They are a very close nit group and have their elders of the church. But they are nothing to be scared of as are some of the cults around now.
Hoot Owl
Just saw your post and thought would jump in.
I have some dealings with the SDA and find them to be nice people. Apart from the fact I had to take my own coffee lol their coffee is awful.
Of course they did try to convert me but in the nicest way possible. I lost a very very good friend of mine who was SDA about five years ago.
Although I myself do not wish to follow their teachings I do not find them nearly as bad as some others who try a forceful conversion .
I was welcome in their homes etc and was even offered help and a job a while back when I needed one. But of course that would have meant I had to convert. Which I had no intention of doing.
They are a very close nit group and have their elders of the church. But they are nothing to be scared of as are some of the cults around now.
Hoot Owl