1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured Are all of God's Ten Commandments still valid?

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by BobRyan, Dec 24, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Here we have Moody "NOT endorsing" DHK's war on God's Ten Commandments.



    Here we have DHK trying to "spin this" to a nonsensical as if his war on God's Ten Commandments is even remotely compatible with Moody's direct attack on DHK's argument.

    the point remains.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
  2. Salty

    Salty 20,000 Posts Club
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    38,982
    Likes Received:
    2,615
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Mr. Ryan

    Please tell us why the Fourth Commandment is NOT repeated/Required in the New Testament.

    (and I don't care what Spurgeon, Moody or Pat Robertson has to say about it)

    Salty

    PS - Since you don't know the answer let me explain the difference between "A" and "the".

    "A" Baptist doctrine statement could be any of dozens of statements - all of which are different.

    "The" Baptist doctrine statement means the official one for all Baptists. BTW, - there is NO doctrine statement - official or otherwise - for ALL Baptist groups.
    In fact the SBC Southern Baptist Faith and Message is not even the official Doctrine Statement for all SBC churches.
     
  3. PreachTony

    PreachTony Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2014
    Messages:
    1,910
    Likes Received:
    2
    :thumbsup: :thumbs: :applause:
     
  4. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    NO I DON'T! Get it through your skull! I don't have to believe any Baptist concerning the Sabbath or Sunday. There are hundreds of different Baptists and we are all different. My authority is the Word of God, not Baptists. When will you learn that, and how often do I have to repeat it??
    It is! With the SDA it is official doctrine, so official that if one does not believe they have the mark of the beast according to EGW!
    In reference to Baptists they do not exist. They do not apply. They have nothing to do with me. Look, even Moody was a Congregationalist and not a Baptist, and yet you keep quoting him. Sheer stupidity on your part.
    What is incredibly obvious is you don't know what you are talking about, and are completely ignorant about Baptists. Don't post what you don't know about.
     
  5. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    Because he is a Calvinist and I am not. Duh!
    The debate takes place in the Cal/Arm forum, not here on a thread on the Sabbath. So it is apples and oranges.
    Icon is a Calvinist and I am not.
    More than any other poster on this board Icon references and quotes various confessions of faith. So?
    He is arguing from a Calvinist point of view and therefore has a different point of view than mine.
    Furthermore you are way off topic. The topic he is discussing has nothing to do with the topic here. It is another red herring concerning the Law.

    You have put yourself under the Law.
    When are you going to start keeping the other 613 OT commands?
     
  6. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    or the "BAPTIST confession of faith" says??

    So then your own Baptists take a position and you want an Adventist to "explain it to you"???

    Well the reason that even your own Baptists take that position and do not use your "not repeated" failed idea is that

    1. There is no such doctrine as "not repeated = deleted" in all of scripture.
    2. The third commandment is not repeated or ever quoted in part in the NT -- the fourth commandment by contrast IS.

    As we all know by now.

    The most shallow reader of the thread - is going to know that obvious fact.

    Now back to the "BAPTIST confession of Faith" -

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
  7. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    When I quote the "BAPTIST confession of Faith" or D.L. Moody I am immediately asked by those who are at war against God's TEN Commandments to "explain" those first 6 points as listed the OP and as clearly AFFIRMED by the various Baptist groups.

    How .... odd.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
  8. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    hint: The "BAPTIST Confession of Faith" is their name for it -- not mine and you have not come up with a single other "Baptist Confession of Faith" for us to compare it to.

    You don't like the facts of history so you simply blame me for reporting it.

    How.... odd...

    Even the most shallow reader of this thread is going to see right through that tactic you are using. This is not a debate over whether that historic document "exists" neither is it a debate about me being the author of that document. Trying to blame me for it - is totally nonsensical.
     
  9. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian


    Perhaps if I repeat this 3 times for you -- you will get it and respond to the point actually in the post.

    1. The point was not that you have to actually "believe Baptists" the point is that those sources are not SDA and yet even THEY admit to the Bible details about God's Ten Commandments such that they know enough not to be at war with God's Ten Commandments.

    The point is that your constant efforts to re-cast this as "just SDAs

    2. The point was not that you have to actually "believe Baptists" the point is that those sources are not SDA and yet even THEY admit to the Bible details about God's Ten Commandments such that they know enough not to be at war with God's Ten Commandments.

    The point is that your constant efforts to re-cast this as "just SDAs

    3. The point was not that you have to actually "believe Baptists" the point is that those sources are not SDA and yet even THEY admit to the Bible details about God's Ten Commandments such that they know enough not to be at war with God's Ten Commandments.

    The point is that your constant efforts to re-cast this as "just SDAs


    I say that to address your "it is just SDAs" when the first 6 points of the OP come up.


    Sadly for you - Baptists do exist - and they are not SDA -- no not even the "BAPTIST Confession of Faith" or D.L. Moody are ... SDA.

    You yourself have nonsensically posted that you are in agreement with D.L. Moody and also here that you are not.

    ===============================================
    Sheer stupidity on your part.

    What is incredibly obvious is you don't know what you are talking about,

    =========================================

    As you mentioned
     
    #209 BobRyan, Jan 17, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 17, 2015
  10. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian



    1. He was responding to your illogical statement about Romans 8:5-8 and the Law of God.

    2. This thread is about the Ten Commandments as the Law of God written on the heart.

    Even the most shallow reader of this thread will know that by now.

    Your opposition to God's Ten Commandments - is not "Arminian" by a long shot.






    Hmmm -- which we also find on this thread.



    on that thread you BOTH refer to Romans 8 and the law of God for the saved saints -

    Were we simply "not supposed to notice"????


    1028 commands in the NT and only 613 in the OT and you want to "keep bringing up the numbers"???? as if this comparison "helps you"????

    Really?
     
    #210 BobRyan, Jan 17, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 17, 2015
  11. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    Why do you keep quoting Moody? What makes him an authority?
    1. He was a Congregationalist, not a Baptist.
    2. Later on he became non-denominational though never left his Congregational roots. So why are you quoting a Congregational evangelist as an authority to Baptists. That is strange Bob.
     
  12. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    You are the one in previous discussions about Moody claiming that you agreed with him.

    Many Baptists support the Moody Bible Institute to this very day

    So your idea that no Baptists accept his teaching is horribly flawed.

    In any case - my argument is not that he 'is your pope' -- my argument is that he is another example of a non-SDA affirming the first 6 points in the OP - and that like Spurgeon there ARE a significant number of Baptists that hold him in regard as though he were a good Bible teacher and they do not regard him as "an SDA".

    I say that to address your "it is just SDAs" when the first 6 points of the OP come up.

    Obviously you are not following the discussion.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
    #212 BobRyan, Jan 17, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 17, 2015
  13. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    So that is what you are trying to do--justify your cult and their position through the beliefs of others. NO, it won't work. They don't believe the same as the SDA. The very document that you posted, from Moody, has a disclaimer on it that Moody distances himself from all beliefs of the SDA.. He does not want to be associated with the SDA whatsoever. You have nothing in common with the cited authors, Confession of Faiths, etc.

    The SDA believe that those who don't worship on Saturday but rather on Sunday have the mark of the Beast. What mockery is that. Not one of us believe in such mockery of the Word of God.

    You have put yourself under the law.
    When are you going to start keeping the rest of the OT LAW?
     
  14. RLBosley

    RLBosley Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG]

    Now if you could actually deal with what I said, that would be great...

    Oh who am I kidding? You won't do that. You''ll just obfuscate and deflect with more silliness about Moody and some Baptist confession that you don't understand...
     
  15. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian




    hint -- pay attention to the actual discussion. IF you think your wild claim that the first 6 points in that post - points you are totally at war with - are NOT held by the sources listed -- -then ... show.... it.

    Responding with vitriol,acrimony and loud "harrumph" -- followed by nothing of substance demonstrates to ALL - that you have nothing to offer but factless assertion.

    how long could the Baptist church survive on a meal of "factless assertion"???

    Why choose that form of collapse??
     
  16. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    that you find inconvenient? the first 6 points in the actual OP? On topic? yet you "need" to divert from the points - avoid the details in the OP as if they are "not pertinent to the topic"??? that sounds like nonsense.

    Is there a single point in this discussion from the OP that you have addressed??

    one??

    How is it that runaway - is a tactic that some baptists find so irresistible on this subject??

    As for 1Cor 9

    17 For if I do this voluntarily, I have a reward; but if against my will, I have a stewardship entrusted to me. 18 What then is my reward? That, when I preach the gospel, I may offer the gospel without charge, so as not to make full use of my right in the gospel. 19 For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may win more. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law; 21 to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some. 23I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it.
    24 Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may win. 25 Everyone who competes in the games exercises self-control in all things. They then do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. 26 Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air; 27 but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached (the Gospel) to others, I myself will not be disqualified.

    "what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God." 1 Cor 7:19

    Your contradiction of Paul's letter to corinth is that God's Law - God's Commandments are not Christ's, or that the OT is not the Word of Christ -- "all scripture given by inspiration from God" even though Christ calls the writing of Moses the "Word of God" in Mark 7 as I pointed out to you already and you dismissed as if this was of little importance --- though it is the teaching of Christ Himself in Mark 7
     
    #216 BobRyan, Jan 17, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 17, 2015
  17. RLBosley

    RLBosley Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    What?

    Not directly I guess, as in quoting your OP. I can if you would like. I did however challenge the main presupposition of your OP.


    How is replying to you, and pointing out that you never actually answered my point at all, running away? I would LOVE to hear you explain that.


    Again, you ignore what Paul plainly says - He is not (and by extension all Christians) under the Law, referring to the Mosaic Law particularly the Decalogue as codified in the Mosaic Covenant. That is clear from the text. He also says that thought he is not under the (Mosaic) Law he is not without the law of God and identifies the law that he is under as Christ's Law. The ONLY logical deduction is that Christ's law is at least in some way separate and distinct from the codified law handed down at Sinai. The conclusion is inescapable.

    The level of continuity between the two laws - Mosaic and Christ's - is another discussion. But to say that they are identical is exegetically impossible.
     
  18. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    SDAs believe in the Trinity, sola scriptura testing of all doctrine, the virgin birth and bodily resurrection of Christ, saved by grace through faith - and that the bible is the Word of God.

    So sorry to hear that nonsensical idea that Moody rejected any truth held in common by SDAs.

    Let me know when the period of grieving and mourning among Moody Bible Institute trained pastors and missionaries has ended.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
  19. RLBosley

    RLBosley Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    And I disagree with them. Yay.

    It's not actually. The Sabbath was given to Israel via Moses in the wilderness. The 7th day of creation is sanctified, but no evidence is given that EVERY 7th day was thus sanctified, nor that it became a command incumbent on all people from Adam on.

    Wrong. The Decalogue was given to the Jews as part of their legal, conditional, suzerainty style covenant with God. The 10 as law, are not binding on the Gentiles or on Christians.

    Not from Gen 2 but other than that you are correct.

    They are not, scripture never refers to them as such. They reflect God's moral demands but are not identical with them.

    Sort of.

    How do you mean opposed? Are they contrary to God's plan in the gospel? Certainly not. However, they are not and cannot be used as a way of obtaining or maintaining grace.

    No one believes this.
     
  20. RLBosley

    RLBosley Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's a lie. If SDA believed in Sola Scripture they would not have accepted the words of a false prophet.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...