Featured Seventh Day Adventance

Cool. My mindset and outlook is a bit different, but this I do not disagree with.

 

Friend, if your mindset is different, in the face of Scriptural principles and Scriptural mandate, then you need to change your mind and stance. Ponder this and read the Scriptures. Scripture is our sole source of faith and practice, if 'our mindset' (pure subjectivity) differs, it is we, and not Scripture that is on the wrong track. I speak this in love and grace, but you are not an authority, nor is your mindset or outlook.

 

I look to God's approval rather than man's, so you don't have to personally approve of the opinions I've formed based on my understanding of scripture and what I believe God has shown me.

This topic is going way beyond the topic in the OP and getting into what tends to be a massive dispute. (As evidenced by the one thread from the past few days that was just closed yesterday evening I believe.) There are many different views on what scripture says regarding how we are to precisely how we are to respond to beliefs that are not our's or that we do not believe to be Biblical. It's not a cut-and-dried issue in my experience.

Done here.

 

I see. Show me how your opinions are based upon Scripture, the same opinions you've pitted against the evidence I've given.

Scripture is more cut and dried than you attest. I've given examples and have shown you to be purely subjective then you run off. Your outlook and mindset are not Biblically based nor authoritative thus your apologia is non existent or at the least purely subjective. It's shameful to see so many run away when confronted with Biblical mandates which do away with their personal notions.

 

Well said Amy! I couldn't have said it as well myself.

 

I will give a similar experience. Many years ago I was up early one Sat. or Sun. morning and saw this kindly old white haired man discussing Scripture. I did not here anything I could take exception to at that time. At the end of his discourse I learned he was Herbert W. Armstrong founder of the Worldwide Church of God, a church which at that time was considered a heretical cult. Since that time there has been a movement of that group toward orthodox Christianity [According to Hanegraaff in his revised Kingdom of the Cults.}.

I have no doubt that millions of families are conned by these people who live lavish lifestyles as a result. TBN people are a prime example.

 

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :thumbsup:

Exactly!

I've always wondered how that was done!

 

HA! Good one!

 

We believe in the Triune Godhead , God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.

We believe in the Bible as the inspired word of God and that the Bible is the test of all doctrine and tradition.

We believe in "believer's baptism" and we believe that the Ten Commandments are the moral law of God still binding on all mankind - even the saints today.

Many others like D.L. Moody and the "Baptist Confession of Faith" and the "Westminster Confession of Faith", Andy Stanley, R.C. Sproul... will also claim that the Ten Commandments are the moral law of God given to mankind since Eden and still binding on the saints and the whole world. Where we differ with them is that we do not believe you can "EDIT" the 4th commandment so that it applies to some other day - other than the 7th day of the week.

In that regard we are somewhat more like the Seventh-day Baptists.

We believe the 1Tim 6:15-16 statement that "God ...alone possess immortality" and that everyone else gets it by access to the Tree of Life.

And we believe in the continuation of the 1Cor 12 spiritual gifts - although we do not accept any of what passes today for the gift of tongues and healing etc We think that is mostly counterfeit of what the Bible was talking about.

Other details if interested.

There is an online web site with all the doctrinal statements of the denomination to compare against.

in Christ,

Bob

 

You forgot to mention you believe one must maintain their gift of salvation via obedience to the Law after having received Grace.

 

oops! How could I forget! Thanks for reminding me.

Yes we accept Matt 18 and Matt 6, and Romans 11 "as they read". So in this case they warn against experiencing "forgiveness revoked".

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

Matt 18 is another place where "forgiveness revoked" is a subject of the Bible - often ignored by those clinging to man-made-tradition over the Word of God.

[FONT=&quot]32 ""Then summoning him, his lord said to him, "You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]33 " Should you not also have had mercy on your fellow slave, in the same way that I had mercy on you?'[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]34 ""And his lord, moved with anger, handed him over to the torturers until he should repay all that was owed him.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]35 "" My heavenly Father will also do the same to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart.'' [/FONT]


Matt 6

12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:

15 But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.


There is a long list of other texts that disprove OSAS in the same way - such as those we find in Ezek 18.

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

 

You based those ennonous views on what the passages mean because you heed the fale teachings of a false prophetess, who co mingled grace and law!

 

Some of your beliefs are Orthodox but then there is this:

 

Did you forget your concordance. There are no such words in the Bible or in any theological dictionary either. There is no such doctrine except in your imagination. What you purport is heresy. Nowhere does the Bible teach this strange doctrine.

Be careful. When the two sons of Aaron offered strange fire on the altar, they were consumed of the Lord.

Paul warned the Galatians not to accept strange doctrine or another gospel. Those that did so were accursed he said. (Gal.1:8)

John wrote about those that brought any other doctrine than that doctrine that we (the apostles) have taught you. If they teach otherwise, do not allow them into your house, do not even say good-bye to them (God-be-with-you), because then, are you a partaker of their evil deeds. You have a strange doctrine, opposite of which the apostles taught. (2John 9-11)

Everyone here accepts Matthew 18, Romans 11, Matthew 6, etc. In fact we accept every verse in the Bible, just not your interpretation of it.

The only one rejecting the truth of Scripture is yourself.
The one who follows tradition is Bob, who consistently follows the traditions of EGW, as written in "The Great Controversy." Thus he does not believe in sola scriptura, no matter how much he makes that claim. He defends the false prophetess of EGW.

The quoting of Scripture above, which we all believe to be true, in no way proves anything of Bob's false doctrine. It simply shows that he knows how to use the copy and paste function of his computer. :sleeping_2:
It does get tiring after awhile.

Here is the truth of that parable:
It is given here:

Ephesians 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.
31 Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice:
32 And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you.

--Concerning OSAS, it is strongly worded in verse 30. Every believer is sealed unto the day of redemption. No one can undo that seal. Our redemption (if based on grace and faith [Eph.2:8,9]) is eternally secure in Christ. It can never be lost. It has been sealed by the Holy Spirit.

Verse 31 gives characteristics of the unsaved or of the flesh which ought not to be characteristic of the believer: bitterness, wrath, anger, clamour, evil speaking, malice. These attributes are not characteristic of the one who is truly born again.

A Christian is one who is both forgiven and forgiving. The reason is succinctly given in verse 31.
Forgiving one another even as God for Christ's sake has forgiven you.
--This is the Book of Ephesians, a doctrinal book where we look for solid doctrine. Here redemption is taught; forgiveness and its basis is taught; eternal security is taught. It is a book of doctrine, not a parable, not a book of history, but a book meant to teach doctrine. This is highly significant. Parables do not teach doctrine. They illustrate doctrine that has already been taught.

In Matthew 18:
Matthew 18:15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
--Jesus was teaching on the importance of forgiveness (cf. Eph.4:31).

Matthew 18:21 Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
22 Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.
--Jesus was teaching on the importance of forgiveness (cf. Eph.4:31).
A Christian is one who has been forgiven and is forgiving.

Matthew 18:23 Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account of his servants.
--Jesus now narrates a parable about the kingdom of heaven.
It is illustrates his teaching on the importance of forgiveness (cf. Eph.4:31)

The parable may be explained in two different ways and still with no contradiction. The way that I explained it was that the second servant, or from verse 28ff was Jesus giving a hypothetical situation, the words "suppose ye" being omitted. The differences between the two servants are too great for them to be the same. At the end we see that the one, originally declared forgiven and thus righteous, is now wicked. Thus it is apparent they are two different servants and Christ is giving a hypothetical situation.
This is not just my view. It is presented also in the KJV Study Bible and other sources.
The view Biblicist gave is a popular view and just as credible. It is well accepted by MacArthur, William MacDonald (Believer's Bible Commentary), and Walvoord and Zuck (The Bible Knowledge Commentary).
It doesn't matter what interpretation one takes here (his or mine), the conclusion arrived at is the same. God puts a great importance on forgiveness (Eph.4:31). No new doctrine is introduced. The parable reinforces Christ's teaching to Peter. It is not a threat made to him.

The first servant is forgiven of a debt so enormous that it cannot even be imagined. He ought to have been very grateful and thankful, but instead he went out and grabbed a fellow-servant by the throat and demanded that he pay him back "all that he owed him." It happened to be a hundred pence or about five dollars; a pittance, especially in the light of what he had just been forgiven.
Previously Jesus had been speaking of offenses, and making sure that we make things right with our brother. This man was doing the opposite. This was not a large debt, but more in line with an offense. He wasn't even giving his fellow-servant a chance to make things right. He wasn't willing to forgive.
In the same measure that he was not willing to forgive his brother, the heavenly Father will also deal with him. The lesson is on the importance of forgiveness. The Father will deal with him in chastisement. Hebrews 6 speaks of the way that the Lord disciplines those that are his.
1. It does not teach purgatory.
2. It is not teaching eternal hell.
3. It is not teaching heresy as forgiveness revoked.

It is teaching the importance of forgiveness, and how that quality of forgiveness ought to be a characteristic of every believer. If it is not one of the characteristics that stands out in those that call themselves "Christian" then I would doubt if that person is a Christian.

 

DHK
You might as well waste your time shoveling sand against the tide rather than try to enlighten a cult member. It can't be done unless God intervenes.

I don't know whether you remember but many years ago families would have to forcibly remove their children from cults like the Moonies.

 

When I used to watch cult TV networks TBN was like comedy central and 3ABN could put you to sleep even if you just drank a 12 pack of Mountain Dew.

When I was young we lived in a Roman Catholic neighborhood and when I was 15 we moved to a Seventh Day Adventurer neighborhood, as Archie Bunker referred to them, they are some of the most legalistic hypocrites I have ever met in my life. If you claim to live by the law you will be damned by it.

 

Bob Ryan and E-7 are on this forum for the purpose of causing trouble, pulling peoples chain by starting false threads, spouting false doctrine, and perverting the Gospel. They post the same Scripture repeatedly, with or without false interpretation. We would all do well to simply ignore their threads. Whether they are real or not I cannot say. I can say that Ryan is pushing a heretical doctrine and E-7 is pushing nonsense.