Would you fellowship with a Seventh Day Adventist Family?

Does it matter? Where in the New Testament, anywhere, does it command the believer to worship on the Sabbath Day?
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]I have one better.

Prove using ONLY the New Testament that Jesus is the Messiah!!!!

Just one verse that shows us that He is more than just a really nice guy who healed people and supposedly died and came back, and all that mumbo jumbo.

Prove it.

Prove He is the Messiah, but DO NOT TOUCH the Old Testament.

God Bless

 

I'm sorry but that is a really bad analogy.

When God made the Sabbath, there was only ONE day that He made to rest and cease from labor, and worship, and study and fellowship.

The OTHER PAPER didn't come along until 4000+ years later.

He made the Sabbath for man. Are you not a part of man? God didn't make the Sunday. He called it the FIRST day. He didn't bless that day. He didn't hallow that day. He didn't call that day HOLY.

The Sabbath is God's day. There is no other day in His eyes.

The sacredness of Sunday is baptized paganism. It's origins are pagan. It is a counterfeit Sabbath.

God gives a warning to all those who ARE His that are in this false system of religion:

"Come out of her MY people, that you receive not of her plagues"

That tract that you are critisizing is calling out those who are His.

I wonder how many people who got one of those had their hearts open to God, and received the Truth, and are now living in obedience to God?

God Bless

 

Peter said WHO? The WHO? Why did Peter know there was a Messiah?

Where did he get that crazy idea?

 

This is an interesting topic. We were talking about it in philosophy class the other day. I just ask, are you denying the humanity of Christ? Was He really tempted in all points and is a help to us? How could He be a help if He could have never sinned? What was the point of the incarnation? Was His desert temptation just going through the motions?

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe Jesus sinned. However, it seems that His humanity is being neglected with this statement. Was He not 100% God and 100% man?

Just thinking out loud..........

Neal

 

This is an interesting topic. We were talking about it in philosophy class the other day. I just ask, are you denying the humanity of Christ? Was He really tempted in all points and is a help to us? How could He be a help if He could have never sinned? What was the point of the incarnation? Was His desert temptation just going through the motions?

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe Jesus sinned. However, it seems that His humanity is being neglected with this statement. Was He not 100% God and 100% man?

Just thinking out loud..........

Neal </font>[/QUOTE]I have always kind of wondered the same thing in the back of my mind, but, what I said is true. It would have been impossible for Him to sin. I think He went through the temptation so that this could be said:

Heb 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
Heb 4:16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

It is very encouraging to know that HE knows how we feel.

God Bless

 

When a thread starts getting this ugly, my
inclination is to back out of it and answer no one.
I think it is time.

 

Did you think I was serious? Ever heard of 'playing the devil's advocate' in debate?

You still are not getting the point.

WHY did Peter know that there was a Messiah?

Just because The Father revealed it to Him? The Father could have said 'He is the Jajajaja', but unless Peter had HEARD that there was a promised 'Jajajaja', it wouldn't have meant a thing to him.

WHERE did Peter get the idea that there was a Messiah?

Remember, you are not to TOUCH the Old Testament to answer this question.

God Bless

 

I would like to first point out that the post you responded to, was not adressed to you, but to Singer.

What is odd, and really quite sad, is that you ignore this chapter. I have quoted this chapter before in reference to the Sign that God has made between His people. Are you NOT one of His people? Do you think you are a GENTILE? Then you are not His.

Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

Gal 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Why didn't I quote the whole verse? Well, technically I wasn't posting a verse, I was posting my beliefs that are backed by scripture. Typical of cults to quite the Bible, that's right, you don't like it when we quote the Bible. What does the Bible say about grace?

Rom 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
Rom 6:2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

A man that is not part of man? That didn't make any sense.

Called good, yes, but you have yet to disprove my statement. He DID NOT call it Holy, or BLESS that day apart from the others. He only blessed, made Holy, Sanctified, hallowed, ONE day. The Sabbath.

The context of my statement is not 'he literally does not know that the other 6 exist', that is rediculous. He does not see any other day as HOLY, set apart, sanctified, hallowed.

What, should I NOT be prejudiced against pagan things? Should we all just accept everyone elses pagan beliefs? Adopt them as our own? GOD FORBID.

Why did he do that? And WHEN was that? Where was he going? Did he not LEAVE them the very next morning? His gathering them together could have been on ANY day. It just so happened that it was AFTER the Sabbath that he had rested on, and would not travel on, that they then met to say farewell. This text does not prove Sunday Sacredness.

Really? Where is that in the Bible? I find it truly interesting that the only mention of the first day in Corinthians is this passage:

1Co 16:2 Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.

Hmmmm so that there are no gatherings when he comes. When did they work? From First day to the preparation day. They then RESTED on the Sabbath. On the first day AFTER the Sabbath, they looked at all the fruits of their past weeks labor, and layed aside the first fruits of that labor. Did they take it to church that day? NOPE, it clearly states that they were to LAY IT ASIDE IN STORE. Now, you could manipulate that to say 'bring your first fruits to the STORE HOUSE at the Church on the first day', but then, it doesn't say that. You have a problem.

As I noted above, there is NO indication that they were gathering TOGETHER on the first day. Paul even added there (for clarity no doubt) that they were to lay it aside on the first day so that WHEN HE CAME, there would be no gathering. NOW it stands to reason that from then on they did this EVERY first day. Now, when he came, HOW would they do it like he told them, AND meet with him, and do no gathering? There is a contradiction in your theology and what this passage states.

YOU TAKE IT???? The false system of religion is clearly outlined by a marked progression of pagan theology mixed with the pure doctrines of the Apostles. It is marked by the pagan day of worship being used as a counterfeit Sabbath. It is marked by a total disregard for the Holy Law of God, and a replacement of that Law with doctrines of men.

NONE of that describes the Seventh Day Adventist Church.

You want me to name names? I wouldn't lower myself to your level of crudeness.

God Bless!

 

I am not trying to argue with you, 3AM, but how could He really know how we feel if He could never have sinned? How could He know what temptation was like if He never really had the option of sinning? Doesn't that kind of defeat the meaning of temptation? There would have been no struggle within Him if He did not have the capacity to sin, so He would not 'know' what temptation is really like.

Neal

 

Mark 2:27 tells us that He made the seventh-day Holy day - memorial of creation week - the Sabbath - "for mankind".

This is in full agreement with Isaiah 66 that tells us that From Sabbath to Sabbath "ALL MANKIND shall come before Me to Worship".

And of course - this fits perfectly with with the Exodus 20 "summary" of Gen 1-2:3 - telling us that WHEN God rested - He provided all the authority that is needed to "sanctify" the Sabbath as a day of rest and worship for Mankind.

Long before there was a Jew - in Gen 2:3 we see the Sabbath day MADE a "Holy day" and Christ tells us that it was MADE for Mankind - rather than Mankind MADE for the Sabbath.

Therefore the Lord's Day (the Holy day of the Lord Isaiah 58) - is the Sabbath and Christ Himself is "Lord of the Sabbath" Mark 2:28.

The two great blessings for mankind that we took from the Garden of Eden... God's Holy Seventh day memorial of Creation AND the institution of Marriage.

We can still give Him praise and thanksgiving for that "for our Faith ESTABLISHES the Law of God" Rom 3:31 as "holy just and good" -- Romans 7 even today.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Christ was BOTH God and Man.

As God - He COULD not get "hunry".

As God - He COULD not get "tired".

As God - He COULD not be oppressed by the heat of the day.

As God - He COULD not be killed, tortured, hurt nor could He die.

As God He COULD not "BECOME SIN" for us.

As God - He COULD not be tempted.

Philipians 2 tells us "That He EMPTIED HIMSELF" in order to take on the form of mankind.

And so HE WAS tempted, He WAS tired, He WAS hungry, He WAS tortured, He WAS hurt, He DID die for our sins.

The temptation was "real". Satan knew more about the "ontology" of God and Christ in human form than mere mortals and HE ALSO knew that Christ COULD be tempted.

Temptation is ONLY temptation to those who CAN fail. Notice how you are never tempted to "fly over the moon". You can't do it - you are never tempted to do it - you "can't" be tempted in that way.

Think about it.

In Christ,

Bob

 

It is obvious you will not believe me. I have already explained th passage for you. I know what it means. Perhaps you will believe someone else, like Albert Barnes?

Let every one of you. Let the collection be universal. Let each one esteem it his duty and his privilege to give to this object. It was not to be confined to the rich on]y, but was the common duty of all. The poor, as well as the rich, were expected to contribute according to their ability.
Lay by him in store. par eautw tiqetw qhsaurizwn. Let him lay up at home, treasuring up as he has been prospered. The Greek phrase, "by himself," means, probably, the same as at home. Let him set it apart; let him designate a certain portion; let him do this by himself, when he is at home, when he can calmly look at the evidence of his prosperity. Let him do it, not under the influence of pathetic appeals, or for the sake of display when he is with others; but let him do it as a matter of principle, and when he is by himself. The phrase in Greek, "treasuring up," may mean that each one was to put the part which he had designated into the common treasury. This interpretation seems to be demanded by the latter part of the verse. They were to lay it by, and to put it into the common treasury, that there might be no trouble of collecting when he should come. Or it may, perhaps, mean that they were individually to treasure it up, having designated in their own mind the sum which they could give, and have it in readiness when he should come. This was evidently to be done not on one Sabbath only, but was to be done on each Lord's-day until he should come.
As God hath prospered him. The word "God" is not in the original, but it is evidently understood, and necessary to the sense. The word rendered "hath prospered" (euodwtai) means, properly, to set forward on one's way; to prosper one's journey; and then to prosper, or be prospered. This is the rule which Paul lays down here to guide the Christians at Corinth in giving alms--a rule that is as applicable now, and as valuable now, as it was then.
That there be no gatherings when I come. No collections, (logiai,) 1Co 16:1. The apostle means that there should be no trouble in collecting the small sums; that it should all be prepared; that each one might have laid by what he could give; and that all might be ready to be handed over to him, or to whomsoever they might choose to send with it to Jerusalem, 1Co 16:3.
In view of this important verse, we may remark,
(1.) that there is here clear proof that the first day of the week was observed by the church at Corinth as holy time. If it was not, there can have been no propriety in selecting that day in preference to any other in which to make the collection. It was the day which was set apart to the duties of religion, and therefore an appropriate, day for the exercise of charity and the bestowment of alms. There can have been no reason why this day should have been designated except that it was a day set apart to religion, and therefore deemed a proper day for the exercise of benevolence towards others.
(2.) This order extended also to the churches in Galatia, proving also that the first day of the week was observed by them, and was regarded as a day proper for the exercise of charity towards the poor and the afflicted. And if the first day of the week was observed, by apostolic authority, in those churches, it is morally certain that it was observed by others. This consideration, therefore, demonstrates that it was the custom to observe this day, and that it was observed by the authority of the early founders of Christianity.
(3.) Paul intended that they should be systematic in their giving, and that they should give from principle, and not merely under the impulse of feeling.
(4.) Paul designed that the habit of doing good with their money should be constant. He, therefore, directed that it should be on the return of each Lord's-day, and that the subject should be constantly before their minds.
(5.) It was evident that Paul in this way would obtain more for his object than he would if he waited that they should give all at once. He therefore directed them honestly to lay by each week what they could then give, and to regard it as a sacred treasure. How much would the amount of charities in the Christian churches be swelled if this were the practice now, and if all Christians would lay by in store each week what they could then devote to sacred purposes.
(6.) The true rule of giving is, "as the Lord has prospered us." If he has prospered us, we owe it to him as a debt of gratitude. And according to our prosperity and success, we should honestly devote our property to God.
(7.) It is right and proper to lay by of our wealth for the purposes of benevolence on the Sabbath-day. It is right to do good then, (Mt 12:12 and one of the appropriate exercises of religion is to look at the evidence of our prosperity with a view to know what we may be permitted to give to advance the kingdom of the Lord Jesus.
(8.) If every Christian would honestly do this every week, it would do much to keep down the spirit of worldliness that now prevails everywhere in the Christian church; and if every Christian would conscientiously follow the direction of Paul here, there would be no want of funds for any well-directed plan for the conversion of the world.
{a} "first day" Ac 20:7; Re 1:10
{*} "gatherings" "collections"

That explanation of 1Cor.16:2 should help you, if you have an open mind to learn.
DHK

 

Abiyah:

If I was easily persuaded to follow every wind that came my way,
I'd have surely succumbed to Catholicsim, as they have a strong
intent to convert. They have ''proof'' that they're right, Mormon's
have proof, Adventists have proof, my cult had proof. They even
called themselves "THE TRUTH" (All others were liars) THere are
more. Is my choice to pick from one of the above, or can I just
have my own God Given PROOF...?

God doesn't expect me to jump from one denomination to the other
just because someone had a new "insight" or pet doctrine.

I have numerous things to rely on that give me salvation.

1.) "Whosoever has the Son has life"......THat's Me !
2.) " He that believes is not condemned....
3.) "Whosoever believes in me and lives shall never die.
4.) "Confess with thy mouth and believe in thy heart"....
5.) " Happy is the man who does not condemn himself"....
6.) "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord
shall be saved.
7.) "No man can say that Jesus is Lord, save the Holy Ghost.
8.) "You are saved by Grace through faith, not of works..."

Sorry, ...changing to the Sabbath sure won't alter the above, and
none of the above include the Sabbath.

[ February 14, 2003, 12:41 AM: Message edited by: Singer ]

 

I just saw my name on the front page, Singer. Was
this the thread I said I was through with, or was it
the tongues thread? 8o) I can't remember!! I know I
was tired of both!

Is the post above all you intended to write, or did
you get cut off? 8o)


. . . Oh -- I guess you are rewriting.

 

What are you..... a Moderator, Abiyah?

 

I am not trying to argue with you, 3AM, but how could He really know how we feel if He could never have sinned? How could He know what temptation was like if He never really had the option of sinning? Doesn't that kind of defeat the meaning of temptation? There would have been no struggle within Him if He did not have the capacity to sin, so He would not 'know' what temptation is really like.

Neal </font>[/QUOTE]I see what you are saying. He COULD have sinned, being God, He could do what He wants, but for that same reason, that He is God, He cannot sin.

He knows how we feel in temptation. He also knows what sin feels like, remember the 'He became sin for us' conversation?

He was tempted in every way that we are. Just because He didn't sin, doesn't mean He doesn't know how we feel.

God Bless

 

8oD

NO! I couldn't handle the job. When things start
getting too weird, I walk away, and that would never
do for a moderator.

8oD