| Author |
Message |
Asurprise
Registered user
Username: Asurprise
Post Number: 1547
Registered: 7-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 - 2:15 pm: |     |
Wow! He wrote the verse - but he missed it!!! In Exodus 31:13 God said that the Sabbath was to be a SIGN between Israel and Himself!!!
Moses made it clear in numerous places such as Deuteronomy 4:13 what the covenant was between Israel and God. Here he's talking to Israel: "So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, THE TEN COMMANDMENTS; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone."
And Moses made it clear just whom was the recipient of those Ten Commandments in Deuteronomy 5:3 "The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, those who are here today, all of us who are alive."
And where does he get the idea that the Sabbath was given to Adam and Eve, (on their first day alive, by the way)? Of all the days of creation, this is the ONLY ONE where it doesn't say "and the evening and the morning were the _____ day."
God is still resting from His work of creation. Have him read Hebrews 3 and 4 where God invites us to enter His rest. Also have him read Hebrews 8:13 where it says that the old covenant is obsolete.
The Ten Commandments have a purpose in that they show the Holiness of God and show the sinner his/her need for a Savior. But Paul says that "the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor." Galatians 3:24,25
Paul also says that when we are saved, we have died to the law. The law points the sinner to Christ, but when we have been saved, "we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter." (Romans 7:6)
I don't understand how come he keeps saying that the Sabbath is the SEAL in the New Covenant. The Bible says VERY clearly that the Holy Spirit is the Seal (Ephesians 1:13,14).
I feel sorry for Adventists, because they totally lack this Seal. They think that their salvation is made up of a religion of doctrines. This applies SO WELL to Adventists:
"For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God. For Christ is the END OF THE LAW for righteousness to everyone who believes." (Romans 10:3,4)
I hope this helps. |
Grace_alone
Registered user
Username: Grace_alone
Post Number: 1824
Registered: 6-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 - 3:13 pm: | |
I'd like to ask this guy if he believes that the word "commandment" automatically means "sabbath" every time it comes up in the Bible.
Also, Leigh Ann, I'm glad you called this guy on this "commentary". It looks like he thought he'd trump you by referring to it. He's messing with the wrong lady...
 Leigh Anne (with an e)
(Message edited by grace_alone on November 30, 2010) |
Patallen
Registered user
Username: Patallen
Post Number: 184
Registered: 7-2010
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 - 3:14 pm: | |
I was sharing some of my findings regarding the Sabbath with an Adventist pastor friend of mine and he responded by reciting James 2:10-11:
10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it. 11 For he who said, "Do not commit adultery," also said, "Do not murder." If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker.
He told me that clearly these verses are referring to the Ten Commandments and they are still binding. Yes, murdering and committing adultery are in the Ten Commandments, but the Ten Commandments are part of the whole Law. When James recited the Old Testament here, he was illustrating the wrongness of showing favoritism, which is also one of the 613 commands in the Law. Leviticus 19:15 says:
15 "'Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly.
James was merely trying to get across the point that breaking the commandment of showing favoritism makes you as guilty as if you had murdered or committed adultery. Take note that showing favoritism is not in the Ten Commandments portion of the law but a part of the whole law. Why would James compare apples and oranges to make a point? Clearly he was comparing apples with apples because committing murder, adultery and showing favoritism are all a part of The Law and carried equal weight.
A vital point to know and understand is that James was not speaking to Gentile Christians (non-Jews). James was speaking to Jews, who still adhered to the Torah and as Jews, they had no problem making the connection. They knew that showing favoritism was part of the law and as such, they knew that if they broke one law in the Torah, they were guilty of all. James was not saying nor verifying that the Ten Commandments and Torah are still binding. He was only reminding the Jews of the seriousness of showing favoritism and providing them with a graphic picture showing that it was on the same level as committing murder and adultery.
James 2:10-11 in The Complete Jewish Bible reads thusly: “For a person who keeps the whole Torah, yet stumbles at one point, has become guilty of breaking them all. For the One who said, "Don't commit adultery," also said, "Don't murder." If you don't commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the Torah.”
James is the author of the book of James, which was written to 1st Century Jewish Christians.
James talked about the Royal Law of Love and compared it to the Torah, or whole law. The Royal Law of Love is the New Commandment – loving God and others.
Pat |
Michaelmiller
Registered user
Username: Michaelmiller
Post Number: 165
Registered: 7-2010
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 - 5:50 pm: | |
LA,
I just went through a sabbath study with some SDA friends last night... the subject is fresh on my mind!
In addition to all of the obvious covenant stuff (sabbath being the "remember" sign of the OC; the Lord's supper being the "remember" sign of the NC), there are these Bible chapters which come to mind: Rom 14, Col 2, and Heb 3-4. If you have a good handle on Heb 3-4 you can use that to demonstrate that the creation rest (God's rest) is a different rest than the weekly sabbath. The keepers of the weekly sabbath never entered God's rest; to enter God's rest one has to "rest from working for their salvation" by belief in Christ. He will, of course, miss the whole point of the chapters and focus in on one verse to say it is promoting keeping the sabbath day when it clearly is not.
In the end you are not going to get anywhere debating the issue with him. At some point you will just have to say that you've explained your reasons (that was his question) and that your interpretations aren't going to agree (even more so since he is reading every scripture through the EGW filter). If/when he wants an honest dialog/study on the issue then you can revisit it, but there is no use in debating with someone confusing the issue with an EGW filled commentary (and very cleverly not revealing that as the actual source either).
Michael |
Leighpinski
Registered user
Username: Leighpinski
Post Number: 156
Registered: 8-2010
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 - 7:09 pm: | |
You guys are an amazing support group! I have taken bits and pieces from each one of you and sent a short, condensed response.
I ended it by telling him that we are going to come to an impasse because he does not realize how clouded his vision is by Ellen White's false teachings. And that as long as he filters each scripture through her, we would only go round and round. Then I quoted my favorite scripture to him, 2 Cor 3:14-17 and told him that I would pray that the veil would be lifted and that he would find the freedom in Christ that I did.
(That ought to make him good and mad)
I cannot thank you all enough for the support you are to me!!!!!!!!
Love you guys,
LA |
Leighpinski
Registered user
Username: Leighpinski
Post Number: 157
Registered: 8-2010
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 - 7:18 pm: | |
Oh...and yes, he DID admit that he was using SDA commentary.
Sneaky, sneaky.
I knew it |
Skeeter
Registered user
Username: Skeeter
Post Number: 1167
Registered: 12-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 - 10:53 pm: | |
I have really enjoyed this thread
You are so right LA ! There is no way he will be able to see the truth as long as he is filtering everything through EGW .
The SDA commentary is most probably the only one he has or feels a need to have.
I guess SDA pastors have an especially hard time (thicker veils ?) since it is their job to convince others of the Sabbath "truth". (sigh)
Reminds me of another Pastor.... Stephen Bohr from Fresno, Ca. .. My SDA MIL thinks he is the greatest thing since sliced bread... 
I listened a while back to his 2 or 3 (forget) part sermon titled "Defending the Sabbath".
He starts out by being critical of Dale Ratzlaff and says that he (Dale) has made it his mission to destroy everything about the SDA church...
He then admits that Dale's book (Cultic doctrine) bothered him "for several years" UNTIL he found the answer (in one of EGW's books of course)
I emailed him and asked him to please explain to me why he was satisfied with Ellens "answer" and why he could not find defense for his beliefs in the Bible ... of course I got no answer. |
Cloudwatcher
Registered user
Username: Cloudwatcher
Post Number: 269
Registered: 5-2009
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2010 - 2:57 am: | |
Skeeter, that sermon is cracking me up. And I can just see the audience soaking it up. He speaks so authoratatively.
Here is the link if anyone else feels like being amused...try not to vomit.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4256350515445629651# |
Michaelmiller
Registered user
Username: Michaelmiller
Post Number: 168
Registered: 7-2010
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2010 - 6:46 am: | |
As a SDA convert I was completely uninformed about the EGW plagarism accusations and the disputes with the IJ. Names like Ford and Rae were never spoken about. All of that information remained intentionally hidden from me for 13 years (a deceptive practice at best)! Even my wife, a lifer who grew up during the era of the disputes, was entirely sheltered from all of it. The covenants were a subject that we never heard while in the SDA church.
Why do I mention this? I mention it because although the laity have largely been sheltered, those who are pastors do know about this stuff. They have long ago made their decision on the matters. It is likely that a large percentage have built up elaborate walls to protect their beliefs.
Either they are searching themselves, or they are not; all that can be done is to present the gospel simplicity. The reaction will be evident quickly. If they are unreasonable, condescending, and deceptive then don't be surprised if the Holy Spirit leads to move on... continuing the debate is likely making it harder for the gospel message to get through later. Of course, you could just as easily be led to call them out on their actions and continue the debate; follow where you are led, but don't be surprised if the leading is to just drop the seed and move on.
I'm not saying pastors are unreachable. There do exist a small percentage of SDA pastors who are open to a real discussion and/or do disagree with major points of doctrine. They usually publicly keep quiet about it and preach something unrelated (which still isn't the pure gospel since the SDA doctrines are incompatible with the gospel simplicity). They also tend to lose their jobs given enough time. The top-down system is very self selecting against anyone who might attempt to change the status quo.
Michael |
Leighpinski
Registered user
Username: Leighpinski
Post Number: 158
Registered: 8-2010
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2010 - 8:27 am: | |
Skeeter, I'm so glad you enjoyed the post! I felt like a little kid running back and forth for help and guidance.
Michael, yes, I feel like I accomplished what I was led to do. I planted a seed and I defended my beliefs. The rest is up to the Holy Spirit.
I am sure the demon that has a hold on him will not let him go so easily. You should see his facebook posts! They are drenched in Ellen White. He preaches heavily about going into hiding with the Sunday laws go into effect. I've seen people on his page talking about selling everything and going to the country right now so they will already be self sufficient when the laws go into effect. It is sad to read!
It really is like River once said...spiritual warfare. I will plant seeds and pray that God will water them with the Holy Spirit. |
Leighpinski
Registered user
Username: Leighpinski
Post Number: 159
Registered: 8-2010
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2010 - 9:57 am: | |
OH MY...I JUST realized this post was in Discussion and not Members only. That's what happens when I go away for so long!
Oh well, I guess this where God wanted it posted |
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady
Post Number: 8814
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2010 - 10:38 am: | |
Even growing up sda I was completely uninformed about those who left to follow God. The church members are not told a single thing when things like Desmond Doss, Walter Rae and other very important things happened. I only learned all this when God took me out of adventism completely.
Diana L |
Michaelmiller
Registered user
Username: Michaelmiller
Post Number: 171
Registered: 7-2010
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2010 - 10:52 am: | |
LA,
LOL! I thought you were just being more bold lately and didn't care where this was posted!
Interestingly, I have a fairly traditional SDA pastor in my Facebook friends list who hasn't said a word about any of my wall posts.
Michael |
Pnoga
Registered user
Username: Pnoga
Post Number: 428
Registered: 1-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2010 - 10:55 am: | |
LA,
LOL you are no longer a closet Sunday keeper... |
Indy4now
Registered user
Username: Indy4now
Post Number: 940
Registered: 2-2008
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2010 - 11:04 am: | |
haha! ... got my chuckle today! |
Leighpinski
Registered user
Username: Leighpinski
Post Number: 160
Registered: 8-2010
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2010 - 11:04 am: | |
Oh, I'm officially "out of the closet!"
I just feel bad that I listed his name. I would not have publicly listed his name on purpose.
Like I said, I suppose this is where God wanted it to be! |
Leighpinski
Registered user
Username: Leighpinski
Post Number: 164
Registered: 8-2010
| | Posted on Friday, December 03, 2010 - 5:12 am: | |
I got another response from him:
--------------------------------------------------
"Allow me to leave you something to chew on:
If you indulge stubbornness of heart, and through pride and self-righteousness do not confess your faults, you will be left subject to Satan's temptations. If when the Lord reveals your errors you do not repent or make confession, his providence will bring you over the ground again and again. You will be left to make mistakes of a similar character, you will continue to lack wisdom, and will call sin righteousness, and righteousness sin. The multitude of deceptions that will prevail in these last days will encircle you, and you will change leaders, and not know that you have done so. {RH, December 16, 1890 par. 19}
WIll pray for you too. "
--------------------------------------------------
Yep, that's right good old Ellen. "Bless his heart" is all I can say... |
Believer247
Registered user
Username: Believer247
Post Number: 208
Registered: 3-2009
| | Posted on Friday, December 03, 2010 - 8:25 am: | |
yep, when he can't come up with any more Bible verses to support his point, he turns to Ellen White. |
Michaelmiller
Registered user
Username: Michaelmiller
Post Number: 176
Registered: 7-2010
| | Posted on Friday, December 03, 2010 - 9:28 am: | |
Did that "chewing on" taste bitter or what? And to think... we are the ones that get accused of being bitter?
That EGW quotation is full of pride and arrogance!
Michael |
Leighpinski
Registered user
Username: Leighpinski
Post Number: 165
Registered: 8-2010
| | Posted on Friday, December 03, 2010 - 9:42 am: | |
EXACTLY Michael and 247!!
I personally think he needs to read it and apply it to HIMSELF!!!! |
Grace_alone
Registered user
Username: Grace_alone
Post Number: 1831
Registered: 6-2006
| | Posted on Friday, December 03, 2010 - 2:03 pm: | |
Leigh Ann,
What a donkey!! (I'd rather use the Biblical term, but you get the picture).
Are you going to reply to that or just drop it?
If I were you, I'd copy and paste what Believer247 posted...
Sheesh!
Leigh Anne |
Pnoga
Registered user
Username: Pnoga
Post Number: 430
Registered: 1-2007
| | Posted on Friday, December 03, 2010 - 6:16 pm: | |
What he doesn't realize he is practicing the very thing he is preaching. It's hard to see from behind that veil.
Paul |
Leighpinski
Registered user
Username: Leighpinski
Post Number: 174
Registered: 8-2010
| | Posted on Friday, December 10, 2010 - 6:25 am: | |
I dropped it. If he can't go toe to toe with me based on scripture alone, there's no point in going any further.
He's blinded by the veil! |
