Doug Batchelor: His Catholic Church Attacks

[dosdog]

In the Bible, the first Christians, the Apostles, celebrated the Lord’s day on Sunday, the first day of the week. Saturday worship was the Old Covenant, just like circumcision, etc.

Do you practice circumcision? If not, why since circumcision is found in the Bible?

Also, consider that the Old Testament itself was changed since Jesus’ arrival, i.e. Jesus changed Old Testament Scripture when he said: “You have hear it said, ‘do not committ adultery’, BUT I SAY TO YOU anyone who looks at a woman with lust in his eyes has already committed adultery.”

If you are upset about Sunday worship, you should also be upset that it is immoral to look at a woman with lust in your eyes, because originally in the Old Testament it wasn’t. Do you agree, yes or no?

***St. Paul told Timothy he had to get circumcised ***
But anyone, who will look at the facts without preconceived theory, must see that between Peter and Paul there was no difference in principles, but merely a difference as to the practical conduct to be followed under the circumstances. “Conversationis fuit vitium non praedicationis”, as Tertullian happily expresses it. That Peter’s principles were the same as those of Paul, is shown by his conduct at the time of Cornelius’s conversion, by the position he took at the council of Jerusalem, and by his manner of living prior to the arrival of the Judaizers. Paul, on the other hand, not only did not object to the observance of the Mosaic Law, as long as it did not interfere with the liberty of the Gentiles, but he conformed to its prescriptions when occasion required (1 Corinthians 9:20).

Thus he shortly after circumcised Timothy (Acts 16:1-3), and he was in the very act of observing the Mosaic ritual when he was arrested at Jerusalem (Acts 21:26 sqq.). The difference between them was that Peter, recently come from Jerusalem, thought only of not wounding the susceptibility of the zealots there, and was thus betrayed into a course of action apparently at variance with his own teaching and calculated to promote the designs the Judaizers; whereas Paul, not preoccupied with such a consideration and with more experience among the Gentiles, took a broader and truer view of the matter. He saw that Peter’s example would promote the movement to avoid close relations with the Gentiles, which was only an indirect way of forcing Jewish customs upon them.
newadvent.org/cathen/08537a.htm

 

[Kansasdad]

The whole point of the Ten Commandments (God’s Moral Law) is to show us what sin is (Romans 7:7). We don’t receive salvation by only obeying these Laws…we receive it by having faith that Christ can free us from our sin (2 Timothy 3:15), accepting him as our Saviour and loving him. Once we receive him into our hearts, the Holy Spirit produces fruits that others can see and are of benefit to all (Galatians 5:22). That love we have for him is shown by our willingness to submit to him and him alone and in doing so, obeying all of his Moral Law (John 14:15). Unless we do that, our worship for him is in vain (Mark 7:7-8).

God bless.

Ok and that just makes your statement that “the Catholic Church changed the 10 commandments even more silly”.

If you worship an Idol is that not the same thing as putting a god above God. So why say the same thing twice. Is coveting a mans possession the same thing as lusting after his wife? Seems pretty obvious you would want to distinguish the two. Or do you consider a mans wife his possession?

It is silly quotes like that which make a fruitful discussion difficult.

God Bless,
K.D.

 

[dosdog]

Ok and that just makes your statement that “the Catholic Church changed the 10 commandments even more silly”.

If you worship an Idol is that not the same thing as putting a god above God. So why say the same thing twice. Is coveting a mans possession the same thing as lusting after his wife? Seems pretty obvious you would want to distinguish the two. Or do you consider a mans wife his possession?

It is silly quotes like that which make a fruitful discussion difficult.

God Bless,
K.D.

If we were to number every “command” in those sections of the Bible we would have about 17 commandments or more. So different efforts have been made to number and group them over the centuries.

There is no numerical division of the Commandments in the Books of Moses, but the injunctions are distinctly tenfold, and are found almost identical in both sources. The order, too, is the same except for the final prohibitions pronounced against concupiscence, that of Deuteronomy being adopted in preference to Exodus. A confusion, however, exists in the numbering, which is due to a difference of opinion concerning the initial precept on Divine worship.

The system of numeration found in Catholic Bibles, based on the Hebrew text, was made by St. Augustine (fifth century) in his book of “Questions of Exodus” (“Quæstionum in Heptateuchum libri VII”, Bk. II, Question lxxi), and was adopted by the Council of Trent. It is followed also by the German Lutherans, except those of the school of Bucer. This arrangement makes the First Commandment relate to false worship and to the worship of false gods as to a single subject and a single class of sins to be guarded against – the reference to idols being regarded as mere application of the precept to adore but one God and the prohibition as directed against the particular offense of idolatry alone. According to this manner of reckoning, the injunction forbidding the use of the Lord’s Name in vain comes second in order; and the decimal number is safeguarded by making a division of the final precept on concupiscence–the Ninth pointing to sins of the flesh and the Tenth to desires for unlawful possession of goods.

Another division has been adopted by the English and Helvetian Protestant churches on the authority of Philo Judæus, Josephus, Origen, and others, whereby two Commandments are made to cover the matter of worship, and thus the numbering of the rest is advanced one higher; and the Tenth embraces both the Ninth and Tenth of the Catholic division. It seems, however, as logical to separate at the end as to group at the beginning, for while one single object is aimed at under worship, two specifically different sins are forbidden under covetousness; if adultery and theft belong to two distinct species of moral wrong, the same must be said of the desire to commit these evils.

newadvent.org/cathen/04153a.htm

 

[BibleTruth]

BibleTruth;3914592:

when is the last time you did this?

Prophecy Of Ezechiel
Chapter 46
Other ordinances for the prince and for the sacrifices.

1 Thus saith the Lord God: The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east, shall be shut the six days, on which work is done; but on the sabbath day it shall be opened, yea and on the day of the new moon it shall be opened. 2 And the prince shall enter by the way of the porch of the gate from without, and he shall stand at the threshold of the gate: and the priests shall offer his holocaust, and his peace offerings: and he shall adore upon the threshold of the gate, and shall go out: but the gate shall not be shut till the evening. 3 And the people of the land shall adore at the door of that gate before the Lord on the sabbaths, and on the new moons. 4 And the holocaust that the prince shall offer to the Lord on the sabbath day, shall be six lambs without blemish, and a ram without blemish. 5 And the sacrifice of an ephi for a ram: but for the lambs what sacrifice his hand shall allow: and a hin of oil for every ephi.

6 And on the day of the new moon a calf of the herd without blemish: and the six lambs, and the rams shall be without blemish. 7 And he shall offer in sacrifice an ephi for a calf, an ephi also for a ram: but for the lambs, as his hand shall find: and a hin of oil for every ephi. 8 And when the prince is to go in, let him go in by the way of the porch of the gate, and let him go out the same way. 9 But when the people of the land shall go in before the Lord in the solemn feasts, he that goeth in by the north gate to adore, shall go out by the way of the south gate: and he that; goeth in by the way of the south gate, shall go out by the way of the north gate: he shall not return by the way of the gate whereby he came in, but shall go out at that over against it. 10 And the prince in the midst of them, shall go in when they go in, and go out when they go out

You do realize that the laws you’re referencing are Mosaic Laws (written on paper and placed outside of the Ark of the Covenant), that were done away with by the blood of Christ? There is a differences in those laws vs. God’s eternal Moral Law (which was written in stone and placed inside the Ark of the Covenant).

Again, we’re warned to not try and sidestep what God has made clear, in support of choosing not to obey him.

 

[MrS]

Interestingly enough, I also read the Bible but I do not agree with your personal interpretation of the Bible. You may be able to use the Bible to defend your beliefs but so can I. So, how do we solve this problem of difference in interpretation according to the Bible?

ask Ellen White??

 

[BibleTruth]

If we were to number every “command” in those sections of the Bible we would have about 17 commandments or more. So different efforts have been made to number and group them over the centuries.

There is no numerical division of the Commandments in the Books of Moses, but the injunctions are distinctly tenfold, and are found almost identical in both sources. The order, too, is the same except for the final prohibitions pronounced against concupiscence, that of Deuteronomy being adopted in preference to Exodus. A confusion, however, exists in the numbering, which is due to a difference of opinion concerning the initial precept on Divine worship.

The system of numeration found in Catholic Bibles, based on the Hebrew text, was made by St. Augustine (fifth century) in his book of “Questions of Exodus” (“Quæstionum in Heptateuchum libri VII”, Bk. II, Question lxxi), and was adopted by the Council of Trent. It is followed also by the German Lutherans, except those of the school of Bucer. This arrangement makes the First Commandment relate to false worship and to the worship of false gods as to a single subject and a single class of sins to be guarded against – the reference to idols being regarded as mere application of the precept to adore but one God and the prohibition as directed against the particular offense of idolatry alone. According to this manner of reckoning, the injunction forbidding the use of the Lord’s Name in vain comes second in order; and the decimal number is safeguarded by making a division of the final precept on concupiscence–the Ninth pointing to sins of the flesh and the Tenth to desires for unlawful possession of goods.

Another division has been adopted by the English and Helvetian Protestant churches on the authority of Philo Judæus, Josephus, Origen, and others, whereby two Commandments are made to cover the matter of worship, and thus the numbering of the rest is advanced one higher; and the Tenth embraces both the Ninth and Tenth of the Catholic division. It seems, however, as logical to separate at the end as to group at the beginning, for while one single object is aimed at under worship, two specifically different sins are forbidden under covetousness; if adultery and theft belong to two distinct species of moral wrong, the same must be said of the desire to commit these evils.

newadvent.org/cathen/04153a.htm

Deuteronomy 4:13: And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.

 

[dosdog]

dosdog;3914627:

You do realize that the laws you’re referencing are Mosaic Laws (written on paper and placed outside of the Ark of the Covenant), that were done away with by the blood of Christ? There is a differences in those laws vs. God’s eternal Moral Law (which was written in stone and placed inside the Ark of the Covenant).

Again, we’re warned to not try and sidestep what God has made clear, in support of choosing not to obey him.

Matthew 5 18 For amen I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one tittle shall not pass of the law, till all be fulfilled.

 

[BibleTruth]

Ok and that just makes your statement that “the Catholic Church changed the 10 commandments even more silly”.

If you worship an Idol is that not the same thing as putting a god above God. So why say the same thing twice. Is coveting a mans possession the same thing as lusting after his wife? Seems pretty obvious you would want to distinguish the two. Or do you consider a mans wife his possession?

It is silly quotes like that which make a fruitful discussion difficult.

God Bless,
K.D.

Deuteronomy 4:13: And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.

 

[MrS]

That name was given and taken on by men…not God.

Any church of God should use Scripture to prove any ecclesiastical point they dare to make and will teach the keeping His commandments. Just ask yourself, does your church fit that criteria?

Not true. It was God, Jesus the Christ, who first used the word Church, a word that never appears in the OT… for then the assembly place was a temple.

It was God who declared He would built it… it would be His work, not the work of Ellen White or Smith, or Russell. or whomever.

Only the group who belonged to this entity, through their baptism first, would be His Church.

If you have a valid trinitarian baptism, that is only the first step… like being born into a family. But it is the family who will feed and cloth you, and protect you from harm… unless you choose to go live in the back yard.

You have made your choice. In spite of God’s desire that we all be one, you have chosen to be other than the one.

Prayers for you always.

.

 

[dosdog]

The Oral Law and Our Own Opinions

Moses came down from the mountain, and began teaching the Torah to the Children of Israel. And whenever the Children of Israel came to ask a question, Moses was able to supply the answer.

Yet we find that despite having studied the Torah directly from Hashem, there were at least three points of information that Moses did not know.

So how did Moses find out what should be done in each of these cases? Did they simply decide according to what made sense to them? No, Moses asked Hashem.In each of those three cases, the Torah makes it clear that they asked Hashem, and that Hashem very clearly told them the Law.

It is a foundation of our faith to believe that God gave Moses an oral explanation of the Torah along with the written text. This oral tradition is now essentially preserved in the Talmud and Midrashim. Just as we depend on tradition for the accepted text, vocalization, and translation of the Torah, so must we depend on tradition for its interpretation. The Written Torah cannot be understood without the oral tradition. Hence, if anything, the Oral Torah is the more important of the two. Since the Written Torah appears largely defective unless supplemented by the oral tradition, a denial of the Oral Torah necessarily leads to the denial of the divine origin of the written text as well…

2 Thess. 2:15 - Paul clearly commands us in this verse to obey oral apostolic tradition. He says stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, either by word of mouth or letter. This verse proves that for apostolic authority, oral and written communications are on par with each other. Protestants must find a verse that voids this commandment to obey oral tradition elsewhere in the Bible, or they are not abiding by the teachings of Scripture.

2 Thess. 2:15 - in fact, it was this apostolic tradition that allowed the Church to select the Bible canon (apostolicity was determined from tradition). Since all the apostles were deceased at the time the canon was decided, the Church had to rely on the apostolic tradition of their successors. Hence, the Bible is an apostolic tradition of the Catholic Church. This also proves that oral tradition did not cease with the death of the last apostle. Other examples of apostolic tradition include the teachings on the Blessed Trinity, the hypostatic union (Jesus had a divine and human nature in one person), the filioque (that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son), the assumption of Mary, and knowing that the Gospel of Matthew was written by Matthew.
scripturecatholic.com/oral_tradition.html
aish.com/literacy/concepts/The_Oral_Tradition.asp

 

[BibleTruth]

BibleTruth;3914750:

Matthew 5 18 For amen I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one tittle shall not pass of the law, till all be fulfilled.

Old Testament laws (Mosaic Laws) looked forward to Christ. The blood sacrifices represented the blood of Christ so save us from our sins. His sacrifice did away with the need for us to continue doing them but doesn’t excuse of from breaking the Moral Law of God (which is what you’re referring to).

In fact, he came to magnify them. If you continue reading in Matthew 5, you’ll see in verse 19: Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 5:18-19, in the New Living Translation reads: I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until its purpose is achieved. So if you ignore the least commandment and teach others to do the same, you will be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. But anyone who obeys God’s laws and teaches them will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.

Think about it…how do we know it’s not good to lie, steal or murder? It’s because of the moral code we have imprinted on our hearts by God Himself (Hebrews 8). If you don’t think any of those things are acceptable, why would you think it’s right to break any of those other Ten Commandment laws? Let’s be reasonable here.

 

[dosdog]

dosdog;3914779:

Old Testament laws (Mosaic Laws) looked forward to Christ. The blood sacrifices represented the blood of Christ so save us from our sins. His sacrifice did away with the need for us to continue doing them but doesn’t excuse of from breaking the Moral Law of God (which is what you’re referring to).

In fact, he came to magnify them. If you continue reading in Matthew 5, you’ll see in verse 19: Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 5:18-19, in the New Living Translation reads: I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until its purpose is achieved. So if you ignore the least commandment and teach others to do the same, you will be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. But anyone who obeys God’s laws and teaches them will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.

Think about it…how do we know it’s not good to lie, steal or murder? It’s because of the moral code we have imprinted on our hearts by God Himself (Hebrews 8). If you don’t think any of those things are acceptable, why would you think it’s right to break any of those other Ten Commandment laws? Let’s be reasonable here.

John 20 23 Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.

The Sacrament of Penance
newadvent.org/cathen/11618c.htm

 

[BibleTruth]

Not true. It was God, Jesus the Christ, who first used the word Church, a word that never appears in the OT… for then the assembly place was a temple.

It was God who declared He would built it… it would be His work, not the work of Ellen White or Smith, or Russell. or whomever.

Only the group who belonged to this entity, through their baptism first, would be His Church.

If you have a valid trinitarian baptism, that is only the first step… like being born into a family. But it is the family who will feed and cloth you, and protect you from harm… unless you choose to go live in the back yard.

You have made your choice. In spite of God’s desire that we all be one, you have chosen to be other than the one.

Prayers for you always.

.

I’ve made a choice to follow the examples of Jesus Christ and not the false teachings of misguided men. I don’t have to make excuses for my beliefs or try to come up with explanations as to why I don’t obey God’s Moral Law. I love God and have chosen to keep his commandments and to serve him by loving and serving others.

When the time comes, there will be a complete unification of Christ’s true followers. And for many, there will be a sad realization that they never knew Christ at all, even after being exposed to the truth.

Matthew 7:21-23 (NLT): “Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter. On judgment day many will say to me, ‘Lord! Lord! We prophesied in your name and cast out demons in your name and performed many miracles in your name.’ But I will reply, ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God’s laws.’

I think my time in this forum has come to an end for now. I will continue to pray for you all and if I feel inspired to return, I will do so. But for now, I pray God blesses and keeps you all until the day of Jesus’ return to take us all home.

 

[dosdog]

I’ve made a choice to follow the examples of Jesus Christ and not the false teachings of misguided men. .

Protestants are so often blind to the pedigree of their own ideas. Studying Luther and Calvin (and Zwingli and Bucer and Bullinger and the early Anglicans, and the Anabaptists) helps all of us to better understand why and how Protestantism got to where it is today. Many Protestants like to play the game that they have no tradition at all, and that they are simply returning to the Bible, etc., etc. I could write for days about the resulting absurdities of this tunnel vision outlook

Protestants don’t care about personalities, we care about the Word of God.

Our authority doesn’t come from a human personality but from the Word of God.
That’s impossible to do (in a practical sense). The book doesn’t interpret itself (though Protestants claim that it does). Furthermore, this “Bible vs. authoritative human beings in the Church” mentality is not the view of the Bible itself, which refers to Church authority and a binding tradition. So (ironically) to claim to be following simply the “Bible Alone” is to land right back into a Catholic notion of ecclesiology and authority. It’s inescapable

Due to the Protestant experience of effectual calling and belief in the Word of God as sole authority This is a distortion of the classic Protestant understanding of sola Scriptura (and is more accurately described as SOLO Scriptura).

A Biblical Defense of Catholicism
More Biblical Evidence for Catholicism
The Catholic Verses: 95 Bible Passages That Confound Protestants
socrates58.blogspot.com/2004/09/importance-of-studying-luther.html

 

[ChristianRoots]

---

St. Paul told Timothy he had to get circumcised ***

Are you implying that circumcision is necessary for salvation?

But anyone, who will look at the facts without preconceived theory,must see that between Peter and Paul there was no difference in principles, but merely a difference as to the practical conduct to be followed under the circumstances.

 

[dosdog]

Are you implying that circumcision is necessary for salvation?

For Timothy is was - Do not eat the apple was not a suggestion
?

 

[MarysRoses]

dosdog;3914779:

Old Testament laws (Mosaic Laws) looked forward to Christ. The blood sacrifices represented the blood of Christ so save us from our sins. His sacrifice did away with the need for us to continue doing them but doesn’t excuse of from breaking the Moral Law of God (which is what you’re referring to).

In fact, he came to magnify them. If you continue reading in Matthew 5, you’ll see in verse 19: Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 5:18-19, in the New Living Translation reads: I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until its purpose is achieved. So if you ignore the least commandment and teach others to do the same, you will be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. But anyone who obeys God’s laws and teaches them will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.

Think about it…how do we know it’s not good to lie, steal or murder? It’s because of the moral code we have imprinted on our hearts by God Himself (Hebrews 8). If you don’t think any of those things are acceptable, why would you think it’s right to break any of those other Ten Commandment laws? Let’s be reasonable here.

Yes, let’s be reasonable. Adventists are NOT consistent in there insistence that others interpret scripture as they do. You have just established the point that the 10 commandments was written on stone, therefore (according to you) it they take precedence over laws written on paper.

Some inconsistencies I see in the Adventist position…

Dietary laws were certainly not included in the 10 commandments, yet Adventists refuse to eat ‘unclean’ foods.
Yet… while avoiding pork and shellfish they ignore the verses that forbid the mixing of meat and milk, or the mixing of different fibers in clothing. At the same time, Adventists do not observe circumcision. hm…

The say that Christians must “keep” the sabbath…
Yet… Adventists have no consistent interpretation of what ‘keeping the sabbath’ means. Some will say going to a park is wrong, while others promote “nature walks”. Some will refuse to swim, while others find saturday afternoon after church the perfect time for a family outing to the swimming pool. Some say not to buy or sell, yet many on the west coast will go out to eat after church or pick up something from the grocery store, because eating is a ‘necessary’ activity. Adventists where I live wouldn’t dream of being seen in a restaurant on Saturday. Adventists living in the western hemisphere are fairly consistent about observing sabbath sundown friday to sundown saturday… Yet there are many different opinions on exactly when its sabbath in the North, where in summer and winter sunsets and sunrises are notoriously inconvenient. Adventists in the South Pacific are similarly conflicted. Because of the dateline, Adventists in Hawaii are off to church on saturday, while at the same time a few hundred miles to the south, on the same line of longitude in Kiribati, Sunday keeping Christians are off to church and the Adventists are having a workday. Some Adventist pastors in the South Pacific in the past, have worshiped on Sunday… but then, there’s nothing to distinguish them from the sunday keepers, so that solution was dropped…

To get back to the point… the ONLY thing consistent among Adventists as far as sabbath keeping, is they all agree one should go to church to worship on that day. Funny thing is, if you read the commandment, assembling for worship is NOT in there… not at all.

And the major point for me, is all the other commandments.
Adventists SERIOUSLY need to clean their house before pointing fingers. You never see Adventists single out the commandment against murder for much attention. They’d really rather not have a deep discussion on that one. Adventists are officially pro-choice on the matter of Abortion:

“Abortion is one of the tragic dilemmas of human fallenness. The Church should offer gracious support to those who personally face the decision concerning an abortion. **Attitudes of condemnation are inappropriate **in those who have accepted the gospel.”

“Women, at times however, may face exceptional circumstances that present serious moral or medical dilemmas, such as significant threats to the pregnant woman’s life, serious jeopardy to her health, severe congenital defects carefully diagnosed in the fetus, and pregnancy resulting from rape or incest. **The final decision whether to terminate the pregnancy or not should be made by the pregnant woman **after appropriate consultation.”

The full statement is carefully worded, but it is still a pro choice statement. One shouldn’t condemn those who decide on abortion, and the final choice is up to the pregnant woman. Thats pro choice.

Link to the official SDA Website:

adventist.org/beliefs/guidelines/main_guide1.html

Adventists are recognized by groups critical to the Pro Life movement for their position…

“An exception among conservative Christian groups is the Seventh Day Adventist Church. They are pro-choice to the extent that they believe that ’ The final decision whether to terminate the pregnancy or not should be made by the pregnant woman…’ They recognize that abortion can be a legitimate option for some women…”
religioustolerance.org/abo_hist1.htm

Many Adventist hospitals in the US have far above the average number of abortions, as in many markets they are the only ones who will permit them.

Adventists love to throw out accusations we do not honor God’s law. None of us are perfect, but their accusations have no merit.

Adventists also like to ignore certain scriptures:

They are quick to judge over the sabbath and ignore:

Colossians 2:16
Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

Sabbath is a SHADOW. Adventists will say this is only the ‘ceremonial’ sabbaths, again, a distinction the OT never makes.

Another verse they ignore, is the last phrase of their favorite:

Matthew 5:18
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Catch that last phrase again… there is a condition on nothing passing from the law… till all be fulfilled

Christ fulfilled all of the law. The law of death is gone and replaced with the New Covenant.

Galatians 5:14
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

1 John 4:16
And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.

It is not wrong to go to Church on Saturday instead of Sunday… thats preference. It is wrong to judge others over their preferences. There is a moral principle involved in setting aside regular time for rest and worship. There is no moral dictate that it must be Saturday. Doesn’t even make sense on a round planet where sometimes its hard to figure out what constitutes “saturday”. So tell me, when should Adventists observe sabbath on the international space station?

Jesus’s commandments are the law of Love, Love God and Love your neighbor.

Adventists seem to make the day you attend church MORE important than whether or not babies are being murdered in their hospitals. You know, Adventists teach that the day we worship on will become the test at the end of time that will determine our loyalty to God, and our salvation will rest on that choice. Seems to me a baby’s life is more important than a day of worship…

Just some thoughts for our new SDA poster

MarysRoses

 

[dosdog]

BibleTruth;3914841:

Yes, let’s be reasonable. Adventists are NOT consistent

Barrow, Alaska
The sun does not rise between the end of November and the end of January.
fairbanks-alaska.com/barrow.htm

 

[Kansasdad]

dosdog;3914627:

You do realize that the laws you’re referencing are Mosaic Laws (written on paper and placed outside of the Ark of the Covenant), that were done away with by the blood of Christ? There is a differences in those laws vs. God’s eternal Moral Law (which was written in stone and placed inside the Ark of the Covenant).

Again, we’re warned to not try and sidestep what God has made clear, in support of choosing not to obey him.

Some how I get the impression you are not really reading the post. These were in direct reference to the ten commandments of which you claim the Catholic Church changed. Which as I pointed out is a silly comment.

 

[wisdomseeker]

No need to apologize, but I do think you missed the whole point of what I wrote. My worship goes to God alone through Jesus Christ.

I don’t accept, as you wrote, “the Mother of our Lord”…assuming you’re talking about Mary…as any holy deity because there’s nothing in the Bible that says she is. Mary, the virgin mother of Jesus, is dead and in her grave awaiting the resurrection like most others.

I haven’t been programmed…I seek an understanding of God’s word freely because it provides me all the direction I need to live a godly life. Before judging me like that, you should understand that as it says in Matthew 7:2, the standard that you judge others is the same standard that you’ll be judged.

When judgment day comes, who will you be able to say you served…God or the programming of anyone else (including his adversary)?

I am not going to refute every misunderstanding of yours. that is for you to find out for yourself.

Judging you? arent you judging catholics when you continuously say that we are all wrong… that the CC did this and that wrong. please. nonsense.

another thing you need to learn. the word judgement. that can be applied in different circunstances and different ways.