Doug Batchelor: His Catholic Church Attacks

  • Thread starter Thread starter James1234
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Since DJ has bowed out of this discussion, can someone tell me how if there was Salvation in the Sabbath God saw a need to send us Jeusus for our salvation?

Also, if that is a basic misconception (that our salvation is not found in the Sabbath), whose misconception is it? God’s? Could he have sent his Son to die on the cross for nothing? Because if Jesus is our salvation and we can only go unto the Father through Jesus and that was contained in the Old Covenant, why on earth did God send Jesus to die for our salvation???

Someone is wrong and I would like to know if it’s me.

It appears that I’m too ignorant to have a conversaiton with since I don’t even have the intelligence to know when I’m being insulted.

No, I’ve never written a book or a thesis on theology. And no, I don’t have pefect knowledge of the Bible. But I can and do read, ALOT. I do make mistakes and I don’t always agree. If I could have a conversation on this thread with someone who doesn’t point out mistakes or a difference of opinion as a lie or just plain stupidity, that would be great.

And when I ask for assistance it would be good to get it without it being attached to an insult. What a concept.

HC
 
Gabriel_of_12 said:
Gabriel of 12;
The reason you haven’t heard a Catholic pray for the intercession of Moses, Elijah and Enoch along with all the others mentioned in the bible and Saints after the Apostles, is because you have not attended Mass for a complete 3 year cycle or else you would have heard these prayers. This says alot about your misunderstanding of Catholic belief’s.

What I shared with you is what Catholics practice and believe, but for some unknown reason here, you refuse to believe testimony from a practicing Catholic who has informed you, that some one has decieved you about Apostolic Tradition which only the Catholic church can teach because she was the only Christian society in existance since the Apostles. Yet some one has lied to you, and convinced you that Catholics follow mens traditions instead of God? this is a lie from the devil himself. Give me one mans tradition that the Catholic church follows instead of God?, and I will help you see some light from your darkness.

Thus far, you have only made a clarion cry to a false pretense of the Catholic faith, without any historical or factual evidence, only what you have been trained to do as Saul of Tarsus did from a blind side of faith. Without any reason other than the deceptions you have been given and the lack of truthful gainful knowledge of the Catholic church Jesus built upon Peter, you entertain yourself with by persecution of Catholic belief’s believing you are speaking a truth, when in reality you appear as a noisy gong that makes no sense to us practicing Catholics and those learned non catholics and protestants alike, would disagree with your false assumptions of Mary and thus far you have not provided any proof of a man made tradition followed by Catholics instead of God? only a out of time gong.

To date, you have accused the Catholic church of following mans traditoins instead of God? That Catholics worship Mary? You have expressed you dont care about feelings, I feel sorry for you, because your reasoning for attacking the Catholic church has no foundation, only deception, misunderstandings, and out right refusal of belief. Now tell me is this the way to inform one who is searching for the Truth by false accusations of anothers belief?, and is this the way to teach the Truth by attacking the Catholic church who has given you the bible you have today, then think you can use the Catholic church’s canonized bible books to conflict with what Jesus commissioned the Catholic church to teach, and Jesus did not wright any thing down, because He has been with his Catholic church since Jesus himself founded and built his Catholic church.

If you care to share your SDA faith here, you are most welcome, but attacking the Catholic church has no purpose but to hit your own foot against a stone (Rock). You might be better informing what you think Catholics believe or what you have been told Catholics believe, and then Let Catholics explain what we truly beleive. But if you are going to attack my Catholic faith because I a practicing Catholic revealed to you that I dont worship Mary, and dont follow mans traditions instead of God, and you dont believe me? Then I feel sorry for you, and will add your name to my rosary prayer and ask the living blessed Virgin Mary to Join me in prayer in heaven and pray to “Abba” Father to help us grow in understanding of what Jesus the Lord our Savior and King has revealed to his Church he himself built “On Earth As It Is In Heaven”.

Peace be with you:)
Click to expand...
My Dear Gabriel,

You are saying nothing only your personal opinion. I wrote some posts with some Scripture verses,read them please and when you do then we can discuss.I want answers,Scriptural of course. Anything you say I want you to give me Bible verses that support the things you and your church teach and preach. Faith is not about the feelings my friend. Jesus fought Satan through the WORD not traditions of humans,I am ready to hear what am I saying wrong,if you accuse me of being false prove me.I gave you my points through the Bible verses… I got to go to work now,I will write later more.

Bye
 
It appears that I’m too ignorant to have a conversaiton with since I don’t even have the intelligence to know when I’m being insulted.
Click to expand...
No, you assumed that you were being insulted when you weren’t.
No, I’ve never written a book or a thesis on theology.
Click to expand...
Who said that you had to?
And when I ask for assistance it would be good to get it without it being attached to an insult. What a concept.
Click to expand...
There was no insult–you think that way, not me. I told you explicitly: “seen this on a lot of threads and forums.” Since you weren’t there it obviously wasn’t an insult that you had done those things.

If you can’t talk about me, or to me without lying, then don’t talk period.
 
One more thing to add.
The reason you haven’t heard a Catholic pray for the intercession of Moses, Elijah and Enoch along with all the others mentioned in the bible and Saints after the Apostles, is because you have not attended Mass for a complete 3 year cycle or else you would have heard these prayers. This says alot about your misunderstanding of Catholic belief’s.
Click to expand...
I am sorry for my “sin of ignorance” but who would know that this is needed for I never ever read in the Bible for such a practice. Intercession of prophets is only done in Catholic church. None of the apostles practiced anything as such. If I am wrong I wish you would enlighten me with Biblical verse where it is clear that any of the apostles used someone else for the intercession besides Jesus Christ. But have it your way in your life and I feel sorry for you doing it . I will glorify my Lord Jesus Christ,give Him the place in my life as He deserves, I will come directly to Him in my prayers ,who can be greater than Him. He is my Savior ,He gave His life for my sins ,He is my King my all.I do not need anyone besides Him to intercede for me. Look in Bible and let me know if I am telling something wrong.I can prove my point but I do not see you proving yours.

If you want something more to discuss I would recommend to all watch Walter Veith,he used to be a Catholic…I recommend these videos on Youtube and if you do watch do not comment on it if you did not see it all and check the things for yourself. All the things we discuss here are in his many videos.
Seventh day Adventist or Papacy Part 1 of 5
Papacy Admitt SDA is Truth

There are many others but if you are willing and not scared to watch you can start with these.🙂
 
happilycatholic said:
1. WAS THE PLAN OF SALVATION MADE AFTER THE FALL?
EGW: YES “The kingdom of grace was instituted immediately after the fall of man, when a plan was devised for the redemption of the guilty race” (Great Controversy, p. 347).
BIBLE: NO “For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you
were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, but with the
precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake” (1 Peter 1:18-20).
BIBLE: NO “For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in
his sight” (Ephesians 1:4).

Here D&D quote Ellen White saying that the “kingdom of grace” was instituted and the plan was “devised” immediately after the fall. What they failed to quote was Ellen White’s statements that the plan had actually existed long before that (see Desire of Ages, p. 22, third paragraph in particular): “The plan for our redemption was not an afterthought, a plan formulated after the fall of Adam…” And this statement in the same book, p. 147: “…every act of Christ’s life on earth was in fulfillment of the plan that had existed from the days of eternity.” There are numerous statements like this in her writings. To get a balanced view of what Ellen White really said about this issue (and in its proper context) we recommend the chapter entitled “The Plan of Redemption” in the book Patriarchs and Prophets.

Oh my gosh! I went to YOUR recommended site and it explicitly shows EGW at the hight of inconsistency IF you interpret it the way the site recommends she intended!

**However, I would interpret it this way: Actually what she said was: **after the fall of man, when a plan was devised for the redemption of the guilty race" That’s taken from EGW on YOUR site. Meaning: When was the plan devised? AFTER the fall of man. Nowhere in this does she remotely incinuate that she meant anything but after the fall of man.

**It is impossible to read anything else into this. Except for if you consider the entirely separate statement in Desire of Ages where she ABSOLUTELY CONTRIDICTS HERSELF. **

And herein lies my personal problem with EGW. How can one call her a prophet? Where is she getting this from? It’s definitely NOT a devine source.
Click to expand...
Hi Happily Catholic

The kingdom of grace was instituted immediately after the fall of man, when a plan was devised for the redemption of the guilty race. It then existed in the purpose and by the promise of God; and through faith, men could become its subjects. Yet it was not actually established until the death of

Page 348
Christ. Even after entering upon His earthly mission, the Saviour, wearied with the stubbornness and ingratitude of men, might have drawn back from the sacrifice of Calvary. In Gethsemane the cup of woe trembled in His hand. He might even then have wiped the blood-sweat from His brow and have left the guilty race to perish in their iniquity. Had He done this, there could have been no redemption for fallen men. But when the Saviour yielded up His life, and with His expiring breath cried out, “It is finished,” then the fulfillment of the plan of redemption was assured. The promise of salvation made to the sinful pair in Eden was ratified. The kingdom of grace, which had before existed by the promise of God, was then established.

Here is the quote you use along with the rest of the paragraph. As you can see Ellen White says that the kingdom of grace was instituted immediatly after the fall. Ask yourself this, could it have been any other way? Could God’s plan of salvation have been instituted before man fell? The answer is obviously no. God instituted His plan of salvation in Gen.3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Now, does this contradict either herself in Desire of Ages or the bible in 1 Peter 1:18-20 and Ephesians 1:4. Well, if you look at the last line of the quote from GC, which you for some reason left out, she explains that the kingdom of grace existed before the fall, but was implemented after man sinned. This is completely consistant with the rest of her writings and also with the bible.
 
djconklin said:
No, you assumed that you were being insulted when you weren’t.

Who said that you had to?

There was no insult–you think that way, not me. I told you explicitly: “seen this on a lot of threads and forums.” Since you weren’t there it obviously wasn’t an insult that you had done those things.

If you can’t talk about me, or to me without lying, then don’t talk period.
Click to expand...
DJ,

Peace Be With You.
 
Richard_Kastner said:
Hi Happily Catholic

The kingdom of grace was instituted immediately after the fall of man, when a plan was devised for the redemption of the guilty race. It then existed in the purpose and by the promise of God; and through faith, men could become its subjects. Yet it was not actually established until the death of

Page 348
Christ. Even after entering upon His earthly mission, the Saviour, wearied with the stubbornness and ingratitude of men, might have drawn back from the sacrifice of Calvary. In Gethsemane the cup of woe trembled in His hand. He might even then have wiped the blood-sweat from His brow and have left the guilty race to perish in their iniquity. Had He done this, there could have been no redemption for fallen men. But when the Saviour yielded up His life, and with His expiring breath cried out, “It is finished,” then the fulfillment of the plan of redemption was assured. The promise of salvation made to the sinful pair in Eden was ratified. The kingdom of grace, which had before existed by the promise of God, was then established.

Here is the quote you use along with the rest of the paragraph. As you can see Ellen White says that the kingdom of grace was instituted immediatly after the fall. Ask yourself this, could it have been any other way? Could God’s plan of salvation have been instituted before man fell? The answer is obviously no. God instituted His plan of salvation in Gen.3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Now, does this contradict either herself in Desire of Ages or the bible in 1 Peter 1:18-20 and Ephesians 1:4. Well, if you look at the last line of the quote from GC, which you for some reason left out, she explains that the kingdom of grace existed before the fall, but was implemented after man sinned. This is completely consistant with the rest of her writings and also with the bible.
Click to expand...
Hi Richard:

I’m pretty much spent on this one so forgive me if I don’t adequately respond. I guess it is a matter of opinion, but to me it appears inconsistant even in your explaination. The last line you bold contridicts the quote in blue from the site DJ gave me. 🤷 But I didn’t leave that out, I took that from the site that DJ gave me the link to. That was their quote not mine.

But it really doesn’t matter one way or another. I’ve spent most of my time trying to defend my faith and myself from insults from people who then turn around and try to say they didn’t insult me. And unfortunately, I’ve done my share of insulting, but at least I apologized when asked to. It’s Lent and I try 😊.

But you have been very charitable and I appreciate that. Happy Sabbath to you! (although a little late from where I’m at).

Peace Be With You.

HC
 
The last line you bold contridicts the quote in blue from the site DJ gave me.
Click to expand...
No. That site explicitly says:

“… Ellen White’s statements that the plan had actually existed long before that (see Desire of Ages, p. 22, third paragraph in particular): “The plan for our redemption was not an afterthought, a plan formulated after the fall of Adam…” And this statement in the same book, p. 147: “…every act of Christ’s life on earth was in fulfillment of the plan that had existed from the days of eternity.” There are numerous statements like this in her writings. To get a balanced view of what Ellen White really said about this issue (and in its proper context) we recommend the chapter entitled “The Plan of Redemption” in the book Patriarchs and Prophets.”

Click on the chapter title and it will take you to the chapter–8 pages inclusive.
 
Okay, the subject matter here which is the existance of the kingdom of grace and whether it existed at creation or if the kingdom of grace was instituted immediately after the fall of man when (at that time) a plan was devised for our redemption.

My problem with EGW is not whether the former or the latter is true. My problem with her is that she appears to contridict not only the Bible, but herself; even in the same paragraph of the same book. In other words, she says the kingdom of grace was instituted immediately after the fall AND that it had existed “before”. (before what we don’t really have here). And actually in this sentence she appears to be saying that the kingdom of grace and the redemption of man came into play at two different times.

Here are the two statements in question:

EGW: YES “The kingdom of grace was instituted immediately after the fall of man, when a plan was devised for the redemption of the guilty race” (Great Controversy, p. 347).

The kingdom of grace, which had before existed by the promise of God, was then established.

You gave me the site. You gave me the quotes. Now prove to me how these two quotes do not contridict themselves.

My problem is I don’t have the books handy right now but will later. If someone could put this altogether for me in a way that explains that she doesn’t contridict herself, that would be great.

HC
 
happilycatholic said:
Since DJ has bowed out of this discussion, can someone tell me how if there was Salvation in the Sabbath God saw a need to send us Jeusus for our salvation?

Also, if that is a basic misconception (that our salvation is not found in the Sabbath), whose misconception is it? God’s? Could he have sent his Son to die on the cross for nothing? Because if Jesus is our salvation and we can only go unto the Father through Jesus and that was contained in the Old Covenant, why on earth did God send Jesus to die for our salvation???

Someone is wrong and I would like to know if it’s me.

It appears that I’m too ignorant to have a conversaiton with since I don’t even have the intelligence to know when I’m being insulted.

No, I’ve never written a book or a thesis on theology. And no, I don’t have pefect knowledge of the Bible. But I can and do read, ALOT. I do make mistakes and I don’t always agree. If I could have a conversation on this thread with someone who doesn’t point out mistakes or a difference of opinion as a lie or just plain stupidity, that would be great.

And when I ask for assistance it would be good to get it without it being attached to an insult. What a concept.

HC
Click to expand...
Jesus kept the Sabbath.

Salvation come by grace through faith. With that said, however, we will all be judged according to what we’ve done with that faith.
 
happilycatholic said:
Here are the two statements in question:

EGW: YES “The kingdom of grace was instituted immediately after the fall of man, when a plan was **devised **for the redemption of the guilty race” (Great Controversy, p. 347).

The kingdom of grace, which had before existed by the promise of God, was then established.

You gave me the site. You gave me the quotes. Now prove to me how these two quotes do not contridict themselves.

My problem is I don’t have the books handy right now but will later. If someone could put this altogether for me in a way that explains that she doesn’t contridict herself, that would be great.

HC
Click to expand...
I thought that I had been clear, but mabe not. Perhaps the misunderstanding lies in the word devised. Here is the dictionarydefinition.

de⋅vise   /dɪˈvaɪz/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [di-vahyz] Show IPA verb, -vised, -vis⋅ing, noun
–verb (used with object) 1. to contrive, plan, or elaborate; invent from existing principles or ideas: to devise a method.

So what I hear her saying here is that God’s plan of salvation was devised, instituted, established after the fall of man (because it could not have been before the fall because there was no one to save) from promises, principles already in place. This is known as the mystery of God and is refered to in many places in the bible. Here is one 1 Tim.3:16And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. I really don’t see any contradictions here.
 
My problem with her is that she appears to contridict not only the Bible, but herself; even in the same paragraph of the same book.
Click to expand...
That’s the same argument the Bible critics use on the Bible–also we should note that no evidence supporting each element in the claim is presented.

The Bible take a verse or phrase and pit it against another and proudly announce that the Bible contradicts itself. For example:

Proverbs 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

when “pitted against” the next verse:

5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

superficially appears to create a contradiction. The “trick,” if one wishes to use the term, is to not read the Bible (or any other text) so literally, woodenly, and literalistically. One has to learn to think “outside” one’s box that one is used to thinking in. The March 2009 issue of Scientific American has an excellant article on how learning new things preserves new brain cells (with the more difficult problem preserving more brain cells. See “Saving New Brain Cells,” by Tracey J. Shors, pages 46-54.
 
Now prove to me how these two quotes do not contridict themselves.
Click to expand...
Done that. All you have to do is read the whole paragraph that Richard gave you and the chapter in P&P that I pointed you to and sentences given in DA that you quoted from the web site.

===

I just looked at all the neat “buttons” that are above and on the side of where we type in our posts–neat! The spell-checker is especially handy! Now all we need is a grammar checker! At the place I live they had a meeting for the building and when telling what happened last time they closed with the line:

“Hope top see you all a the next meeting!”

ROFL!
 
happilycatholic said:
**Thanks for your response Bible Truth and I totally agree with everything you said. However, you really didn’t answer my question: Are there two covenants? **

**It is said that Jesus is the New Covenant, so are we to keep both the old and the new or only one? **
Click to expand...
To repeat, Jesus is the New Covenant. The Sabbath is a sign that we accept His covenant and the sanctifying power of God in our hearts.

Romans 4:11 gives us biblical license to equate a “sign” to a “seal” (although this can be determined in other ways using the Bible) and God’s people will receive His seal verses the beast’s mark when the time comes because they will have claimed the power of Christ to resist temptation no matter the cost. This is something that should be practiced throughout ones life so when that time does come, resisting evil will come naturally.

To suggest that we’re not able to keep the Sabbath is to deny the power we received from Christ on the cross to give us the victory over sin. That’s exactly what the devil wants us to believe so that we don’t take God’s word as authoritatively as we should and instead, come up with our own rationale for what salvation means. Sin, as we know from the Bible, is the breaking of God’s commandments. Christ died and was resurrected to defeat sin and to give us the power to do so as well.

“‘If you keep your feet from breaking the Sabbath and from doing as you please on my holy day, if you call the Sabbath a delight and the LORD’s holy day honorable, and if you honor it by not going your own way and not doing as you please or speaking idle words, then you will find your joy in the LORD, and I will cause you to ride on the heights of the land and to feast on the inheritance of your father Jacob.’ The mouth of the LORD has spoken” (Isaiah 58:13-14, NIV).

Notice that God calls the Sabbath His holy day…“the LORD’s holy day”. This is the seventh day of the week…not the first. By their own admission, Catholics tried to change the observance of the Sabbath from the seventh day to the first, for which there is no biblical authority. The change cannot be attributed to Apostolic Tradition, because the apostles kept the God’s Sabbath…the seventh day.

“But if serving the LORD seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your forefathers served beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD” (Joshua 24:15, NIV)

In Christ,

Andrew
 
Off-topic:
I just looked at all the neat “buttons” that are above and on the side of where we type in our posts–neat! The spell-checker is especially handy! Now all we need is a grammar checker! At the place I live they had a meeting for the building and when telling what happened last time they closed with the line:
Click to expand...
“Hope top see you all a the next meeting!”
Click to expand...
ROFL!
Click to expand...
Now we need one on emails! I had registered for a forum and when I went to use the password it didn’t work. So, the admin sent me a note saying to use 'dconklin" as my sign in–andit hit me why the password didn’t work, I had used ‘djconklin’ and I sent an email to him telling that was what the problem was. But, in doing so I switched the ‘s’ and the ‘u’ so I had “I sued djconklin.” I added a parenthesis telling him that doesn’t help either!
 
BibleTruth said:
To repeat, Jesus is the New Covenant. The Sabbath is a sign that we accept His covenant and the sanctifying power of God in our hearts.

How can you accept his covenant adn sanctifying power if both of those are Jesus and you refuse to remember that covenant the way Christ asked us to. i.e. the Eucharist. Not crackers and grapejuice, the real Body and Blood of Christ.

There is but one Church today that does as Jesus asked us to do to remember his covenant with us (as opposed to a day) and that is the catholic Church. The sign and the seal of the New Covenant is the Eucharist. You, like the Isrealites, might be missing the sign and the seal. It cannot be a sign already given to people who wouldn’t listen. It cannot be a sign of an old covenant, it will be a NEW sign of the NEW covenant.

The one that Christ asked us to remember at His Last Supper.

Romans 4:11 gives us biblical license to equate a “sign” to a “seal” (although this can be determined in other ways using the Bible) and God’s people will receive His seal verses the beast’s mark when the time comes because they will have claimed the power of Christ to resist temptation no matter the cost. This is something that should be practiced throughout ones life so when that time does come, resisting evil will come naturally.

We as catholics received the Eucharist at every mass. We literally take the Body and Blood of Christ into our bodies. We rest in Him as He rests in us, literally…every single week.

To suggest that we’re not able to keep the Sabbath is to deny the power we received from Christ on the cross to give us the victory over sin. That’s exactly what the devil wants us to believe so that we don’t take God’s word as authoritatively as we should and instead, come up with our own rationale for what salvation means. Sin, as we know from the Bible, is the breaking of God’s commandments. Christ died and was resurrected to defeat sin and to give us the power to do so as well.

**Christ died and was resurrected and gave us a way to remember him. Christ is not celebrated in the Sabbath, He is celebrated in the Eucharist. And yes the devil would place people like Ellen White between us and the Eucharist and some will be swayed. Hebrews clearly states this. But we are not to be swayed from 2000 years of doing exactly what Christ told us to do to remember him. **

“‘If you keep your feet from breaking the Sabbath and from doing as you please on my holy day, if you call the Sabbath a delight and the LORD’s holy day honorable, and if you honor it by not going your own way and not doing as you please or speaking idle words, then you will find your joy in the LORD, and I will cause you to ride on the heights of the land and to feast on the inheritance of your father Jacob.’ The mouth of the LORD has spoken” (Isaiah 58:13-14, NIV).

Old Testament, Old Covenant.

Notice that God calls the Sabbath His holy day…“the LORD’s holy day”. This is the seventh day of the week…not the first. By their own admission, Catholics tried to change the observance of the Sabbath from the seventh day to the first, for which there is no biblical authority. The change cannot be attributed to Apostolic Tradition, because the apostles kept the God’s Sabbath…the seventh day.

You’re right, the Apostles didn’t change it. God did by raising His Son on Sunday, sanctifying it and instituting the New Covenant. What God changed was not the Sabbath, it was the sign and the seal He changed. You state that the Sabbath was the sign and the seal of obedience (basically). Well Christ is the sign and the seal of the New Covenant. Today, we express that in the Eucharist. The Jews continue to express the sign and the seal of the Old Covenant by keeping (truly keeping I might add) the Sabbath.

**SDAs always use the instruction to prepare the Sabbath meal beforehand so that they would not have to “create” a meal on Sabbath. Do you do that? You even use the manna in the desert to explain God’s intention to abstain from your labor on the Sabbath. Do you create light by turning on lights on the Sabbath? These are all basic forms of creation that God specifically asked you to refrain from doing on the Sabbath since it is a “rest” from creation and a gift of rest to all those who observe it. **

So do you REALLY keep the Sabbath or do you just go to church on that day and fellowship, worship, sing praises and rest on that day? Cause I do that too. We have mass on Saturday. BUT we also receive the Eucharist on that day, remembering what Christ told us was the sign of His Everlasting Covenant with us.

“But if serving the LORD seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your forefathers served beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD” (Joshua 24:15, NIV)

I think you probably want to pay close attention to the passage above. It directly relates to people who come along in the 1800’s, calling themselves prophets and leading people astray by telling them to keep old laws and covenants and signs and seals. These are the devil’s advocates.

Not Christ’s Church. Not the Apostles and not its followers who are doing as Christ asked 2000 years earlier.

In Christ,

I’m very definitely in Christ today. I received His Body and Blood this morning at mass.

HC

Andrew
Click to expand...
 
djconklin said:
Off-topic:

Now we need one on emails! I had registered for a forum and when I went to use the password it didn’t work. So, the admin sent me a note saying to use 'dconklin" as my sign in–andit hit me why the password didn’t work, I had used ‘djconklin’ and I sent an email to him telling that was what the problem was. But, in doing so I switched the ‘s’ and the ‘u’ so I had “I sued djconklin.” I added a parenthesis telling him that doesn’t help either!
Click to expand...
Well, Matt 5:25 says; Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison.

It’s best to settle out of court.
 
Bible Truth:

How can you accept his covenant and its sanctifying power if both of those are Jesus and you refuse to remember that covenant the way Christ asked us to. i.e. the Eucharist. Not crackers and grape juice, the real Body and Blood of Christ. We are baptized to wash away sin and to place ourselves in Christ’s Church. We receive the Eucharist as a sign that we remain in Christ’s Church and obedient to Him as he asked us to do this in remembrance of Him.

**There is one Church today that does as Jesus asked us to do to remember his Everlasting Covenant with us and that is the catholic Church. The sign and the seal of the New Covenant is your baptism and the Eucharist. It cannot be a sign already given to people who wouldn’t listen. It cannot be a sign of an old covenant, it will be a NEW sign of the NEW covenant. I assume you are baptized so why do you not receive the Eucharist? I’ve asked this several times without answer. **

We as catholics receive the Eucharist at every mass. We literally take the Body and Blood of Christ into our bodies. We rest in Him as He rests in us, literally…every single week.

**Christ is not celebrated in the Sabbath, He is celebrated in the Eucharist. And yes the devil would place people like Ellen White between us and the Eucharist and some will be swayed. Hebrews clearly states this. But we are not to be swayed from 2000 years of doing exactly what Christ told us to do to remember him. **

You’re right, the Apostles didn’t change it. God did by raising His Son on Sunday, sanctifying it and instituting the New Covenant. What God changed was not the Sabbath, it was the sign and the seal He changed. You state that the Sabbath was the sign and the seal of our obedience to God. Well Christ is the sign and the seal of the New Covenant. Today, we express that in our baptism and the Eucharist. The Jews continue to express the sign and the seal of the Old Covenant by keeping (truly keeping I might add) the Sabbath.

I am definitely in Christ today. I’ve been to mass and received the Body and Blood of Christ into my body. 🙂

Peace Be With You.

HC

Oh and about these matters:

“‘If you keep your feet from breaking the Sabbath and from doing as you please on my holy day, if you call the Sabbath a delight and the LORD’s holy day honorable, and if you honor it by not going your own way and not doing as you please or speaking idle words, then you will find your joy in the LORD, and I will cause you to ride on the heights of the land and to feast on the inheritance of your father Jacob.’ The mouth of the LORD has spoken” (Isaiah 58:13-14, NIV).

Old Testament. Old Covenant. Old Sign. Old Seal. 😉

“But if serving the LORD seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your forefathers served beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD” (Joshua 24:15, NIV)

**I think I would look at this one very closely if I were you. Especially this part: “…then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve…”. Because as I said, the devil does have a way of putting people like EGW between us and the Eucharist. **
 
Richard_Kastner said:
Well, Matt 5:25 says; Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison.

It’s best to settle out of court.
Click to expand...
ROFL! I forgot about that verse!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top