Seventh Day Adventists say Catholics changed...

[Richard_Kastner]

Richard:

As I have said before, I’ll say again, and will keep saying it: *** WE CHRISTIANS ARE NOT UNDER ANY OBLIGATION OF THE LAW THAT WAS GIVEN TO THE JEWS!!! ***. Whether you believe it or not, this is what was taught by Jesus and the Apostles. He gave us a NEW LAW and a NEW and EVERLASTING COVENANT. He fulfilled ( and completed ) the old law which was/is for the Jews alone. The old law made sin recognizeable. By keeping the new law, we should/can not sin. Those that live by the old law will be judged by the old law, all 600+ commandments. The old law does not consist only of the decalogue, but all those ( plus variations ) that are listed in scripture.

Since you ( and the SDA ) insist on keeping the old law, then keep it ALL, not just what you think is important. All were given by God and any one alone is as important as the next one. There is NO distinction in importance from one to the other,

PAX DOMINI

Shalom haMeshiach

Jer.31
31Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:

33But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

34And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

These vs. appear to be saying that because the house of Israel broke the covenant that God made with them that He would make a new covenant with them and this covenant would not be a change in the wording of the covenant, the ten commandments, but that God would instead of writing these commandments on tables of stone would write them on our hearts and put them in our inward parts. Now remember these are God’s words and this is how He defines the new covenant. So, how do you reconcile these vs. in Jeramiah with your statement “WE CHRISTIANS ARE NOT UNDER ANY OBLIGATION OF THE LAW THAT WAS GIVEN TO THE JEWS!!!”

 

[Javl]

Jer.31
31Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:

33But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

34And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

These vs. appear to be saying that because the house of Israel broke the covenant that God made with them that He would make a new covenant with them and this covenant would not be a change in the wording of the covenant, the ten commandments, but that God would instead of writing these commandments on tables of stone would write them on our hearts and put them in our inward parts. Now remember these are God’s words and this is how He defines the new covenant. So, how do you reconcile these vs. in Jeramiah with your statement “WE CHRISTIANS ARE NOT UNDER ANY OBLIGATION OF THE LAW THAT WAS GIVEN TO THE JEWS!!!”

The Jews were the ones to break the law and the covenant, not God. He made another covenant with the Jews which is still in force today. Jesus made a NEW and EVERLASTING covenant only with those that believed in, and accepted, Him as the Messiah. Also, the New Testament replaces the Old Testament since Jesus fulfilled and COMPLETED the old one. I pray to the Holy Spirit that He open your eyes, mind, and heart to Jesus’ teachings and truth, and not follow not only the traditions of men but also their obstinate understanding and erroneous interpretations of Holy Writ. Shalom haMeshiach.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Javl]

benedict and me again:

It is not a matter of intelligence ( I think you both are very ) but of the given gift of the Holy Spirit that you not only have a deep and true faith, but that you also know and truly understand God’s word. Continue to pray for guidance in all matters and give thanks and praise to Him for picking you to defend His Holy word. Shalom haMeshiach.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Richard_Kastner]

The Jews were the ones to break the law and the covenant, not God. He made another covenant with the Jews which is still in force today. Jesus made a NEW and EVERLASTING covenant only with those that believed in, and accepted, Him as the Messiah. Also, the New Testament replaces the Old Testament since Jesus fulfilled and COMPLETED the old one. I pray to the Holy Spirit that He open your eyes, mind, and heart to Jesus’ teachings and truth, and not follow not only the traditions of men but also their obstinate understanding and erroneous interpretations of Holy Writ. Shalom haMeshiach.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

So, from what I gather you are saying that the new covenant spoken of in Jeremiah 31 is a covenant with the Jews only and that God has provided for them and them only a means of salvation that entails keeping this law that is written in their minds and hearts and is exclusive of faith in the sacrifice of Jesus. Is that right?

 

[me_again]

So, from what I gather you are saying that the new covenant spoken of in Jeremiah 31 is a covenant with the Jews only and that God has provided for them and them only a means of salvation that entails keeping this law that is written in their minds and hearts and is exclusive of faith in the sacrifice of Jesus. Is that right?

Rich, I don’t think that Javi meant that at all, at least not from my perspective. Consequently, I’m not quite sure how you arrived at the above question/conclusion, unless you’re being academically sarcastic (to make your point more forceful).

In the Decalogue (10 commandments in stone), the Jews were ordered to stone (kill) violators. That commandment is no longer in effect because it rested on God’s old covenant. After the finger of God (which wrote the Decalogue in stone) was nailed to the cross, God established His new covenant e.g. we keep the moral precepts of the 10 commandments, but it is now listed under:

1. the law of liberty and
2. the “new” commandment to love one another, upon which rested the 10 commandments.

So how does the Jewish Saturday sabbath and the Sunday Resurrection (aka the Lord’s day) come into play in all of this?

After the above was established by God, after the resurrection of His son Jesus, the apostles began meeting on Resurrection Sunday to celebrate. A chief part of this celebration is the taking of communion (Catholic’s call it the Eucharist) e.g. Jesus told us to do this until He returns, in remembrance of Him. It ceremonially involves the eating of His body (bread) and the drinking of His blood (wine). Every Catholic mass surrounds this feature, in remembrance of what God has done for us through the death and resurrection of Christ on the cross**;** whereas the Adventist surround themselves with the weekly Jewish Saturday sabbath and they have communion infrequently, usually on a quarterly basis each year. Which saved us**:** the Jewish Saturday sabbath or the resurrection of Christ on Sunday? Which should we remember at every mass**:** the resurrected Body and Blood of Christ or the weekly Jewish Saturday sabbath of the old Decalogue? Which is more important?

As a result of all of this, Catholicism surrounds it’s Sunday services (aka masses) around the Eucharist, based on the New Covenant**;** whereas the Adventist surround their Saturday church services around the stone Decalogue, claiming that even though the finger of God was nailed to the cross, it didn’t abolish that particular part of Jewish law. The Catholic Sunday mass goes back to Apostolic tradition, all the way back to the resurrection of Christ**;** whereas the Adventist Saturday sabbath goes back to 1844, all the way back to Ellen White’s claims.

It comes down to apostolic tradition, which the SDAs reject, but which the Catholics accept. One tradition stretches back 2000 years ago to the resurrection of Jesus, while the other stretches back to 1844. Choose ye this day whom ye will serve.

If you didn’t know, “mass” means celebration. Every Catholic mass celebrates His resurrection. That’s what every mass is all about.

 

[rinnie]

Are you saying that the Holy Spirit is imparted to us whether we want is or not.

John 3:16 (King James Version)
16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Are you saying that John is wrong here. That we really don’t need to believe, that God will give salvation to us whether we want it or not. Notice what it says here. There is not a word in here about baptism. The free gift of His son is given by the father to WHOSOEVER BELIEVETH. This is done independent of baptism and is totally a matter of FAITH.

This statement is just sad. Not to mention contradictory. So you don’t believe John when he says “whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
Romans 4:3
For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

Original sin is a Catholic fabrication.

Ezekial18
19Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live.

20The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

If original sin is a Catholic Fabrication why did Adam and Eve get thrown out of the garden of eden? Was that a Catholic fabrication also?

 

[rinnie]

Did Mother Mary have original sin and did she die a mortal death?

Mother Mary had fallen asleep in Christ. She was taken into heaven body and soul. She was free from sin and her body never was left to decay in the ground.

 

[rinnie]

Are you saying that the Holy Spirit is imparted to us whether we want is or not.

John 3:16 (King James Version)
16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Are you saying that John is wrong here. That we really don’t need to believe, that God will give salvation to us whether we want it or not. Notice what it says here. There is not a word in here about baptism. The free gift of His son is given by the father to WHOSOEVER BELIEVETH. This is done independent of baptism and is totally a matter of FAITH.

This statement is just sad. Not to mention contradictory. So you don’t believe John when he says “whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
Romans 4:3
For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

Original sin is a Catholic fabrication.

Ezekial18
19Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live.

20The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Richard how in the world does Jesus dying on the cross for the sin we received from Adam and Eve and being free from it at the moment of our baptism change the gospel of John.

And where does the bible say that by Jesus dying on the cross we do not have to have baptism for the forgivness of sins.

If this were true why are we told that Baptism is an outward sign instituted by Christ to give Grace. Why do we have one baptism for the forgiveness of sins? What do you think baptism is?

 

[rinnie]

Richard why do you continue to ignore post 231?

 

[Javl]

So, from what I gather you are saying that the new covenant spoken of in Jeremiah 31 is a covenant with the Jews only and that God has provided for them and them only a means of salvation that entails keeping this law that is written in their minds and hearts and is exclusive of faith in the sacrifice of Jesus. Is that right?

And again you mis-interpret and mis-understand scripture. You refuse to accept the obvious and insist that your interpretation is correct and ours is in error. Your continuous reference to the old testament to support your theology really holds no water, for if you** know** and** understand** Jesus’ teachings it would be quite obvious that the OT was completed with Jesus’ death on the cross and that only the NT is of any consequence today for our salvation.

We have tried to show you ( you personnaly and other SDA ) this ( not only we Catholics, but Orthodox and Protestants as well ) but you all completely ignore and refuse to accept our efforts at explanation. We know definitely that you love God, and do your best to do what He wants, but you ( the SDA ) are totaly in error in your efforts. Please open your heart and mind to the Holy Spirit and pray for His guidance, earnestly. I have and He has filled me with not only the truth but has given me my deep faith in God. I will always pray for you all.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Javl]

Besides post #231,** Richard**, Can you also answer post 232? I am very interested in what your and the SDA answers are. Thank you.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Richard_Kastner]

And again you mis-interpret and mis-understand scripture.

So, inlighten me.

You refuse to accept the obvious and insist that your interpretation is correct and ours is in error. Your continuous reference to the old testament to support your theology really holds no water, for if you** know** and** understand** Jesus’ teachings it would be quite obvious that the OT was completed with Jesus’ death on the cross and that only the NT is of any consequence today for our salvation.

Well Javl how about this
Matt5
17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18For 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.

19Whosoever 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.

This doesn’t sound like Jesus did away with the commandments. Jesus also said 39Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. What are the scriptures Jesus talks about here? Well, the old testament of coarse.
Paul says
1Tim.3
2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Ok, Javl believe it or not I am really trying to understand what you are saying , but instead of clarifying what you are saying you say that I don’t understand. So, here’s your post once again.

Originally Posted by Javl
The Jews were the ones to break the law and the covenant, not God. He made another covenant with the Jews which is still in force today.

You say that God “made another covenant with the Jews which is still in force today”
Let me ask you this. Is this according to you the new covenant spoken of in Jeramiah31?
If not where do we find it.

Jesus made a NEW and EVERLASTING covenant only with those that believed in, and accepted, Him as the Messiah.

Where do we find this covenant Javl? I mean this is like pulling teeth. I really shouldn’t have to ask these questions. If it is the way you say it is where do we find all these covenants? I have given you my exegesis of Jeramiah 31:31-34 as the explanation of the new covenant in Jesus Christ. You don’t seem to think so. So, where is it.

Also, the New Testament replaces the Old Testament since Jesus fulfilled and COMPLETED the old one.

Not according to Matt.5:17-19 above.

I pray to the Holy Spirit that He open your eyes, mind, and heart to Jesus’ teachings and truth, and not follow not only the traditions of men but also their obstinate understanding and erroneous interpretations of Holy Writ. Shalom haMeshiach.

And this is my prayer for you also friend.

We have tried to show you ( you personnaly and other SDA ) this ( not only we Catholics, but Orthodox and Protestants as well ) but you all completely ignore and refuse to accept our efforts at explanation.

I certainly do refuse to accept your explanations because for one thig I find gaping holes of logic in them. As for ignoring you that is just not true.

We know definitely that you love God, and do your best to do what He wants,

Thank you

but you ( the SDA ) are totaly in error in your efforts.

In my efforts to do what?

And I will and have prayed for you.

 

[me_again]

Mother Mary had fallen asleep in Christ. She was taken into heaven body and soul. She was free from sin and her body never was left to decay in the ground.

Regarding Mother Mary, are you saying that she died a mortal death – and was then resurrected?

 

[benidict]

But the angel said to him; fear not, zachary, for thy prayer is heard, and thy wife elizabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name john: and thou shalt have joy and gladness, and many shall rejoicein his nativity. for he shall be great before the Lord; and shall drink no wine nor strong drink: AND HE SHALL BE FILLED WITH THE HOLY GHOST, EVEN FROM HIS MOTHERS WOMB. St. Luke 1:13-15 this in response to post 245. yes sometimes the Holy Spirit is imparted to People weather they want it or not. here we see an example of someone filled from the womb. Peace

 

[benidict]

benedict and me again:

It is not a matter of intelligence ( I think you both are very ) but of the given gift of the Holy Spirit that you not only have a deep and true faith, but that you also know and truly understand God’s word. Continue to pray for guidance in all matters and give thanks and praise to Him for picking you to defend His Holy word. Shalom haMeshiach.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

i do believe this is a very wise insight you have had Javl. thank you. all credit to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Peace

 

[benidict]

Regarding Mother Mary, are you saying that she died a mortal death – and was then resurrected?

hi my friend. i would say lets get a priest to answer this one. i believe completely what the Church teaches about her. and no she did not see corruption. but as far as the actually dying part? i believe she did. but was resurected and assumed before the process of decay could take effect. we see this noncorruption of the body in some of our saints. such as. st. bernadette. who has been dead for years and years, and still looks like she is just sleeping. its amazing really. i really wouldnt know how to begin to explain it. Peace

 

[Javl]

Posted by Richard Kastner

Where do we find this covenant Javl? I mean this is like pulling teeth. I really shouldn’t have to ask these questions. If it is the way you say it is where do we find all these covenants? I have given you my exegesis of Jeramiah 31:31-34 as the explanation of the new covenant in Jesus Christ. You don’t seem to think so. So, where is it.

The covenant given in Jeremiah 31:31-34 is for the Jews alone. The new Law and covenant given by Jesus Christ:

The new law: Matthew 22:38-40

The new covenant: Luke 22:20

If you disagree with this then you disagree with the early Church fathers, for this is what they understood.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[me_again]

The covenant given in Jeremiah 31:31-34 is for the Jews alone. The new Law and covenant given by Jesus Christ:

The new law: Matthew 22:38-40

The new covenant: Luke 22:20

If you disagree with this then you disagree with the early Church fathers, for this is what they understood.

That is what I’ve been trying to explain to Rich e.g. traditional Christendom is based on the teachings of the early church fathers, which have been historically accepted**;** whereas SDA interpretations only go back to 1844 when Ellen G. White invented them.

 

[me_again]

she did not see corruption. but as far as the actually dying part? i believe she did. but was resurected and assumed before the process of decay could take effect.

It has been said that Moses has also been resurrected. The devil argued with St. Michael over the bones of Moses in the book of Jude.

we see this noncorruption of the body in some of our saints. such as. st. bernadette. who has been dead for years and years, and still looks like she is just sleeping.

< shudder >

That sort of stuff gives me the ebee geebees. Why not just bury them since they’re dead?

 

[Javl]

Quote:
Originally Posted by benidict
we see this noncorruption of the body in some of our saints. such as. st. bernadette. who has been dead for years and years, and still looks like she is just sleeping.

originall posted by me again
< shudder >

That sort of stuff gives me the ebee geebees. Why not just bury them since they’re dead?

They can, but by not doing so they show the Power and Glory of God.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem