Results 41 - 60 of 185
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: swerv Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | Hank - Diet ??? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 146816 | ||
Doc: Where is the one singl verse in the NT that commands that the Church worship on the 1st day of the week. If it is not int he scripture then it is based on tradition of man which the Bible clearly teaches against !!!! Merv |
||||||
42 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147013 | ||
Hey Brad: Do you believe in following the unclean/clean meat diet of God ? Merv |
||||||
43 | In what way is it clear? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147018 | ||
Hi Tim: Yes punctuation was added by translators. A quick aside: When Jesus was on the cross and give assurance to the repentent sinner that he would have eternity with Him, the punctuation (,) is added in wrong place to give people the impression that "that very day" they would be together in Paradise. But this is a improper interpretation because clearly Jesus told Mary that He had yet ascended to His Father. If the comma is changed then we see that Jesus meant that "today" I give you assurance that the sinner would be with Him in Paradise. But just like all the rest of mankind that are dead and "returned to dust" - we will all be resurected together when Christ comes. Immortality does not come until that day. I grew up believing in the immortality of the soul but it based on tradition and not scripture. Sorry to go off track but this will be another subject for discussion. Now yes, prince is used twice but clearly both uses are distinguished but "Messiah the Prince" and the "people of the prince" who would destroy Jerusalem. One is Christ and one is teh devil leading the Roman Empire to destroy the Jews and Jerusalem. Well Tim I respect your view but would have to disagree !! Clearly, there is only one week left in Daniel's 70 week prophecy. The only week discussed refers to one who would confirm a covenant of one week. Then in the middle (3.5 years) bring an end to the sacrificial system. There are 3.5 years left after Christ's death in which the disciples stayed in Jerusalem to witness to the Jews only juts as Jesus had instructed them to do. Thus fulfilling the final week of the 70 week probation period for the Jews to repent to God. Thus the majority of Jews rejected Jesus and the Gospel - then the final destruction of Jerusalem came in 70 AD. But note that once Stephen wad martyred 3.5 years after Christ died this was then beginning of the Gospel to go to the Gentiles. Thus the 70 year period was over for the Jews. Remember that this futurist theory ((pushing the final week (tribulation period) out 2000 plus years) was a result of the Protestant reformation and the Catholic Church wanting to decieve the world into believing the antichrist was not yet come. This clearly disagrees with Jesus's own teaching that there were already "antichrist's" in the shaddows awaiting to corrupt the Gospel. The gap theory is CLEARLY wrong and not logical. 69 weeks happened literally - why do we have a 2000 plus year interuption when NOWHERE in Daniel 9 it tells us this. Why !!! This is added to deceive people away from seeing that the antichrist system was indeed the Roman empire and then followed by the Catholic Church. This is then followed by the Protestant reformation which is the "image of the beast" - Although the protestants have reformed in many areas they still uphold to many paganistic doctines like the Sabbath - which is a clear violation of God's Law. But unfortunately people do not see this because "status qo" is comfortable. Now Tim I do not think for an instance that all people are going to hell which many say as a defense to make 7th day adventists to seem judgemental. I believe "light will be given to all" to make a decision. Remember the devil is in the business to make God out to be unjust. How could a just and loving God uphold a single day to be so important. What is the big deal with a day. But what if we had the same attitude to sexual preference in patners. The whole Christian community would not tolerate it. Well Tim - I look forward to your thoughts !! Merv |
||||||
44 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147238 | ||
Ok Brad: Thanks for your honesty !! Look at Math. 15 and Mark 7 (paralell passgaes) and Acts 10 - 11. Determine if you think that from these texts that Jesus/God has cleansed all meat. Remembering that God clearly established in Lev. 11 what animals were unclean (example pig). You can also look at Is. 65:4 to see waht angers God !!!! Also look at Daniel 1 to see why Daniel did not want to defile his body. You would agree that in the NT we are are told our bodies are the "temple of God". If God required only "clean" animal sacrifices in OT would it make logical sense in the NT that God would change what He designated to be unclean to now be clean. Is there any ripture in the NT where we see either Jesus or one of His disciples eating a unclean piece of meat ??? This same principle of arguement used for holding we are still required to be obedient to God's diet, can be used to show we are still to recognize God's Sabbath. Remember we are to follow God and not man. Look forward to what your conclusion is !! Merv |
||||||
45 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147239 | ||
Brad: Looking at your profile - we have similarities. Although not married and no kids - I was raised Methodist/Baptist. Attended Methodist college but fell away from God after college. In recognizing I was lost I searched for truth and challenged my doctrinal beliefs which came as a result of my upbringing. Had contact with Oneness Pentecostal - which helped me more understand the Trinity and "tongues". But currently the closest denomination that I have seen the Biblical Truth that I was searching for is the 7th Day Adventists. I have always grouped them in with Mormons and Jehovah Witness - as I was taught. But had never know there doctrine until I was challenged by a co-worker to justify why we keep the 1sy day as the Sabbath. Anyway I look business/accounting in school so my mind need logical scriptural proof to support doctrine. Hope we can journey together to recognize truth. In love, Merv |
||||||
46 | Hank - Diet ??? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147243 | ||
Hey Doc: You seem to maybe be offended for me not recognizing your arguement. I am here on this forum to discuss scripture and here views on scripture. If I hold strong views I think you must respect my passion and love for God to know Him better and learn His truths. I do not agree that there are three different answers to the 4th commandment of God. 1) Everyday can be a Sabbath 2) the 1st day is now the Sabbath 3) the 7th day is the Sabbath. I just want clear answers to my questions. Giving examples of things the disciples did on a certain does not provide evidence of a new Sabbath unless you can show me within those scriptures a command to recognize a new Sabbath day. Using these scriptures is a similar arguement used when people use Acts 10 - 11 to show all meats are now clean - even though in Is. 65:4 clearly states eating swine's flesh makes God angry. Is. 56 clearly shows that not ONLY Jews kept the Sabbath. Humm - there goes the arguement that only Jews were required to keep the Sabbath. I am sorry but to use examples of 1st day meetings is no evidence whatsoever of God changing His mind on what day He made Holy and sanctified as a day of rest which gives us the opportunity to worship Him, and do "good" - just as Jesus did in the NT even though confronted by the Pharisees. Also, Jesus and Paul clearly show us the real Sabbath was the one they kept as their "custom" was. Look forward to more discussion, In the love and truth of Christ, Merv |
||||||
47 | Hank - Diet ??? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147244 | ||
Yes - early Church also persecuted and killed thousands who did not conform to their beliefs. Kept the Bible hidden so not until 1300 years later the people began to see the error in doctrine. But nowhere in any of the 3-4 1st day references is the word worship mentioned. Paul had a meeting where he preached. He was going away for a long time. The passgae is mentioned due to the man being healed from falling out the window not because to show the Sabbath was now on the 1st day. Jesus and Paul custom was to go to the synogogue on the Sabbath. How coem people want to hold to 1st day references but not to the Sabbath references. Oh ya - the reason is - they call what Paul and Jesus did was keeping the OT law. Humm - but Jesus clearly said the NT covenant would have the laws written on the heart. What exactly were those laws. I guess it was 9 of 10 commandments which makes logical sense considering that the Sabbath was actually instituted prior to sin entering the world. Therefore it was apart of God's perfect creation. Ok it makes sense that the only commandment "changed by a supposedly unchanging God" was the Sabbath. Does this really make sense given the history of corruption of the early Church in how they paganized Christianity. Two years ago I would have held you position but I feel scripture and the leading of the Holy Spirit has shown me the clear truth and the error of traditional doctrine. P.S. - Rom. 14 - does not refer to Sabbath but "holy feast days - which are also called sabbaths" This is the same for Col. 2:16. These feast days (sabbaths) all pointed to Christs ultimate sacrifice as Perfect Lamb and to do aways with sacrifical system. Feasts (sabbaths) were a shaddow just like sacrificial systems was a shaddow of Christ. See Lev. 23:37-38 - to show difference between Sabbath (7th day Sabbath) and the added feasts). Sabbath (7th day) could not be a shaddow - it was created prior to man's sin ??? In love, Merv In love, Merv |
||||||
48 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147413 | ||
Yes Brad: I appreciate loving your brother attitude as Jesus commands. But the important question is what does Jesus expect of us as life reflecting Hid life. Jesus was sinless which is our obligation out of love for what Christ has given to us through His shed blood. To stive for anything less would be making a foll out of Jesus if His death would still allow us to live in sin. God's laws are "clearly" said to be put on our hearts in the new covenant. Clearly we must each stive to understand what God's laws are in accordance to the new covenant. To just say we live by freedom and liberty is making a mochery of God's law which were meant to keep us close to Him in relationship to love. In love, Merv |
||||||
49 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147414 | ||
Ed: Lev. 23:3 which you quote "holy convocation" - means to gather together. Just like Jesus and Paul did as their custom was !!! Yes, Jews fell away from the intention of the Sabbath which was made by God as part of the perfect creation process "prior" to sin entering the world. The Sabbath was perfect in its creation because it was to give 24 hours of time out the week for the people to go about worshiping God and not worry about their daily routine. Clearly you would agree that man cannot worship God if the day is filled with "work" to support oneself and family as God commands. 6 days you "shall" work. Meaning God fully expects use to live for Him every day - while we work and do routine activities - but on the Sabbath since we are commanded to do not work WE ALL then have the time to gather together to worship without the pressures of job schedule and routine schedule. This has got to be clearly seen to understand the purpose of not working. Now being said the Sabbath was made for man (not just Jew)NOT man for the Sabbath. It was made for a blessing of rest, worship and an opportunity to "do good on the Sabbath" as Jesus said to the Pharisees. Sabbath was made from the beginning. I personally believe Abraham was keeping the Sabbath - although we have no direct statement of evidence in the scripture. But we do have Gen. 26:5. Can you tell me what commandments Abraham was keeping. Remember it does not say what they are. But certainly said he kept commandments. Whe it said Jesus "fulfilled the law" - this means he kept the law. Since we did not keep the law (or sinned) then the only atonement possible is for Jesus to live a perfect sinless life but still be put to death - although He did not deserve it like we do. Since He did die He took out place. Just as John 15:10 says - Jesus did not sin -- Why -- because He kept His father's commandments. This is fulfilling the law. Saying We as Man no longer need rest is like saying the principle of not resting the fields every 7th year should not still be followed. We need rest every week from our regular activites. God gave it as a blessing !!!! Heb. 4 clearly says "There remains a Sabbath rest". Clearly you do not understand "work" the priests in the OT had to work in the service. Jesus performed miracles on the Sabbath and called it doing "good". Doing God's work on the Sabbath is not work but loving God. You can go to any pastor out there and they will say WE as Christians must keep a day of rest. Unfortunately it is the 1st day they consider the Sabbath. Look forward to your reply ! Merv |
||||||
50 | Hank - Diet ??? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147518 | ||
Tim: No Tim ! Eary Church - meaning Roman Catholic Church - persecuted and killed 1000's of unconforming Christians. The Dark ages !!! They would not even allow people to have a copy of the Bible to judge the Truth for themselves. Now you mean early Church - the disciples and there "early" spreading to the Gentiles. Yes of course they were persecuted by Rome until Rome converted to Christianity. But there conversion was not to The Gospel that Jesus preached but was a conversion from paganism to paganized Christianity. Along with the this conversion was many, many , many pagan doctines into "so called" Chritianity" - Example Immortality of the Soul, Hell being "everlasting", Prophecy (expansion of 70 weeks of years to include a "gap" between 69th and 70th week) and the Sabbath. Sabbath is recognized worldwide as Saturday (7th) Changed by RCC even though the practise started soon after Jesus death. But Jesus predicted that false Christ's and teaching would arise soon after His death and the disciples were to be aware. Sabbaths - If you look at Lev. 22:32 - the same days called feasts are also called sabbaths. Remebers also that I beleive most times when the Bible refers to feasts and sabbaths being the same - they "sabbath" is not capitalized. But when referring to 7th day "Sabbath" it is capitalized. Another example is look at Lev. 23:3 and Lev. 25:2 - in comparion to the use of sabbath/Sabbath !!! Do not believe also that all sabbaths were also feasts. Look at Lev 23:26-32 - It was not a feast day but only a "extra" sabbath day !!! Now Tim - remember - the death of Christ relaced the ceremonial system - these feasts and sabbaths were a shaddow of the coming Christ. That is why WE do not keep these feasts now or sacrifice animals. We keep the Sabbath because it was institued in the the creation and that 7th day was made holy by God. No other day was made holy by God. Nowhere in any scripture is there any evidence that God made anyother day of the week Holy. It was Holy - Sanctified - "set-apart" so we would be able to not do any regular work and therefore use that time to worship God "convocation - gathering" and also do "good" as Jesus rubuked the Pharisees for not seeing His goods works on the Sabbath. Thanks Merv |
||||||
51 | Hank - Diet ??? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147524 | ||
Steve: Funny that Jesus said "Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath" - I guess that Jesus who was Perfect made a mistake and should have used "Jew" or "People of Israel". He clealy used MAN because it has been and will be for ALL mankind. I think your arguement that although the Sabbath was created in to beginning "prior to sin" and "God blessed and santified it" (Gen:2:3) - Yes it makes plenty of sense to assume that for 2000 years it was sanctified by God but no one kept the day as God intended to be a blessed rest for his created man. Makes also great senses that God/Jesus whom rested on the Sabbath after He created it in Genesis, but when Jesus walked the world 4000 years later and kept the Sabbath "as His custom was" is somehow not showing a consistent God in who we believe. Can you explain - why God would require Moses to test the people of His law of the Sabbath after coming out of Egypt. Quick note: His law was not written until Sinai ???? Just like Gen:26:5 I guess the use of the different words like commandments, statues, and laws all do not refer to anything else but God telling Abraham to do something - like the things you stated. But wait It says in vs. 5 Abraham obeyed "My voice" and kept My charge, My statues, My commandments, and My laws. Remember sin is clealy defined as "transgression of the law". Cain (Gen. 4:6) - "sin lies at the door" --- Humm could it be possible Cain was thinking to kill His brother - which he did in vs.8. But Rom. 3:20 - says "for by the law is the knowledge of sin" ---- Cain knew about killing because it was a "law" -- The same laws God revealed to man prior to Sinai but the 10 comm. given at Sinai were to an entire nation not individuals prior to that. You have not explained why God was angry for them eating swine's flesh but now He is not !! Please repeat it !!! God did not cleanse unclean meat in the NT. Sorry not there. Maybe check the OT. Sorry, but we must have some humor !!!! You said "a law mandatory for Jews only" Well if we look specifically at the Sabbath - you statement is absolutely wrong according to Is. 56:4-5. Unfortunately, many "gentiles" were allowed to keep the Sabbath and recieve all the blessing that came with it. Unfortunately, most non-Jews had no belief in God and God made it plain a clear fo the Jews to keep away from unGodly people. Just like the principle of "leaven" --- a small potion of sin will corupt the whole amount of bread. But if the Non-Jews did recognize God and believe then they were required to show obedience just like the Jew. Explain - how laws only for Jews again ??? In love and respect, Merv |
||||||
52 | Hank - Diet ??? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147525 | ||
Steve: "nothing more was required" -- Jesus forgave the adulteress woman - yes - Humm - did Jesus not also say "go and sin no more".. Is this not something God "required". 1 John 5:2 and 1 John 2:6 and Math. 19:17 I guess these verse mean something other than a "requirement" by God to obey His commandments. Repenting is one thing but the evidence of a repentant heart is to "do" what God "requires". Very plain and clear !!!! BUT DONE IN LOVE !!!!! NOT LEGALISM !!!! Law cannot "save" only Jesus's blood saves. Keeping law shows our "love for God" and not love for the flesh. Yes, I think being a vegetarian is a good idea - considering what I have leanned from scripture !! Does not mean we cannot eat clean meat but God is pretty clear how these clean animals were to be killed and free from blood. Not many of us raise our own animals to be able to ensure they are killed and clean properly. Most Christians do not even understand the reason to why God did not want us to eat blood - cause blood was used to atone for sins !!! Blood represented life !!! Yes you are right no specific laws stated to sacrifice for sins. Also no specific law stated to keep law prior to exit from Egypt. But did every conversation get recorded in the OT. No. But God clearly without refute created a 7th day, rested on it, and sanctified it. Abel shed blood through the little lamb - Cain did not. Only through shedding of blood is the remission of sin. Again the actual blood of the lamb di not atone for Abel's sins but the faith that His son was coming to fulfill the shadow of that little lamb was what made Abel righteous. Do you think they were sheeding lambs blood cause God liked the sight of killing innocent lambs and seeing there blood flow over the alter. Silence does not justify - avoiding the obvious. No command given to worship or keep a "new"day but the majority insist the "new" day of worship and rest is the 1st day. You cannot assume Peter ate unclean meat. He did not do it when God specifically commanded him do to so. Why would he be eating it with Gentiles if he would not even do it when God commanded him to eat it in the vision. Logic !! Merv |
||||||
53 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147530 | ||
Yes Steve: it has a paralell meaning of rest in Christ. Ok so why do we keep a "day" of rest at all - the 1st day. No pastor will tell you - "we do not need a day to rest and focus our activities on Jesus and fellowship". You cannot hav it both ways. Heb.4:7 clearly discussed the 7th day. What do you mean it does not mention a day of the week. Do you see my concern: People will argue there is no more Sabbath (7th) based on the "rest in Christ" we have now. But then they go and keep a "day of rest" - 1st day but call it a new "sabbath" or changed sabbath. If we have rest in Christ as many argue from Heb. 4 then why keep a day !!!! Where is the logic Merv |
||||||
54 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147533 | ||
Ed: Let me get this straight !!! Before man fell to sin - what was the purpose God had for us. Let me see "was it not to love and worship Him" and in return He would bless and love us" We had a relationship with God prior to sin. God loved us deeply and His only requirment was to love God uncoinditionally and obey His commands which were given to bless us and keep us from evil. Now God gave us the creation to enjoy and fill our days with blessings but the only reason God created a 7th day - was for rest AND He "santified" it or set it apart. Time was set apart by God so we would be able during the week to put all things aside - REST - and have the time to really focus on GOD - even though we would always want during the week to please God and fellowship with Him. But this was a specific time alotted by God for this fellowship which would not be competing with any other activites. You seem to be saying that "if" the day was changed from a day of rest to a day of worship - that was a bad thing done by the Jews. Does that really make sense. You do not think Gopd wants our worship. I cannot see you point at all. Even Jesus when He walked with the Jews - went to the synagogue. Never once do we see Jesus condemming the Jewish synogogue worship service. There is just no evidence. Instead it says that Paul and Jesus went and "stood up to read". Sabbath or worship on Sabbath was never condemned by Jesus. He rebuked the Pharisees for making it a burden because they lost sight of not the "resting" part (they added plenty of rest requirments) but the part of loving God through sincere worship which would mean doing "good" on the Sabbath - not just following all there burdensome "added" requirements of the Sabbath. Well if pastors do not think the 1st day replaced the 7th then why not keep the original Sabbath 7th. But most don't. Very few denomination keep the Sabbath (7th) day. I am sorry but clear logic means that if you are resting from routine activites then you have time to do what ????? Worship God together. Clealy, Lev.23:2 - says "holy convocation". Gathering together to worship the God they love and in return loves them. Obviously, God's love in not contigent on man's love. Jews did not make it into a worship day - God made it for worship and fellowship with Him because man was free from daily (day 1-6) activities. Yes they did not collect manna - Why cause God provided it. So they did not have to do any work. Jesus - did not say "more or less" he was the Sabbath or He would have said it. Do not make general statements where there no scripture to back them up. Jesus clearly said He was Lord of the Sabbath. So I guess that means He cancelled it and moved it to his future resurection. Meaning that if His disciples broke a Jewish law of collecting food - since Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath and these are His disciples doing His work of His ministry then I guess gathering some food was ok according to God's purpose of His ministry. But by no means does Jesus say we are to begin working on the Sabbath or cease from coming together on the Sabbath to "convocate" together to love and worship Him. Will continue, Merv Merv |
||||||
55 | Hank - Diet ??? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147537 | ||
Ok - if the 7th day Sabbath was ceremonial can you find a good reason why God put the Sabbath command in the 10 Comm. if it was to be done away with the other "sabbaths / feasts" at the cross. The ceremonial law - written by Moses was put outside the ark while the 10 Comm. were put in the ark. Maybe had to do with Rom.7:12-14, Mal. 3:6, Ps. 19:7, Ps. 111:7-8. Inside ark was most Holy Place on earth. No one to even touch the ark !!! Look closely at Lev. 23 - feasts are also called "sabbaths". I guess since we are no longer to keep the Sabbath - then God making it "santified" just goes away also with no explanation. I guess just like God made ALL unclean animals clean we can assume the same logic that God just decided to make another day "sanctified" EVEN THOUGH there not one single scriptural text which shows this being true. Col. 2:14 clearly says the ceremonial law (sacrifices) was nailed to the cross. This includes all the feasts and additional sabbaths which were a shaddow pointing to Jesus's blood sacrifice. Let's see Moses wrote all these laws and again were kept separate from the 10 Comm. So in Col. 2:16 they were not to be judged on those things revolving around the ceremonial laws of sacrifices and feasts. Lev. 23:37 definetely tells us of the food and drink offerings they were to be making on these days. This is the same food a drink discussed in Col. 2:16. Are we not "spiritual Israel". Sabbath was made for "Man" not only Jew. Sabbath created in beginning before sin and for ALL man - Man was Man then not Jewish. NT never commands Sabbath or Diet because Christians knew what Jewish people followed. In Jerusalem council - they did not list any of the 10 Comm. but we know Jesus said ti keep them. Math. 19:17. He even discussed not to hate because just like "murder". Why did not state at the council. Because this was obvious requirment and teaching of God. You cannot accept the 3-4 illustrations of 1st references without using the same principle to explain references of Jesus and Paul going to synagogue. They broke bread "daily". Paul met on first day because going away for long time. Also - man fell out of window was reason for that story. Does NT show many references to 1st day - NO - 3 to 4. They are discussed not to show a change of Sabbath but to show a mirracle, another to show a collection for needy. Remember they were to collect "and lay up in store" meaning at home. I do not think it is strange that Jesus did go to the Synagogue as an example for us. !!! Rom. 14:5 - is discussing the burden that some Jewish Christians were placing on the Gentiles to observe the feast/sabbath days not about the Sabbath. Just like the food issue in the beginnin og the chapter is not discussing a debate over clean/unclean meat but the "esteemed" unclean meat due to defilement by idols. We must read scripture in context. I am SORRY but Jesus clearly said He was "LORD OF THE SABBATH" -- could this possible be what John was referring to. The Lord's Day. Let me see this same Lord was the one who created and rested on this day. Could I please have one single scripture before Christ's death or a command or statement that would change the Lord's day from the Sabbath to the 1st day or even better a request or command or hint - that God/Jesus said that people were to honour the day of His resurection. In love and respect, Merv |
||||||
56 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147538 | ||
Brad: I appreciate this discussion and how the debate does reflect our love for our brother. I apologize if I have made inappropriate comments. Also, sorry for bad spelling and grammar. Should check before I sent them off. But Brad - you cannot say "lawkeepers" are trying to be holy or gaining righteousness. No one on this board has yet to explain why God is commanding us the be "lawkeepers" or "legalistic". Because that is what you are saying when you refer to keeping His law. The law does not save - only the blood of Jesus saves us from our sin. Once we repent - to follow "love thy neighbor" means we will not disobey God (Rom.13:8). Adam and Eve did not have to do anything but not disobey God. They were created in righteousness (right relationship with God - justified because there was yet sin). So they had a perfect relationship with God - the only thing they could do to "screw it up" was to disobey God. Jesus brought us back int right relationship with Him but again we are the ones if we do not obey will "screw it up". In respect, Merv |
||||||
57 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147540 | ||
Sorry Ed but the Sabbath was created by Gof for Man - not Jew. Just like sacrifices were required by God of Abel where there is no direct statment to say they were to do it. Just cause the Sabbath command is not in Genesis - I think it is pretty naive of us to think it was not a "law" of God when we have evidence of Abraham keeping "laws" in Gen 26:5. Ignoring the OT and relying on only 4 1st day references in the NT is just plain bad interpretation. Merv |
||||||
58 | Hank - Diet ??? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147542 | ||
Tim: No problem ! I have taken time to respond also. Hope all is well now. But Tim I would have to disagree that we cannot look at things "different ways". God is consistent and unchanging !! There is only one truth or else this would open the door to many ways to heaven - which is opposite to what Jesus says that only through Him can we be saved. Why cause only His blood can save. The God of the OT is consistent of the Jesus of the NT. If they are the same voice shown through the disciples (being inspired) how can a God angered by the eating of swine's flesh (Is. 65:4) be the same God who says all unclean meats are now clean. God wants to destroy our bodies to save the Gentiles. Makes no sense. No Tim: Rom. 14 cannot be saying "nothing is unclean". That would be like saying God telling Peter that "do not call unclean what I have called clean" would support God cleansing all animals for consumption. Was there a food shortage or something. God used that profound statement to wake up Peter to see He meant Gentiles were now clean NOT unclean animals were clean. If we want to support a doctrine we can justify multiple interpretations or even blatent wrong interpretaitons. We have already discussed Math. 15 amd Mark 7. See to make the unclean meats go away - these texts all have to point to this change. But they do not !! So then where is the support for this change. God would never want us to harm our bodies. They are the temple of God and we are not to defilke them. It would be like God saying smoking or getting drunk was OK -NT bodies can handle it now with no effects. Now Tim, Mark 7:19 - must be read in context. Please read it again !! It starts saying that the defiled food (by unwashed hands) goes into the stomach and is eliminated "thus purifying all foods" -- NKJV This states that the body deals with unclean food due to unwashed hands. That is it !!!! Nowhere does the text talk about the disciples eating unclean meat (unclean - meaning the animals God said not to eat). Plus I do not think you have explained why Peter would disobey God in the vision if the teaching was made clear to him by Jesus during His ministry. In love, Merv |
||||||
59 | Hank - Diet ??? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147544 | ||
Matt: Yes we are not saved by the law but we are clearly instructed to keep the law by Jesus. Math. 19:17 Law does not save but does show our love for God ! Merv |
||||||
60 | Hank - Doctrine from God or Man ? | Bible general Archive 2 | swerv | 147550 | ||
Hey Mark: Glad to here from you !! I look forward to discussing these issues with anyone. I will repeat that I grew up in Protestant denomination so I have held the same beliefs as my fellow forum members. Even further than this when I was challenged originally two years ago I had the full intention to show my co-worker that his belief in the Sabbath, No eternal hell, Non-immortality of the soul, prophecy, diet, and the Sabbath - were not scriptural because mainly I "just" knew it could not be right according to what I believed. I was by no means a theologian but I had been told so much as I grew up that there are many "cults" out there. So off I went into the scripture to find my answers to these issues. Now I want to make this clear that I went to scripture and scripture alone to find the answers. Obviously I had the verses that my co-worker used to support his view so I had reference points. My most of my understanding came from scripture and the inadequate responses I recieved from pastors and fellow Christians on the subject. The more I got unscriptural answers or non-contextual answers the more I searched for truth. Most of my family members - instead of giving me scriptural background for the doctines of the Chruch they instead pointed me to a certain pastor or certain minister that would get me back on track. The conclusion, is that certain doctrines held by the "church" are not scriptural and are just plain wrong. Just as the Roman Catholic Church tries to surpress the truth - I have come to the same conclusion that the Protestant community is not being honest in the history of these doctrines. Will continue, Merv |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [10] >> |