*This is my response to Catholic #1 and his views. Enjoy.
Catholic #1: Hislop has long been rendered obsolete and Chick, well, what can you say about that.
Response: I dont consider Hislop and Jack Chick obsolete at all. Why do many people dislike Jack Chick? Its because hes been a soul winner for decades and never backed down from exposing the many Catholic superstitions that plague their religion like a virus.
Hislop conclusively proved that many of the infrastructures of the Catholic Church like the Papacy, nuns, mitre, mass, and other things have origins from the Mystery Religions of Egypt and Babylon not from the Bible. Jack Chick has proven to be a soul-winner for Christ and shown great exposes about Mormonism, Catholicism, Freemasonry, Jehovah Witnesses, Evolution, and Bible preservation for decades. Those things and what Hislop wrote are relevant today and are never obsolete.
Catholic #1: For info about chick and Hislop, look to catholic.com for their essays on them.
Response: Sorry, I rather look at www.piney.com/HislopTOC1.html and www.chick.com and see what both men have to say, not distortions. Chick have opposed Freemasonry, JWs, Islam, etc. and that should be commended. His opposition to the religion on Catholicism is founded on Scripture.
Catholic #1: Either/or arguments are a hallmark of Protestantism, though Jesus stated he was the foundation, yet we see in Rev ther are 12 foundations. The saints in heaven share in Jesus. Jesus is the head, we are his body, working together. Honoring Mary is the same as Jesus, as Jesus was a good Jew following the 10 commandments perfectly. Paul stated he suffered for the body, "lacking in Christ's iflictions" Is he saying Jesus didnt do enough? NO! he joins himself to Christ, as we all should do.
Response: This is a classic case of distortion. The Bible says that Christ is the foundation and the chief corner stone plus the Rock period (1 Corinthians 3:11, Ephesians 2:20, Romans 9:33, 1 Corinthians 10:4). The 12 foundations in Revelations refer to the New city of Jerusalem, not to the real and total indestructible foundation and Rock of the Lord Jesus Christ. Nice tactic in distorting the Scriptures to suit your agenda. I agree that the saints in Heaven live with Jesus and that Jesus is the head of the Church and believers are the body working together. On the other hand, there is no scriptural proof of a Pope, nuns, priests being a small number when God established the priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:5, 1 Peter 2:9).
The Lord Jesus Christ is our only High Priest (Hebrews 7:26). There is nothing wrong with Honoring Mary, but I honor all believers equally not just Mary. Mary is a fallible, sinful woman since the Bible says that all men sinned. If you deny that all men have sinned before, you call the Bible a liar. The Catholic religion believes in venerating Mary and many Catholic documents cite Marian worship and some document classify Mary as a co-Mediatrix.
The Bible Says that Jesus Christ is the only Mediator between God and man plus we arent to worship nothing but God (1 Timothy 2:5, Hebrews 12:24, Exodus 34:14). It isnt necessarily for veneration since we respect Mary, but Christ should be our majority for all veneration and honor should be given to all believers (which makes up Mary) equally. Christ was God in the flesh and called Mary woman. I have no problem with man suffering problems after salvation, but suffering is never redemptive. Only God Almighty can redeem us by nothing of ourselves. There is nothing wrong with joining with Jesus Christ, but not following false doctrines like the existence of a Pope, nuns, scapular, rosary beads with repetitive prayer violating Gods word (Matthew 6:7), etc.
Catholic #1: It is not either/or.
Response: There is context in scripture and God said choose heaven or choose Hell. There is an either or in life.
Catholic #1: Any one that seriously believes in Chick, is rather sacary as all his sources 'are covered up" or "trust me"
Response: Jack Chick is right on Evolution, Freemasonry, JWs, Islam, etc. I trust him and his sources and his work are not covered up or intentionally false. Many of his sources include information involving Creation, music, and other issues, not just the Catholic Church. Hes very wide in his perspective.
Catholic #1: Rivera and Todd were documented criminals, these, Chick's sources.
Response: Chick uses more sources than Rivera and Todd. Chick uses sources from Intelligent design promoters, Bible scholars, researchers, etc. Watchman may call me a smearer and question Chick, but I wont. Rivera was a man who made mistakes, but his fundamental arguments of the corruption of the Catholic Church and the Jesuits are facts. Todd was a man who made mistakes as well, but he tried his best to outline the Satanism is prevalent in society and the Secret Societies power in America. That should be cherished not condemned.
Catholic #1: I have read Marcavages views on this site about Catholics. He spends more time, it seems fighting us than focusing on abortion, etc.
Response: Marcavages has a right to believe in what he wants about Catholics. Abortion is forever evil and murder, but ecumenical unity is wrong and shouldnt be used to fight against legitimate social ills at all. I dont follow ecumenicalism and Rome is surely promoting that gambit to con Bible-Believers to compromise their faith for submitting to the teachings of the Vatican. I will never submit to the Vatican, Freemasonry, or other false groups at all. God allowed me to witness the truth in front of my face and I will not deny God. Dissent with false doctrine is scriptural and not evil or a hindrance to people.
Catholic #1: His posts and info show he never really knew anything about Catholicism. Reading articles and statements do not make one a Catholic nor an expert. He clearly knows little about us. Further, the "ex" title is telling. Ex-smokers are some of the biggest anti-smoking nazi's around.
Response: Thats so funny that you call an ex-Catholic like Marcavages as not knowing anything about Catholicism. Catholicism is easy to understand. It believes that works save, that Mary is sinless, that the mass contains the body and blood of Jesus Christ in a circular wafer (used by the ancient Babylonian and Egyptian pagans), that purgatory is a real place, that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ when the Pope is never mentioned in the Bible and the Early Church condemned a bishop of bishops as Cyprian eloquently said in his works.
Catholic #1: Watchman,
I respect the fact that you are at least willing to look at both sides. By reviewing sites such as catholic .com, Catholic Apologetics International, Scripture Catholic, etc one should get a fair and balanced view of what we believe. Not some Chick-fantasy.
Response: Chick is not showing fantasy. Jack Chick is right that Roman Catholicism embraces purgatory, the Papacy, etc. Hes right that the Jesuits have been involved with negative activities before. Hes right that Freemasonry is wrong and occultic and hes right that God existed and that he created the heavens and the Earth. Jack Chick is right on a lot of issues.
Catholic #1: As I have said before, look at what we REALLY believe, not what someon with a clear grudge or slant has to say.
Response: I always know what Catholicism is all about by the Bible, Vatican II documents, early church quotes, more Catholic documents, and other information years ago. I dont have a grudge or slant.
Catholic #1: I have talked to Ralph Woodrow. He wrote a second book refuting, totally, Hislop's views in light on current archeology, etc.
Response: I havent heard of Ralph Woodrow. Hislops main premise that paganism influenced many of the doctrines of Romanism is a fact. I dont care how many books Woodrow right, since that cant be denied. Many scholars write literature blasting others opinion and that doesnt mean that the blaster is accurate at all.
Hislop believed that the cross was a satanic symbol!!
Response: The cross was a satanic symbol if you when a cross with equal sides on it. The cross in the form of a Tau is from heathen civilizations and thats proven by modern research, archaelogy, and history. Thats Hislops point. Thats not extremist for Christ rose from the dead. Having Christ on a cross around your neck is really sick for Christ is not on the cross but on the right hand of God the Father.
www.thewordsofeternallife.com/cross.html is a site with multiple sources proving the pagan origin of the cross.
Catholic #1: He is extremely eccentric
Response: He may be eccentric, but right on his arguments.
Catholic #1: I have read the KJV, comapring it to my 2 Catholic Bibles. NO disagreement. The original KJV had the so-call "apocrapha" books !!!!!
Response: Many scholars have pointed out the many disagreement between the Catholic Bible and KJV. The original KJV had apocrypha books originally because it was of a reference tool not because they were as equally accurate as the 66-book canon. The early Church like Jerome, Origen, Hilary, etc. rejected it. Jewish scholars like Josephus, The Council of Jamnia, and Philo, and others in the time of Christ and for hundreds of years after the death and resurrection of Jesus condemned the Apocrypha as being inaccurate. Thats a historical fact.
The Roman Catholic Church did not officially canonize the Apocrypha until the Council of Trent (1546 AD). Even King James and William Tyndale condemned the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha have many unscriptural precepts like prayers for the dead and sinless perfection (2 Maccabees 12:39-46), Salvation by Almsgiving (Ecclesiasticus 3:30), Purgatory (II Maccabees 12:39-45), the justification of suicide (II Maccabees 14:43-46), slavery and cruelty (Ecclesiasticus 33:24-28), and reincarnation (Wisdom of Solomon 8:19-20). Lying, assassination and magical incantations are also approved in the Apocrypha. Luther and Calvin regarded the Apocrypha as not inspired works of God. Luther called it solely for edification and Calvin rejected them out right. So, Bible-Believers rejected the Apocrypha from the beginning.
Catholic #1: TRy as I have, I could not find any validation of the man-made Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide or for some of you, once-saved-always-saved.
Response: There is tons of validation of Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide and other precepts. Sola Scriptura is the belief that the Scriptures alone are sufficient to help a believer to find all fundamental doctrines of Christianity. Sola Scriptura also means that the Bible is the supreme source of information for religious usage, the final court of appeal for doctrine, and sufficient guide for any religious walk. Those 3 signs can be easily derived from Gods word. Thats a fact since 2 Timothy 3:15-16 All Scripture is inspired. Also see Psalm 89:34 .Not even God would alter his word. 2 Peter 1:20-21 says his written word is inspired and not given by private inspiration. The prophecy came by holy men of God moved by the Holy Spirit.
The Scriptures arent equal to tradition since tradition has a tendency to be distorted over time, change, some tradition are unscriptural, and no one knows the total extent of authentic tradition. The Scriptures are totally preserved in 66 books. Christ condemned some of tradition, but Christ never condemned the Holy Scriptures. Since tradition varies over time and the Bible doesnt, the Bible is superior to all tradition. Sola Fide is that by grace alone God can save a soul and thats fact expressed explicitly by Paul and others in the NT. I dont believe in once saved always saved.
Catholic #1: BTW
For those of you that are conspiracy nuts, how do you know that Peroutka is really a protestant now, not a Catholic ? Paranoia eventually leads to trusting in nothing or no one.
Response: A Conspiracy is mentioned in the Bible (Ezekiel 22:25, Acts 23:13). Satan is in a conspiracy to ruin the world, but in the end; he will fail. Legitimate conspiracies ought to be praised not condemned like John Loftus, Eric Jon Phelps and other proving that the Vatican allowed Nazis war criminals to come to South America, U.S.A., and other places in the Vatican Ratline. Peroutka is an Arminian Christian. Theres no need for paranoia, but there isnt a need for doubting the New World Order plan as well.
Catholic #1: Christ founded a Church, not a Jesus-and-me-only ism. Read Paul's letters carefully.
Response: Christ founded a Church with Christ as its head, but not with Popes, nuns, monks, priests, etc. that existed from the obsolete Judaism or from pagan religion. Read Paul and Jesus words carefully. Christ wanted the church to be simplistic not massive expansive with pomp and public, unnecessary religious ceremonies as we see today not only in Catholicism but in Charismatic circles and apostate Protestants and apostate Baptist churches.
Catholic #1: The pagan fallacy, once taken its natural and full route, can invalidate all Christianity. There are several books that allege that Jewish and Christian beliefs are nothing more than pagan beliefs, mixed with Middle eastern religions and Greek.
Response: Satan using false faiths counterfeited items of authentic truth and some aspects of Christianity have roots in Judaism. On the other hand, Christianity is unique from all faith since its the only faith that believes that one man saved the sins of the word and that mankind cant be saved by works, but by grace through faith.
All pagan religions subscribe to the belief that works will save a man, but his works can never save a man. Also, Christianity is unique in saying that Jesus Christ is the only way to Heaven and Jesus saved all of the sins of the entire world of all time not Buddha, Muhammad, Hinduism, etc. Books existing slandering Christianity doesnt validate their opinions anyway. Theres books slandering Bible-Believers, but that doesnt make them factually true.
Catholic #1: The everything-we-dont-like-is-a-pagan-religion is poor on any archeology, history and religious thought.
Response: Wow, God said dont follow in the way of the heathen. The Bible says that dont follow sinful. Thats paganism. Archaeology, history, and religious thought have proven the pagan influences in Catholicism and you refuse to accept that. For example, the Popes mitre is from the pagan religions of Babylon and has no scriptural validation. Monks existed in pagan religions globally, but has no scriptural validation. The circular mass is circular and claims to have the blood and body of Christ and a circular wafer is found in many ancient pagan religions (proven by historian Wilkinson), but it has no scriptural validation.
The Pope itself has no scriptural validation and Popes existed in Babylon and many Roman Emperors were called Pappa. Paganism ought to be rejected as wrong not covered up. It's not about what we don't like, it's about what God doesn't like. God doesn't like repeating prayer, unscriptural doctrine, calling a man Holy Father, and other things. I follow God not men.
Catholic #1: Unlike Watchman, you all disagree with me based on your own misconceptions, not what I really bleieve, yet each one of you acts as your own "pope" in what is biblical and who is or isnt a Christian, based on your own narrow and undereducated mind set.
Response: I have no misconceptions about Catholicism. Watchman is Watchman and tried to call me a smearer when I exposed his pal Ronald Reagan (that fraud) and I know all about Catholic belief. I dont act as my own Pope since God gave us a mind to question things. God gave us a spirit to discern things and God gave us a soul so he could save us. Questioning and exposing false doctrines is not evil or a sin. I dont act as a Pope. The Pope lets people bow to him, the Pope claims that he is the Vicar of Christ, centuries ago many Pope claimed to be God or take the place of God which is blasphemous, and the Pope is called Holy Father, when only God is called Holy Father (John 17:11).
Catholic #1: Look at the sites I noted for a fair opinion.
I always looked at pro-Catholic sites before and my mind is made up to follow Gods word and not unscriptural addition tradition.
Catholic #1: I do thank you all, for your attacks have deepened my Catholic faith and I have gotten even depper into scripture!!! I also am a Promo Director now for a Catholic Apolgist group!!!
Response: I thank you for deepening my faith in Jesus Christ. Ive gotten deep in Scripture as well. It doesnt matter if you are a Promo Director for a Catholic Apologist group, since Ive debated racist, 7th Adventists, Oneness, Muslims, JWs, Freemasons, etc. before. This is nothing new.
Catholic #1: BTW- Bible Christian Society, tapes and CD's for $1, if you are interested in the Catholic view from a strict, Bible-only study! No Fathers, little to no Cathecis or Encyclicals
Response: Sorry, Im not interested.
Catholic #1: I am a believer. I find the Catholic faith is in complete harmony with the RSV, Douy-Rheims and KJV!
Response: You are living in false doctrine in the Catholic religion. It is in harmony with the RSV and Douy-Rheims, but not with the KJV that eloquently refutes much of Roman Catholic distortions of scripture.
Catholic #1: Thank you all for increasing my faith. I continually pray for you, that Satan not use you as a willing patsy for his will.
Response: Thank you for increasing my faith. I dont need prayer to follow Roman Catholicism. Satan is not using me as a patsy for his will. The Roman Catholic Church is false by the evidence.
Catholic #1: Watchman, I can at least respect you/I differences brother in Christ!!!!!
Response: What can I say. Watchman is Watchman. Hes pro-Confederacy and denies that Freemasonry influenced the Confederacy and Union side of the War. For example, the Southern Jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite was based in Charleston, South Carolina and Albert Pike and many Confederate leaders were Masons just like General Grant. Anton Chaitkin documented a strong Masonry presence in the South as well. Watchman mocked me by questioning the existence of the Knights of the Golden Circle when both Union and Confederate leaders were members and scholars having proven their and the Jesuits involvement in the death of Abraham Lincoln before. He makes the mistake by claiming that I judge all Confederates as evil, which I dont.
I only judge the leadership of the Confederacy like Union as controlled by the Elite in the Civil War. Nothing more or less. I go on the Bush Revealed Forum and writes articles, but I dont agree with everything he believes in as well. He mocks the Jesuit conspiracy fact, but heres some facts that Watchman and Catholic #1 dont want you to know:
Fact: Jesuit priest Bernhard Staempfle helped Hitler write Mein Kampf proven by author Edmond Paris and Otto Strasser was one of the founders of the Nazi Party. Even Hitler said that he modeled the SS after the Jesuit Order.
Fact: Honorary 33rd Degree Freemason Ronald Reagan was cozy with Boston College President Jesuit J. Donald Monan. Reagan not only passed abortion in California in the 1960s and was anti-gun, but also allowed pro-abortion Supreme Court justice Sandra Day OConnor to exist and other bad political policies.
Fact: Hitler signed Concordant with Vatican Cardinal Pacelli in 1933 with the help of Knight of Malta Franz von Papen. Hitler was never excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church at all.
Fact:
Fact: Many Jesuits and the Vatican supported Latin American dictators to oppress the people there.
Fact: Jesuit Priest and 33rd Degree Freemason Joseph Rettinger create the powerful and sinister Bilderberger Group.
Fact: Jesuit priest William J. Fulco wrote the script for the unscriptural/occultic film of the Passion of the Christ.
Fact: Knight of Malta Dr.John J. DeGioia is a Georgetown/Jesuit trained person whos part of the Elite by being a member of the U.S. National Commission for UNESCO, Chair of its Education Committee, according to the webpage he "represents Georgetown" being a member of the World Economic Forum and the Council on Foreign Relations.
Fact: Jesuit Georgetown University trained Bill Clinton and he even went with Jesuit Richard McSorley on a trip to Olso, Norway since both opposed the Vietnam War. Clinton is obvious a person who is pro-abortion and even vetoes a ban on partial birth abortion when the majority of the American people opposed that type of abortion.
*Not to mention that the refuse to look at the Vaticans Secret Societies of the Opus Dei, Knights of Columbus, Knights of Malta, etc. I hope you convert to real Christianity Catholic #1.
By TruthSeeker24 (Timothy).
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Debate on the Sabbath
From http://thetruth81901.yuku.com/topic/758/t/Debate-on-the-Sabbath.html
I like this response.
2 Corinthians 3:6-17 "Who also hath made us able ministers of the NEW TESTAMENT; not of the LETTER (the law), but of the SPIRIT: for the LETTER KILLETH, but the spirit giveth LIFE. But if the MINISTRATION OF DEATH (the law), written and engraven in STONES (the 10 commandments), WAS GLORIOUS, so that the children of ISRAEL could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be DONE AWAY: How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of CONDEMNATION (the law) be glory, much more doth the ministration of RIGHTEOUSNESS EXCEED IN GLORY. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in THIS RESPECT, by reason of the glory that EXCELLED. For if that which IS DONE AWAY (the law) was glorious, much more that which REMAINETH is glorious. Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to THE END of that which IS ABOLISHED: But their minds were BLINDED (Rom 11:25): for until this day remaineth the same VAIL untaken away in the reading of the OLD TESTAMENT; which vail is DONE AWAY IN CHRIST. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away. Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is LIBERTY."
Hebrews 8:6-8 "But now hath he obtained a MORE EXCELLENT ministry, by how much also HE (Jesus Christ) is the mediator of a BETTER COVENANT, which was established upon BETTER PROMISES. For if that first covenant had been FAULTLESS, then should NO PLACE have been sought for the SECOND. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a NEW COVENANT with the house of ISRAEL and with the house of Judah."
Romans 6:14 " For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace."
Gal 3:10 "For as many as are of the WORKS of the law are UNDER THE CURSE: for it is written, CURSED is everyone that continueth not in ALL THINGS which are written in the law to DO THEM."
*Indeed this is my final response to the issue and you can respond to it as you wish.
pitbull wrote:
The one does not logically follow the other. Just because I'm not supposed to judge you on the day you worship doesn't preclude the requirement to keep the Sabbath. BTW, that's a falacious arguement, since we are not to allow others to judge US on the day we commemorate (Col.2.16), among other things.
Response: It isnt a fallacious argument despite your word games. This is a slick sematic game by you. First, I purely stated a fact that Col. 2:16 forbids us to judge people what we eat or what day we worship. That isnt complicated and that is a simple statement that doesnt need to be criticized. Second, allowing others includes anyone (believer or non-believer) so this sematic game isnt working. Col 2:14 perfectly states that this works dogma of mandatory Sabbath Keeping is nailed to the cross never to be repeated again. I don't judge people worshipping on Saturday if they want, but I do have a right to criticize those who believe that this is Mandatory for all Christians to do. Once again, The New Testament never outlines the Sabbath as a mandatory requirement for all believers to follow at all. I'm believing in Christianity not obsolete Judaism.
pitbull wrote:
Excuse me?!? On the 7th day of the universe's history Yeshua observed the Sabbath. The children of Israel observed the Sabbath BEFORE the Covenant was given from Sinai, and YHWH expected them to observe it, was wroth when they didn't. Remember the double portion of manna on the 6th day and the commandment to NOT go out to gather it on the 7th day in Ex.16? Covenant was spoken in Ex.20. The Sabbath was miraculously set apart at least 3 ways BEFORE the covenant; 1) the double portion on the 6th day, 2) no provision on the 7th day, 3) the extra portion from the 6th day did not spoil overnight, as on the other days. The celebration of Christians (mostly on Sundays) commerates the resurrection of Christ from the dead." But Messiah rose on Sabbath afternoon, just before sundown! What has 1st day (sunday) got to do with it? Go ahead. Ask me to prove it.
Response: Your rhetoric is astounding to me. On the 7th Day, God rested and there is no evidence that Adam, Noah, Abraham or anyone alse before the Exodus 16 observed the Sabbath. There is not even a word of the Sabbath in Genesis and thats a fact you refuse to accept. The children of Israel observing the Sabbath is true in Exodus 16, but this was the first time in the Bible that God required the Hebrews to observe the Sabbath. Before Ex. 16, there were no evidence of anyone observing it or doing rituals to fulfill it all all. As for when Christ rose from the dead:
Jesus wasn't crucified after the Sabbath, but he rose again after the Sabbath (the Sabbath ends at sundown, there is no Sabbath after sundown and the Bible perfectly states that). Look at these verses to clear your distortion:
"1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.
3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:
4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.
5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.
6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay." (Mt. 28:1-6)
"Chapter 16
16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
16:2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.
16:3 And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?
16:4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.
16:5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.
16:6 And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him.
16:7 But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you.
16:8 And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.
16:9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils."
(Mark 16:1-9).
"Chapter 24
1 Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.
2 And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.
3 And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus.
4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:
5 And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?
6 He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee,
7 Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.
8 And they remembered his words,
9 And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest.
10 It was Mary Magdalene and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles." (Luke 24:1-9).
www.bible.ca/d-3-days-and...hts.htm#IX
explains it greatly as well. Let the truth be told though the heavens fall.
pitbull wrote:
Just how is the New Covenant different from the Old? Where does any passage that refers to it say it is changed? Jer.31.31-34? Nope. Heb.8? Nope. In Hebrews 8.7, 13, and 9.1, the word covenant is supplied by the translators and shows their doctrinal bias. If we leave those words out, the word 'first' refers back to the noun 'ministry', and the ministry of the Melchizedek priesthood is DEFINITELY different that the ministry of the Levitical priesthood.
Response: There is plenty of evidence that that new covenant is different from the Old. The Bible says that we arent under the law (Rom. 6:14; Gal. 5:1.
Jer. 31:32-34 states in prophecy that God will have a new law from the old indeed. Also, Hebrews 7:12 outlines that God will change his law. Romans 10:4 proves that the old law is dead not required for believers in Jesus Christ. This sematics game doesnt work pitbull. One simple example is that in the Old law, there were priests who handled the religious affairs of the Temple. Now, in the New Law, the priesthood is changed into all believers are priests as mentioned forth in the Bible whether you like it or not. The word covenant outlines a reality and you saying that covenant was supplanted by the translators shows a hatred of the New Law. The Bible perfectly says that by the cross, the new law came into existence and much of the Old Law isnt a requirement for Christians to follow at all. Even Romans Rom. 14:5-6 say that a man can worship on anyday they want with no basic consequences. The ministry of the Levitical priesthood is also different from the universal priesthood of believers outlined in Hebrews. I reject Judaizers. Primarily Melchizedek relates to Christ and is no consequence about this subject. Take it as you wish.
pitbull wrote:
The only difference between the 'old' Covenant and the 'new' covenant is the medium on which it is inscribed, hearts of flesh vice tables of stone.
Response: There are tons of differences between the Old and New covenant:
-Christians arent required to follow many man-made laws and holidays after salvation like Jubilee, the Sabbath, etc. I have no problem though with folks celebrating Passover or the Feast of Tabernacles who are Christians.
-The Old law included the ceremonial and moral components of the Torah while the new law emphasizes the following of the moral law to have a better spiritual relationship with God. (i.e. The NT perfect says that we cant murder, commit adultery, steal, etc.)
-The New law offers better promises and eliminates animal sacrifice (Hebrews 8:6, 9:23-10:12). Romans 6:14 says that were not under the law, but under grace.
pitbull wrote:
Those who kept sunday before the Edict of Milan (320's CE) were syncretizers, attempting to paganize the Messianic faith. Constantine forced it on the entire empire and those who would not compromise were either killed or escaped to the hills (the Waldenses and Albigenses come to mind). Today, the lie of 'sunday' sanctity, which was instituted by Pope Constantine I, is so ingrained in society that Sabbath keeping is seen as DISobedience!
Response: This is the biggest falsehood of them all. There are tons of examples of Sunday worshipping Christians before the 325 AD. One example is from Acts 20:7 which states that on the first day, Christians broke bread. 1 Cor. 16:1-2, Acts 20:7, Acts 2:1) are evidence of Believers worshipping on the First Day of the Week. Many early church leaders like Ignatius (disciple of John) and early works like DIDACHE outline that worship by Christians were held in Sunday. To label legitiamate Christians who wanted to celebrate the Lord's Day and as syncretizers is very said and disrespectful. The Albigenses were Gnostics and heretics. Mainstream historians have proven this before so you cant make the charge of this accusation being false:
"Officially known as heretics, they were actually Cathari, Provenal adherents of a doctrine similar to the Manichaean dualistic system of material evil and spiritual good (see Manichaeism; Bogomils). They held the coexistence of these two principles, represented by God and the Evil One, light and dark, the soul and the body, the next life and this life, peace and war, and the like. They believed that Jesus only seemed to have a human body. 2
The Albigenses were extremely ascetic, abstaining from flesh in all its forms, including milk and cheese. They comprised two classes, believers and Perfect, the former much more numerous, making up a catechumenate not bound by the stricter rules observed by the Perfect. The Perfect were those who had received the sacrament of consolamentum, a kind of laying on of hands. The Albigenses held their clergy in high regard. An occasional practice was suicide, preferably by starvation; for if this life is essentially evil, its end is to be hastened. 3
They had enthusiasm for proselytizing and preached vigorously. This fact partly accounted for their success, for at that time preaching was unknown in ordinary parish life. In the practice of asceticism as well, the contrast between local clergy and the Albigenses was helpful to the new sect." (The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001.)
The Waldensians were believers, but many bible believers worshipped on Saturday and Sunday and that isnt evil nor a sin at all. Constatine did allow of bad things, but he didnt institute Sunday worship since believers were worshipping on Sunday before 100 A.D. Also to claim that he did it is a Lie. The Sabbath isn't changed, but the Lord's Day was adopted to commerate the Resurrection of Christ in the New Law. The Sabbath was part of Mosaic law to commerate God's creation and the escape of Hebrew out of the bondage from Egypt. There is no change, but an addition of the Lord's Day for worship and celebration. I dont believe that folks worshipping on the Sabbath isnt disobedient. Thats their choice and they have a right to do that.
pitbull wrote:
These have absolutely NOTHING to do with the Covenant, which was given in Ex.20-23. Animal sacrifices FOR TRESPASSES AND SINS were required after the Hebrews broke the Covenant with the golden calf - AND NOT BEFORE!
Response: Animal sacrifices were definitely part of the Old covenant and many Hebrews did it in Jesus time. The Old law is more than the 10 commandments but includes thousands of rules and regulations that are required for those living in the times before and during the arrival of Christ. That is something a lot of law keepers don't mention in their literature lately.
pitbull wrote:
We refer to EVERY day by a pagan name. That is another gift of the Roman Catholic system. Don't blame Sabbath keepers for it.
Response: I blame the Roman Catholic system for it and many Sabbath keepers scaring people to believe that if you dont have Sabbath keeping, youre going to Hell which they promote in their literature and false dogma.
pitbull wrote:
That's right. To ALL Israel, not just the Jews. After Solomon, references to Israel are USUALLY about the 10 northern tribes, while references to Judah always refer to the 3 southern tribes. This includes the 'new' Covenant (Jer.31, Heb. . When Israel (10 tribes) were carried away by Assyria, they were easily assimilated into the nations since they'd been practicing paganism for hundreds of years (and calling their golden calves 'yhwh"). The were assimilated and have never been a nation or tribe since. They are essentially 'lost' to human history. But NOT to YHWH Yeshua. He knows every child of Israel, even those born in America or China. YOU could be one of them. I am.
Response: Israel included the Jews which you and I agree on. After the Assyrian Captivity, there is plenty evidence of many of the lost tribes returning back to Israel. One example you fail to mention is the Paul was from Tarsus and visited Israel many times and he was of the Tribe of Benjamin. Also, many of the lost tribes are proven to be in many regions of the world that are identifiable. Jew is used synonymously with Hebrew in Jeremiah 34:9. Mordecai was called a Jew although he was from the tribe of Benjamin (Esther 2:5).
2 Chronicles 34:5-9 actually make mentions of some of the lost 10 tribes returning back to Israel. Genetically and historically much of the so-called Lost Tribes are throughout the World (mainly in India, parts of Central Asia, and even some parts of Africa). Anna the Prophetess was of the tribe of Asher (Luke 2:36). Paul mentioned all twelve tribes. (Acts 26:6,7) and James mentioned all twelve tribes as well. (James 1:1) How can all 10 tribes be gone forever without a trace when Asher and Benjamin are mentioned existing in the vicinity of the Middle East after the Assyrian Captivity.
I will in 2005 list over a dozen verses to prove that many of the Lost Tribes existed after the captivity because of the half-truths indeed. 1 Peter 1:1 refers to them as part of the Dispersion. They arent all lost in human history. By the time of the NT, the words Jew and Israel are interchangeably used in the Bible. Even Acts 18:2 had 2 Jewish people were from Pontus not Israel. So, being a Jew doesnt mean youre specifically from the tribe of Judah. Before the Captivity, indeed there was a distinction between Jews and the rest of the 10 tribes.
pitbull wrote:
Please don't be ludicrous. Messiah NEVER broke any commandment. He IS Torah, for Pete's sake. To forsake any part of Torah is to forsake himself.
Response: I give you that Christ never broke any commandment but came to fulfill the Law, etc.
pitbull wrote:
TS24 wrote; "there is no verse in the New Testament that requires us to follow it to be saved at all. There is no evidence of Christians required to worship on the Sabbath to be saved."
Response: Jesus is our real Sabbath and Lord over the Sabbath.
Pitbull: No duh! Salvation is not by any works we can do. It is by the grace of YHWH through the faith of Yeshua, not by anything we can do. We keep sabbath to keep our souls from sin, which is the transgression of Torah (1Jn.3.4).
Response: Yeah, thats true that Jesus is our real Sabbath and Lord over the Sabbath. So, we agree thats true then why do you obsess with the Sabbath being part of the New law when it isnt. There is no verse in the Bible that to keep the Sabbath keep our souls from sin. The commandments in the Bible in a lot of instances exceed the 10 commandments or dont mention them at all. For example in John 13:34, Christ said that his new commandment was to love one another. The commandments mention in John refers to the word of God not explicitly of the 10 commandments. We are to follow 9 of them in our new covenant and again the Sabbath is voluntarily not mandatory for Christians to follow at all. .
And if you were really following the Sabbath, according to the OT, you need to (1) Doing no work. (Ex. 20:9-10) (2) No baking or boiling. (Ex. 16:23) (3) Bearing no burden. (Jer. 17:21-22) (4) Offering two lambs. (Num. 28:9-10). If you fail to do that and other actions, you therefore are breaking the Sabbath. God broke the Old Law by the Cross alone. If youre serious about following the Law, the Bible says that if you break one rule of the Old law, then youre guilty of all of them. (James 2:10) The Sabbath was a sign between God and the Children of Israel for a perpetual covenant not for the Church. ( Ezekiel 20:13, 20) The Church is different from Israel. Not to mention that you have to follow thousands of other rules in the Old Law as well.
If Bible-Believers/Fundamentals/Evangelicals are tired of the Adventist/Sabbath-keeping propaganda, you can go to:
watch.pair.com/sabbath.html
www.biblebelievers.com/Caldwell1.html
www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/...dventi.htm
www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/...martin.htm
www.jesus-is-lord.com/sabbath.htm
www.letusreason.org/7thAd15.htm
By Timothy
_________________
7 CITIES
NORFOLK
PORTSMOUTH
HAMPTON
CHESAPEAKE
NEWPORT NEWS
VIRGINIA BEACH
SUFFOLK
I like this response.
2 Corinthians 3:6-17 "Who also hath made us able ministers of the NEW TESTAMENT; not of the LETTER (the law), but of the SPIRIT: for the LETTER KILLETH, but the spirit giveth LIFE. But if the MINISTRATION OF DEATH (the law), written and engraven in STONES (the 10 commandments), WAS GLORIOUS, so that the children of ISRAEL could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be DONE AWAY: How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of CONDEMNATION (the law) be glory, much more doth the ministration of RIGHTEOUSNESS EXCEED IN GLORY. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in THIS RESPECT, by reason of the glory that EXCELLED. For if that which IS DONE AWAY (the law) was glorious, much more that which REMAINETH is glorious. Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to THE END of that which IS ABOLISHED: But their minds were BLINDED (Rom 11:25): for until this day remaineth the same VAIL untaken away in the reading of the OLD TESTAMENT; which vail is DONE AWAY IN CHRIST. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away. Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is LIBERTY."
Hebrews 8:6-8 "But now hath he obtained a MORE EXCELLENT ministry, by how much also HE (Jesus Christ) is the mediator of a BETTER COVENANT, which was established upon BETTER PROMISES. For if that first covenant had been FAULTLESS, then should NO PLACE have been sought for the SECOND. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a NEW COVENANT with the house of ISRAEL and with the house of Judah."
Romans 6:14 " For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace."
Gal 3:10 "For as many as are of the WORKS of the law are UNDER THE CURSE: for it is written, CURSED is everyone that continueth not in ALL THINGS which are written in the law to DO THEM."
*Indeed this is my final response to the issue and you can respond to it as you wish.
pitbull wrote:
The one does not logically follow the other. Just because I'm not supposed to judge you on the day you worship doesn't preclude the requirement to keep the Sabbath. BTW, that's a falacious arguement, since we are not to allow others to judge US on the day we commemorate (Col.2.16), among other things.
Response: It isnt a fallacious argument despite your word games. This is a slick sematic game by you. First, I purely stated a fact that Col. 2:16 forbids us to judge people what we eat or what day we worship. That isnt complicated and that is a simple statement that doesnt need to be criticized. Second, allowing others includes anyone (believer or non-believer) so this sematic game isnt working. Col 2:14 perfectly states that this works dogma of mandatory Sabbath Keeping is nailed to the cross never to be repeated again. I don't judge people worshipping on Saturday if they want, but I do have a right to criticize those who believe that this is Mandatory for all Christians to do. Once again, The New Testament never outlines the Sabbath as a mandatory requirement for all believers to follow at all. I'm believing in Christianity not obsolete Judaism.
pitbull wrote:
Excuse me?!? On the 7th day of the universe's history Yeshua observed the Sabbath. The children of Israel observed the Sabbath BEFORE the Covenant was given from Sinai, and YHWH expected them to observe it, was wroth when they didn't. Remember the double portion of manna on the 6th day and the commandment to NOT go out to gather it on the 7th day in Ex.16? Covenant was spoken in Ex.20. The Sabbath was miraculously set apart at least 3 ways BEFORE the covenant; 1) the double portion on the 6th day, 2) no provision on the 7th day, 3) the extra portion from the 6th day did not spoil overnight, as on the other days. The celebration of Christians (mostly on Sundays) commerates the resurrection of Christ from the dead." But Messiah rose on Sabbath afternoon, just before sundown! What has 1st day (sunday) got to do with it? Go ahead. Ask me to prove it.
Response: Your rhetoric is astounding to me. On the 7th Day, God rested and there is no evidence that Adam, Noah, Abraham or anyone alse before the Exodus 16 observed the Sabbath. There is not even a word of the Sabbath in Genesis and thats a fact you refuse to accept. The children of Israel observing the Sabbath is true in Exodus 16, but this was the first time in the Bible that God required the Hebrews to observe the Sabbath. Before Ex. 16, there were no evidence of anyone observing it or doing rituals to fulfill it all all. As for when Christ rose from the dead:
Jesus wasn't crucified after the Sabbath, but he rose again after the Sabbath (the Sabbath ends at sundown, there is no Sabbath after sundown and the Bible perfectly states that). Look at these verses to clear your distortion:
"1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.
3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:
4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.
5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.
6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay." (Mt. 28:1-6)
"Chapter 16
16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
16:2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.
16:3 And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?
16:4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.
16:5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.
16:6 And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him.
16:7 But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you.
16:8 And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.
16:9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils."
(Mark 16:1-9).
"Chapter 24
1 Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.
2 And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.
3 And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus.
4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:
5 And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?
6 He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee,
7 Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.
8 And they remembered his words,
9 And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest.
10 It was Mary Magdalene and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles." (Luke 24:1-9).
www.bible.ca/d-3-days-and...hts.htm#IX
explains it greatly as well. Let the truth be told though the heavens fall.
pitbull wrote:
Just how is the New Covenant different from the Old? Where does any passage that refers to it say it is changed? Jer.31.31-34? Nope. Heb.8? Nope. In Hebrews 8.7, 13, and 9.1, the word covenant is supplied by the translators and shows their doctrinal bias. If we leave those words out, the word 'first' refers back to the noun 'ministry', and the ministry of the Melchizedek priesthood is DEFINITELY different that the ministry of the Levitical priesthood.
Response: There is plenty of evidence that that new covenant is different from the Old. The Bible says that we arent under the law (Rom. 6:14; Gal. 5:1.
Jer. 31:32-34 states in prophecy that God will have a new law from the old indeed. Also, Hebrews 7:12 outlines that God will change his law. Romans 10:4 proves that the old law is dead not required for believers in Jesus Christ. This sematics game doesnt work pitbull. One simple example is that in the Old law, there were priests who handled the religious affairs of the Temple. Now, in the New Law, the priesthood is changed into all believers are priests as mentioned forth in the Bible whether you like it or not. The word covenant outlines a reality and you saying that covenant was supplanted by the translators shows a hatred of the New Law. The Bible perfectly says that by the cross, the new law came into existence and much of the Old Law isnt a requirement for Christians to follow at all. Even Romans Rom. 14:5-6 say that a man can worship on anyday they want with no basic consequences. The ministry of the Levitical priesthood is also different from the universal priesthood of believers outlined in Hebrews. I reject Judaizers. Primarily Melchizedek relates to Christ and is no consequence about this subject. Take it as you wish.
pitbull wrote:
The only difference between the 'old' Covenant and the 'new' covenant is the medium on which it is inscribed, hearts of flesh vice tables of stone.
Response: There are tons of differences between the Old and New covenant:
-Christians arent required to follow many man-made laws and holidays after salvation like Jubilee, the Sabbath, etc. I have no problem though with folks celebrating Passover or the Feast of Tabernacles who are Christians.
-The Old law included the ceremonial and moral components of the Torah while the new law emphasizes the following of the moral law to have a better spiritual relationship with God. (i.e. The NT perfect says that we cant murder, commit adultery, steal, etc.)
-The New law offers better promises and eliminates animal sacrifice (Hebrews 8:6, 9:23-10:12). Romans 6:14 says that were not under the law, but under grace.
pitbull wrote:
Those who kept sunday before the Edict of Milan (320's CE) were syncretizers, attempting to paganize the Messianic faith. Constantine forced it on the entire empire and those who would not compromise were either killed or escaped to the hills (the Waldenses and Albigenses come to mind). Today, the lie of 'sunday' sanctity, which was instituted by Pope Constantine I, is so ingrained in society that Sabbath keeping is seen as DISobedience!
Response: This is the biggest falsehood of them all. There are tons of examples of Sunday worshipping Christians before the 325 AD. One example is from Acts 20:7 which states that on the first day, Christians broke bread. 1 Cor. 16:1-2, Acts 20:7, Acts 2:1) are evidence of Believers worshipping on the First Day of the Week. Many early church leaders like Ignatius (disciple of John) and early works like DIDACHE outline that worship by Christians were held in Sunday. To label legitiamate Christians who wanted to celebrate the Lord's Day and as syncretizers is very said and disrespectful. The Albigenses were Gnostics and heretics. Mainstream historians have proven this before so you cant make the charge of this accusation being false:
"Officially known as heretics, they were actually Cathari, Provenal adherents of a doctrine similar to the Manichaean dualistic system of material evil and spiritual good (see Manichaeism; Bogomils). They held the coexistence of these two principles, represented by God and the Evil One, light and dark, the soul and the body, the next life and this life, peace and war, and the like. They believed that Jesus only seemed to have a human body. 2
The Albigenses were extremely ascetic, abstaining from flesh in all its forms, including milk and cheese. They comprised two classes, believers and Perfect, the former much more numerous, making up a catechumenate not bound by the stricter rules observed by the Perfect. The Perfect were those who had received the sacrament of consolamentum, a kind of laying on of hands. The Albigenses held their clergy in high regard. An occasional practice was suicide, preferably by starvation; for if this life is essentially evil, its end is to be hastened. 3
They had enthusiasm for proselytizing and preached vigorously. This fact partly accounted for their success, for at that time preaching was unknown in ordinary parish life. In the practice of asceticism as well, the contrast between local clergy and the Albigenses was helpful to the new sect." (The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001.)
The Waldensians were believers, but many bible believers worshipped on Saturday and Sunday and that isnt evil nor a sin at all. Constatine did allow of bad things, but he didnt institute Sunday worship since believers were worshipping on Sunday before 100 A.D. Also to claim that he did it is a Lie. The Sabbath isn't changed, but the Lord's Day was adopted to commerate the Resurrection of Christ in the New Law. The Sabbath was part of Mosaic law to commerate God's creation and the escape of Hebrew out of the bondage from Egypt. There is no change, but an addition of the Lord's Day for worship and celebration. I dont believe that folks worshipping on the Sabbath isnt disobedient. Thats their choice and they have a right to do that.
pitbull wrote:
These have absolutely NOTHING to do with the Covenant, which was given in Ex.20-23. Animal sacrifices FOR TRESPASSES AND SINS were required after the Hebrews broke the Covenant with the golden calf - AND NOT BEFORE!
Response: Animal sacrifices were definitely part of the Old covenant and many Hebrews did it in Jesus time. The Old law is more than the 10 commandments but includes thousands of rules and regulations that are required for those living in the times before and during the arrival of Christ. That is something a lot of law keepers don't mention in their literature lately.
pitbull wrote:
We refer to EVERY day by a pagan name. That is another gift of the Roman Catholic system. Don't blame Sabbath keepers for it.
Response: I blame the Roman Catholic system for it and many Sabbath keepers scaring people to believe that if you dont have Sabbath keeping, youre going to Hell which they promote in their literature and false dogma.
pitbull wrote:
That's right. To ALL Israel, not just the Jews. After Solomon, references to Israel are USUALLY about the 10 northern tribes, while references to Judah always refer to the 3 southern tribes. This includes the 'new' Covenant (Jer.31, Heb. . When Israel (10 tribes) were carried away by Assyria, they were easily assimilated into the nations since they'd been practicing paganism for hundreds of years (and calling their golden calves 'yhwh"). The were assimilated and have never been a nation or tribe since. They are essentially 'lost' to human history. But NOT to YHWH Yeshua. He knows every child of Israel, even those born in America or China. YOU could be one of them. I am.
Response: Israel included the Jews which you and I agree on. After the Assyrian Captivity, there is plenty evidence of many of the lost tribes returning back to Israel. One example you fail to mention is the Paul was from Tarsus and visited Israel many times and he was of the Tribe of Benjamin. Also, many of the lost tribes are proven to be in many regions of the world that are identifiable. Jew is used synonymously with Hebrew in Jeremiah 34:9. Mordecai was called a Jew although he was from the tribe of Benjamin (Esther 2:5).
2 Chronicles 34:5-9 actually make mentions of some of the lost 10 tribes returning back to Israel. Genetically and historically much of the so-called Lost Tribes are throughout the World (mainly in India, parts of Central Asia, and even some parts of Africa). Anna the Prophetess was of the tribe of Asher (Luke 2:36). Paul mentioned all twelve tribes. (Acts 26:6,7) and James mentioned all twelve tribes as well. (James 1:1) How can all 10 tribes be gone forever without a trace when Asher and Benjamin are mentioned existing in the vicinity of the Middle East after the Assyrian Captivity.
I will in 2005 list over a dozen verses to prove that many of the Lost Tribes existed after the captivity because of the half-truths indeed. 1 Peter 1:1 refers to them as part of the Dispersion. They arent all lost in human history. By the time of the NT, the words Jew and Israel are interchangeably used in the Bible. Even Acts 18:2 had 2 Jewish people were from Pontus not Israel. So, being a Jew doesnt mean youre specifically from the tribe of Judah. Before the Captivity, indeed there was a distinction between Jews and the rest of the 10 tribes.
pitbull wrote:
Please don't be ludicrous. Messiah NEVER broke any commandment. He IS Torah, for Pete's sake. To forsake any part of Torah is to forsake himself.
Response: I give you that Christ never broke any commandment but came to fulfill the Law, etc.
pitbull wrote:
TS24 wrote; "there is no verse in the New Testament that requires us to follow it to be saved at all. There is no evidence of Christians required to worship on the Sabbath to be saved."
Response: Jesus is our real Sabbath and Lord over the Sabbath.
Pitbull: No duh! Salvation is not by any works we can do. It is by the grace of YHWH through the faith of Yeshua, not by anything we can do. We keep sabbath to keep our souls from sin, which is the transgression of Torah (1Jn.3.4).
Response: Yeah, thats true that Jesus is our real Sabbath and Lord over the Sabbath. So, we agree thats true then why do you obsess with the Sabbath being part of the New law when it isnt. There is no verse in the Bible that to keep the Sabbath keep our souls from sin. The commandments in the Bible in a lot of instances exceed the 10 commandments or dont mention them at all. For example in John 13:34, Christ said that his new commandment was to love one another. The commandments mention in John refers to the word of God not explicitly of the 10 commandments. We are to follow 9 of them in our new covenant and again the Sabbath is voluntarily not mandatory for Christians to follow at all. .
And if you were really following the Sabbath, according to the OT, you need to (1) Doing no work. (Ex. 20:9-10) (2) No baking or boiling. (Ex. 16:23) (3) Bearing no burden. (Jer. 17:21-22) (4) Offering two lambs. (Num. 28:9-10). If you fail to do that and other actions, you therefore are breaking the Sabbath. God broke the Old Law by the Cross alone. If youre serious about following the Law, the Bible says that if you break one rule of the Old law, then youre guilty of all of them. (James 2:10) The Sabbath was a sign between God and the Children of Israel for a perpetual covenant not for the Church. ( Ezekiel 20:13, 20) The Church is different from Israel. Not to mention that you have to follow thousands of other rules in the Old Law as well.
If Bible-Believers/Fundamentals/Evangelicals are tired of the Adventist/Sabbath-keeping propaganda, you can go to:
watch.pair.com/sabbath.html
www.biblebelievers.com/Caldwell1.html
www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/...dventi.htm
www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/...martin.htm
www.jesus-is-lord.com/sabbath.htm
www.letusreason.org/7thAd15.htm
By Timothy
_________________
7 CITIES
NORFOLK
PORTSMOUTH
HAMPTON
CHESAPEAKE
NEWPORT NEWS
VIRGINIA BEACH
SUFFOLK
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)