|
|
Post by Charis on Mar 17, 2004 22:15:40 GMT -5
i'm sorry you feel your denomination is being bashed. unfortunately, ever thread that questions another denomination actually ends up a Bashing of the Rcc. we turn the other cheek constantly. as ann said, i do not feel defending my faith is bashing. First, I am *not* SDA. Never have been, never will be. I just have better things to do with my time than beat my head against a brick wall. Gene didn't start this thread. He didn't start most of the SDA threads. No, Nic started this thread bashing his beliefs (some of which I share, such as the Sabbath), and that is just an invitation to all SDAs and Sabbath keepers to come. Why don't we start holding the originator of these threads responsible, since I have yet to see ANY good come of ANY of the SDA/Sabbath threads? And anyway, who honestly cares what Gene thinks? So he says you aren't saved. So what? Heck, I've been told by a fundie Catholic that I wasn't saved solely because I keep Sabbath. Consider the source and whether your identity lies in what they think. The only thing that counts is God's opinion, and this thread is not glorifying to Him. |
|
|
|
Post by TarueBeliever on Mar 17, 2004 22:38:31 GMT -5
If one were keeping the Sabbath, would it not be wrong to work for hire on the Sabbath? and to hire someone to work for you on the Sabbath?
ScottMy opinion, yes. [/color][/quote] Then how do Adventists justify hiring the utilities workers to work for them on Saturday while they use electricity to light their homes and churches? If they were serious about "keeping the Sabbath," wouldn't they do without all services that required labor on Saturday? And don't call electricity a "necessity." People lived on this planet for 5900 years without it just fine.
Scott |
|
|
|
Post by Nicodemus on Mar 17, 2004 23:03:13 GMT -5
First, I am *not* SDA. Never have been, never will be. I just have better things to do with my time than beat my head against a brick wall. Gene didn't start this thread. He didn't start most of the SDA threads. No, Nic started this thread bashing his beliefs (some of which I share, such as the Sabbath), and that is just an invitation to all SDAs and Sabbath keepers to come. Why don't we start holding the originator of these threads responsible, since I have yet to see ANY good come of ANY of the SDA/Sabbath threads? And anyway, who honestly cares what Gene thinks? So he says you aren't saved. So what? Heck, I've been told by a fundie Catholic that I wasn't saved solely because I keep Sabbath. Consider the source and whether your identity lies in what they think. The only thing that counts is God's opinion, and this thread is not glorifying to Him. This was never posted with an eye toward convicing the Sabbath keepers of their error - but rather as a warning sign to those that might be thinking you all might be right. The attempts to counter the facts of the author are at best lame - but I should expect nothing better. Note the copyright date of this article - 1904. This meant that the author was an eyewitness to the things he is reporting. But to the Sabbath keepers, I don't know which they believe to be in the greatest error - the author, or the Scriptures posted. |
|
|
|
Post by HomeAtLast on Mar 18, 2004 0:38:19 GMT -5
Just an observation:
Anyone but me notice that really there has not been "bashing" on this thread, yet in each of the numerous catholic "bashing" threads no one ever stood up and asked someone to stop the "bashing"?
God's blessings to all,
Ann
|
|
|
|
Post by HomeAtLast on Mar 18, 2004 0:46:28 GMT -5
gene, Actions speak louder than words. Have a great day, Ann This is what I've been saying about Rome from the beginning, but you want people to accept "some" of the "words" of Rome over their actions of the past, which are not denied or rejected. [/color][/quote] gene, The operative word in your post is "past". You compare actions of the "past" to words of today yet refuse to compare RCC actions of the "past" to secular actions of the "past" and see that those actions of the RCC were far far less than what the secular organizations did. I do not see how you can expect people of today to be made accountable for injustices done 100's of years ago and why you would even want to. The closest that I can tell is because you assume that the RCC will return to those actions of the "past". You have been told over and over again that if that were to happen I would be at your side to stop those type of injustices, yet you rant on and on about how horrible it is based on people who lived hundreds of years ago. Should catholics hold all protestants accountable for the catholics that were persecuted in England so long ago? I personally do not believe so because none of those people are alive anymore and they must answer to God for the injustices that they committed. I hold no animosity toward any of them. That is why you I feel that you unfairly attack the RCC of today because of what was done in the past. Blessings and hopes that you will understand someday, Ann |
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 18, 2004 5:48:28 GMT -5
First, I am *not* SDA. Never have been, never will be. I just have better things to do with my time than beat my head against a brick wall. Gene didn't start this thread. He didn't start most of the SDA threads. No, Nic started this thread bashing his beliefs (some of which I share, such as the Sabbath), and that is just an invitation to all SDAs and Sabbath keepers to come. Why don't we start holding the originator of these threads responsible, since I have yet to see ANY good come of ANY of the SDA/Sabbath threads? And anyway, who honestly cares what Gene thinks? So he says you aren't saved. So what? Heck, I've been told by a fundie Catholic that I wasn't saved solely because I keep Sabbath. Consider the source and whether your identity lies in what they think. The only thing that counts is God's opinion, and this thread is not glorifying to Him. If you don't care, don't answer my posts. Simple isn't it?
By the way, just because you want the ten commandments "nailed to the cross", isn't preaching God's word. [/color] |
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 18, 2004 5:52:17 GMT -5
Then how do Adventists justify hiring the utilities workers to work for them on Saturday while they use electricity to light their homes and churches? If they were serious about "keeping the Sabbath," wouldn't they do without all services that required labor on Saturday? And don't call electricity a "necessity." People lived on this planet for 5900 years without it just fine.
Scott Electricity is there whether one works or not. As far as the other things you mention, we always cleaned our own church on days other than the sabbath.
You're speaking from a legalist standpoint. Besides, I can't speak for what others do or their motives. God's word is only what's important. [/color] |
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 18, 2004 5:54:12 GMT -5
This was never posted with an eye toward convicing the Sabbath keepers of their error - but rather as a warning sign to those that might be thinking you all might be right. The attempts to counter the facts of the author are at best lame - but I should expect nothing better. Note the copyright date of this article - 1904. This meant that the author was an eyewitness to the things he is reporting. But to the Sabbath keepers, I don't know which they believe to be in the greatest error - the author, or the Scriptures posted. The greatest error is the way you're reading things. Just because you found others in error to agree with you doesn't make you correct. [/color] |
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 18, 2004 6:04:51 GMT -5
gene, The operative word in your post is "past". You compare actions of the "past" to words of today yet refuse to compare RCC actions of the "past" to secular actions of the "past" and see that those actions of the RCC were far far less than what the secular organizations did. Oh! O.K., so just because the Rcc wasn't as bad as the rest of the world, they're O.K., right? The truth is the Rcc was behind the secular actions all along. You just won't see it. [/color] I do not see how you can expect people of today to be made accountable for injustices done 100's of years ago and why you would even want to. Not just 100 years ago, but for over 1000 years of injustice. You are not accountable for the wrongs of others but you uphold those injustices by upholding an organization that has never admitted that they were wrong in those actioons.
All I've heard is that the Rcc leadership said they were sorry those actions were necessary.
\I've askwed repeatedly for statements from the popes admitting those actions were wrong, but that admission will never come. [/color] The closest that I can tell is because you assume that the RCC will return to those actions of the "past". This is what scripture tells us. [/color] You have been told over and over again that if that were to happen I would be at your side to stop those type of injustices, yet you rant on and on about how horrible it is based on people who lived hundreds of years ago. I not only believe you'll be at my side, i believe your eyes will finally open and see the Rcc for what it really is. That will make all of this worth the time and effort. [/color] Should catholics hold all protestants accountable for the catholics that were persecuted in England so long ago? If any denomination was pushing for those actions, I say yes! Satan works in all denominations. That's why the bible speaks of "daughters" of the harlot, while referring to those churches who practice the same things as the "mother" of the harlots.
Those terms do apply to the churches, and not individuals or nations. [/color] I personally do not believe so because none of those people are alive anymore and they must answer to God for the injustices that they committed. I hold no animosity toward any of them. That is why you I feel that you unfairly attack the RCC of today because of what was done in the past. Only because there has been no change in attitude or practice. The bible is clear on this when understood correctly. [/color] Blessings and hopes that you will understand someday, Ann |
|
|
|
Post by TarueBeliever on Mar 18, 2004 7:30:12 GMT -5
Then how do Adventists justify hiring the utilities workers to work for them on Saturday while they use electricity to light their homes and churches? If they were serious about "keeping the Sabbath," wouldn't they do without all services that required labor on Saturday? And don't call electricity a "necessity." People lived on this planet for 5900 years without it just fine.
Scott Electricity is there whether one works or not. As far as the other things you mention, we always cleaned our own church on days other than the sabbath.
You're speaking from a legalist standpoint. Besides, I can't speak for what others do or their motives. God's word is only what's important. [/color][/quote] The church life and personal life of Adventists presuppose the availability of electricity on Sabbath. Church sanctuaries are so large that a speaker would never be heard were there no sound system. Lighting, air conditioning and heating are taken for granted. Food has to be kept cool. Even on Sabbath, Adventists depend on subways, traffic signals, elevators, and life-support apparatus at hospitals. When someone uses electricity, it "flows" into the building and is metered. At that point in time, the user becomes liable to pay for its use. When your church gathers on Saturday, I assume it uses electricity to light the rooms, work the heating and air conditioning systems, office equipment, sound systems, etc. It is, in effect, purchasing electricity that day, the Sabbath. In order to produce electricity on the Sabbath, the power company has to employ people to work on the Sabbath. When your church pays for its electricity, it pays the salaries and wages of the power company's employees in part. The same goes for when you use electricity in your own home on the Sabbath. The use of electricity in anyway is breaking the Sabbath. Imagine if an Adventist Revival swept our nation. What would happen if the entire population joined the Adventist church? Would it be possible to still have a technologically advanced society? I'll note but a few of the many problems. First, there's the police. If the US becomes Adventist, we have 2 choices for protecting ourselves against criminals from other countries: (1) leave it to God, or (2) or maintain a police force. If option (2) is chosen, police protection is needed seven days a week. That creates a Sabbath-work dilemma. And as the police seek to protect us, they face another problem: do they expect God to protect them or do they carry guns? If our entire nation is Adventist but surrounding nations aren't, we have an even greater problem of protection from aggressors. The national police force is called the "military." Today's society doesn't allow everything to grind to a halt once every seven days. Nor, for that matter, did a bygone, more low-tech society. For example, the sailing vessel taking Ellen White to Australia in the late 1800s always required at least some oversight on Sabbath. Students in Adventist boarding schools have always required meal service on Sabbaths. Child care has always been a 24/7 task. Bottom, either really keep the Sabbath by avoid all un-necessary labor and not using the products of un-necessary labor on the Sabbath or admit its just legallistist lip-service fitted to your own creature comforts. Scott |
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 18, 2004 8:18:37 GMT -5
The church life and personal life of Adventists presuppose the availability of electricity on Sabbath. Church sanctuaries are so large that a speaker would never be heard were there no sound system. Lighting, air conditioning and heating are taken for granted. Food has to be kept cool. Even on Sabbath, Adventists depend on subways, traffic signals, elevators, and life-support apparatus at hospitals. When someone uses electricity, it "flows" into the building and is metered. At that point in time, the user becomes liable to pay for its use. When your church gathers on Saturday, I assume it uses electricity to light the rooms, work the heating and air conditioning systems, office equipment, sound systems, etc. It is, in effect, purchasing electricity that day, the Sabbath. In order to produce electricity on the Sabbath, the power company has to employ people to work on the Sabbath. When your church pays for its electricity, it pays the salaries and wages of the power company's employees in part. The same goes for when you use electricity in your own home on the Sabbath. The use of electricity in anyway is breaking the Sabbath. Imagine if an Adventist Revival swept our nation. What would happen if the entire population joined the Adventist church? Would it be possible to still have a technologically advanced society? I'll note but a few of the many problems. First, there's the police. If the US becomes Adventist, we have 2 choices for protecting ourselves against criminals from other countries: (1) leave it to God, or (2) or maintain a police force. If option (2) is chosen, police protection is needed seven days a week. That creates a Sabbath-work dilemma. And as the police seek to protect us, they face another problem: do they expect God to protect them or do they carry guns? If our entire nation is Adventist but surrounding nations aren't, we have an even greater problem of protection from aggressors. The national police force is called the "military." Today's society doesn't allow everything to grind to a halt once every seven days. Nor, for that matter, did a bygone, more low-tech society. For example, the sailing vessel taking Ellen White to Australia in the late 1800s always required at least some oversight on Sabbath. Students in Adventist boarding schools have always required meal service on Sabbaths. Child care has always been a 24/7 task. Bottom, either really keep the Sabbath by avoid all un-necessary labor and not using the products of un-necessary labor on the Sabbath or admit its just legallistist lip-service fitted to your own creature comforts. Scott Jesus said it is lawful to do good on the sabbath. That does NOT excuse people like YOU to disregard God's sabbath day in favor of the pagan Sunday, and you do, by your own admission.
Let's look at the root of what's behind your post. It is the fact that we, as SDA's, uphold God's commandment as everlasting, while you like to disregard it because you "feel" it isn't important.
You're participating in Cain's sacrifice.
Rc people actually believe their papacy is correct when it speaks. You on the other hnad, deny the authority of the papacy and rely on the bible alone. YOU have no excuse for your actions because you claim to follow God's word, and that word doesn't give you any authority for the actions you say you participate in.
That's the bottom line.
You think that by writing the little shallow things such as what's above, you've exposed something.
You didn't. All you've shown is your lack of sincerity for God's word.
You have shown good understanding on other matters, but the sabbath issue is a no brainer and you just can't get around that one. [/color] |
|
|
|
Post by I2AM4GOD on Mar 18, 2004 8:57:17 GMT -5
The church life and personal life of Adventists presuppose the availability of electricity on Sabbath. Church sanctuaries are so large that a speaker would never be heard were there no sound system. Lighting, air conditioning and heating are taken for granted. Food has to be kept cool. Even on Sabbath, Adventists depend on subways, traffic signals, elevators, and life-support apparatus at hospitals. When someone uses electricity, it "flows" into the building and is metered. At that point in time, the user becomes liable to pay for its use. When your church gathers on Saturday, I assume it uses electricity to light the rooms, work the heating and air conditioning systems, office equipment, sound systems, etc. It is, in effect, purchasing electricity that day, the Sabbath. In order to produce electricity on the Sabbath, the power company has to employ people to work on the Sabbath. When your church pays for its electricity, it pays the salaries and wages of the power company's employees in part. The same goes for when you use electricity in your own home on the Sabbath. The use of electricity in anyway is breaking the Sabbath. Imagine if an Adventist Revival swept our nation. What would happen if the entire population joined the Adventist church? Would it be possible to still have a technologically advanced society? I'll note but a few of the many problems. First, there's the police. If the US becomes Adventist, we have 2 choices for protecting ourselves against criminals from other countries: (1) leave it to God, or (2) or maintain a police force. If option (2) is chosen, police protection is needed seven days a week. That creates a Sabbath-work dilemma. And as the police seek to protect us, they face another problem: do they expect God to protect them or do they carry guns? If our entire nation is Adventist but surrounding nations aren't, we have an even greater problem of protection from aggressors. The national police force is called the "military." Today's society doesn't allow everything to grind to a halt once every seven days. Nor, for that matter, did a bygone, more low-tech society. For example, the sailing vessel taking Ellen White to Australia in the late 1800s always required at least some oversight on Sabbath. Students in Adventist boarding schools have always required meal service on Sabbaths. Child care has always been a 24/7 task. Bottom, either really keep the Sabbath by avoid all un-necessary labor and not using the products of un-necessary labor on the Sabbath or admit its just legallistist lip-service fitted to your own creature comforts. Scott Jesus said it is lawful to do good on the sabbath. That does NOT excuse people like YOU to disregard God's sabbath day in favor of the pagan Sunday, and you do, by your own admission.
Let's look at the root of what's behind your post. It is the fact that we, as SDA's, uphold God's commandment as everlasting, while you like to disregard it because you "feel" it isn't important.
You're participating in Cain's sacrifice.
Rc people actually believe their papacy is correct when it speaks. You on the other hnad, deny the authority of the papacy and rely on the bible alone. YOU have no excuse for your actions because you claim to follow God's word, and that word doesn't give you any authority for the actions you say you participate in.
That's the bottom line.
You think that by writing the little shallow things such as what's above, you've exposed something.
You didn't. All you've shown is your lack of sincerity for God's word.
You have shown good understanding on other matters, but the sabbath issue is a no brainer and you just can't get around that one. [/color][/quote] Actually, Scott has made some very valid points, gene. Don't let your religion blind you to common-sense.Andy. |
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 18, 2004 9:34:35 GMT -5
Actually, Scott has made some very valid points, gene. Don't let your religion blind you to common-sense.Andy. The points are really not valid at all. First, power companies are automated with skeleton crews manning them. Second, if SDA's actually had to employ someone to produce the electricity, I don't believe we, in my church, would do so, but there are always exceptions.
Thirdly, if the whole country would be devoted SDA's, then God would see to it that we were protected without the need for law enforcement because there would be no crime.
The last part is wishful thinking, but true.
We, as individuals, are responsible for our own actions and no one is perfect but that doesn't mean one who is less than perfect can't speak the truth.
I take exception with those who claim to love God, but practice Cain's sacrifice because of the distorted way they attempt to blend scripture with the secular actions in order to justify their Cain's sacrifice. [/color] |
|
|
|
Post by HomeAtLast on Mar 18, 2004 10:14:04 GMT -5
Thirdly, if the whole country would be devoted SDA's, then God would see to it that we were protected without the need for law enforcement because there would be no crime. [/b][/color][/quote] gene, So no crime is ever committed against SDA's now? Blessings, Ann |
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 18, 2004 10:45:40 GMT -5
gene, So no crime is ever committed against SDA's now? Blessings, Ann Is it really that you don't understand what I'm saying or is it that you're trying to mock me?
[/color] |
|
