|
|
Post by LauraJean on Jul 16, 2004 8:54:03 GMT -5
Who worships bread? Is that some new age religion. Sure glad that as a Roman Catholic I do not fall into idol worship. I only worship The Holy Triune God we all love. I'm glad you brought that up. I was wondering the same thing! Blessings, LJ |
|
|
|
Post by Traffic Demon on Jul 16, 2004 12:03:26 GMT -5
Well, I wouldn't call it worship, but I'm pretty fond of Red Lobster's rolls  --BDT 1:4:9 |
|
|
|
Post by LauraJean on Jul 16, 2004 12:26:04 GMT -5
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
LJ
|
|
|
|
Post by AuntRonda on Jul 16, 2004 19:35:51 GMT -5
Well, I wouldn't call it worship, but I'm pretty fond of Red Lobster's rolls --BDT 1:4:9 Those rolls are WONDERFUL!!! I could make a meal of them along with a salad. Ronda |
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Jul 19, 2004 6:23:38 GMT -5
Ahhh, Protestant... Seems we disagree yet on another thing. Jesus died for our sins 2000 years ago. They are already forgiven. It is a gift of grace. However, what we do with this gift is what can separate us from God; which is the second death. This is where I part from my Southern Baptist upbringing, in that I believe that it is possible to "fall from grace." You see, Jesus died as atonement for the sins of all of humanity. That atonement went into effect IMMEDIATELY. But, just like a newborn baby, what we do with this gift of grace is our own choosing. We can take it and dump it in a trash can, like an unopened present on our doorstep. This is where our free will comes into play. The second death is eternal separation from God. The doors to hell are locked from the inside. Those who experience the second death do so at their own choosing (at least, initially; although I bet they change their minds afterwards....when it is too late.). You claim that we our sins our forgiven when we repent. I understand why you believe this way, for I did too at one time. The problem with this is that it is dependant on our actions rather than Jesus's action. It takes the focus off of the cross, and onto ourselves. Also, it is completely impossible for human beings to wholeheartedly repent, because our corrupted human nature still loves to sin; even after we believe. The second death is just what it says, death from which there is no resurrection.
It means death, not life someplace else.
Secondly, sins are NOT forgiven without repentence from the individual. this is where you err.
Jesus made a way for the sinner to escape the death that is the pay for sin. It is not uncoditional. One must ask for forgivness and turn away from sin.
The bible says that those who are DOERS of God's commandments will eat of the tree of life. Thios is easy to see if you study ALL of thye scriptures instead of just those parts that sound good to us.
A name can be removed from the book of life and many will. [/color] I suppose that we will have to agree to disagree. I do not believe that observing a Lord's Day on Sunday or any other day is the mark of the beast. If I am wrong, then let judgment fall where it may. Arch. It's sad that you feel this way Andy, when it is much better to just obey God, and judgment will most certainly fall, that much is assured.
Sunday sacredness is the mark of the beast.
Your statement proves that you don't understand what or who the beast is, even after the evidence was presented here..
[/color] |
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Jul 19, 2004 6:25:19 GMT -5
That's bad too bad for all us who've ever lived, because no one except Christ Jesus, kept all the "the Law" as given to the Israelites by Moses.
But lucky for us, it's not true. Abraham was counted as righteous because of his faith, 400+ years before "the Law" was given. Abraham obeyed ALL of God's laws, statutes and commandments, as scripture says.
Blindness abounds. [/color] |
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Jul 19, 2004 6:34:15 GMT -5
Protestant,
You made my point ... I didn't become a "Son of Israel" when I became a Christian. I went from unbeliever to Christian, for there are no Gentiles or Jews in Christ.
TBI know you're not so dense as to not see what Pro is explaining to you, so the question is why do you REFUSE to see the truth? [/color] |
|
|
|
Post by TarueBeliever on Jul 19, 2004 19:01:23 GMT -5
That's bad too bad for all us who've ever lived, because no one except Christ Jesus, kept all the "the Law" as given to the Israelites by Moses.
But lucky for us, it's not true. Abraham was counted as righteous because of his faith, 400+ years before "the Law" was given.
TBAbraham obeyed ALL of God's laws, statutes and commandments, as scripture says.
Blindness abounds. [/color][/quote] That’s a MISQUOTE of scripture. The actual pkmtyolpage is …1 Now there was a famine in the land, besides the previous famine that had occurred in the days of Abraham. So Isaac went to Gerar, to Abimelech king of the Philistines. 2 The LORD appeared to him and said, "Do not go down to Egypt; stay in the land of which I shall tell you. 3 Sojourn in this land and I will be with you and bless you, for to you and to your descendants I will give all these lands, and I will establish the oath which I swore to your father Abraham. 4 I will multiply your descendants as the stars of heaven, and will give your descendants all these lands; and by your descendants all the nations of the earth shall be blessed; 5 because Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes and My laws."Genesis 26:1-5 NASBAs you can see, the word "all" doesn’t appear in this scripture. We know that Abraham didn’t keep all of what would be given as "the Law." He lied about Sarah being his wife to the Egyptian Pharaoh (Genesis 12:10-20) and to King Abimelech (Genesis 20:1-17). Abraham had kept what obligations, comandmands, statutes, and laws that God had given to him directly and to mankind in general up to that point.
What laws? In Genesis 9, God gives laws to Noah and all his descendents (that would be everybody!). Genesis Chapters 12 – 22 have many commands that God gave to Abraham. Abraham obeyed these. There is no evidence that Abraham had "the Law" and thus no evidence that he kept "the Law" perfectly.
Lastly, please keep your comments ON THE TOPIC. It is a fallacy to make personal attacks (calling those who disagree with you "blind." Discuss your reasons for believing or disbelieving points and conclusions. Otherwise, take your trash somewhere else.
TB |
|
|
|
Post by TarueBeliever on Jul 19, 2004 19:23:47 GMT -5
Protestant,
You made my point ... I didn't become a "Son of Israel" when I became a Christian. I went from unbeliever to Christian, for there are no Gentiles or Jews in Christ.
TBI know you're not so dense as to not see what Pro is explaining to you, so the question is why do you REFUSE to see the truth? [/color][/quote] I do see what Protestant is trying to say. It is his opinion that all Gentile-Christians became "Sons of Israel" -- absorbed into the body of Jewish-Christians. That way all Christians would all be under the Laws of the Old Conventant that God made with "the sons of Israel."
However, Galatians 3 doesn't say this. God took the Jews (the Sons of Israel) who believed and the Gentiles who believed and made from them both a new creation -- Christians. It is these Christians who will inherit the promise the God made to Abraham (not his blood descendants) because of their relationship with Abraham's one descendent, Jesus Christ.
TB |
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Jul 20, 2004 7:31:23 GMT -5
That’s a MISQUOTE of scripture. The actual pkmtyolpage is …1 Now there was a famine in the land, besides the previous famine that had occurred in the days of Abraham. So Isaac went to Gerar, to Abimelech king of the Philistines. 2 The LORD appeared to him and said, "Do not go down to Egypt; stay in the land of which I shall tell you. 3 Sojourn in this land and I will be with you and bless you, for to you and to your descendants I will give all these lands, and I will establish the oath which I swore to your father Abraham. 4 I will multiply your descendants as the stars of heaven, and will give your descendants all these lands; and by your descendants all the nations of the earth shall be blessed; 5 because Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes and My laws."Genesis 26:1-5 NASBAs you can see, the word "all" doesn’t appear in this scripture. I wasn't quoting scripture but simply relating Abraham's obedience to God. [/color] We know that Abraham didn’t keep all of what would be given as "the Law." No, you don't KNOW that, you assume that because you don't accept the understanding that the whole plane of salvation and the law was given to Adam. Instead, you wish to pretend there was no law given until Sinai as if God all of a sudden decided to make some new laws for the Israelites only. [/color] He lied about Sarah being his wife to the Egyptian Pharaoh (Genesis 12:10-20) and to King Abimelech (Genesis 20:1-17). Abraham had kept what obligations, comandmands, statutes, and laws that God had given to him directly and to mankind in general up to that point. What laws? In Genesis 9, God gives laws to Noah and all his descendents (that would be everybody!). Genesis Chapters 12 – 22 have many commands that God gave to Abraham. Abraham obeyed these. There is no evidence that Abraham had "the Law" and thus no evidence that he kept "the Law" perfectly. Lastly, please keep your comments ON THE TOPIC. It is a fallacy to make personal attacks (calling those who disagree with you "blind." Discuss your reasons for believing or disbelieving points and conclusions. Otherwise, take your trash somewhere else. TB[/color] I'll make whatever comments I wish to the BLIND who write here.
It is ridiculas to assume that God couldn't make up His mind to give ALL mankind His laws and commandments until almost two thousand years pkmtyolped.
Only a BLIND person could come to that silly conclusion.
It is YOU who is spreading TRASH here AND MAYBE IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR YOU TO TAKE YOUR OWN ADVISE!
Sorry about the caps. I hit that key accidently.[/color] |
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Jul 20, 2004 7:48:10 GMT -5
You do realize in reading that scripture that it is talking about specifically worshiping the beast. Not about any type of false worship. Surely you see that. O.K., I'll do y best to explain this ansd not talk down to you.
1. Pro was giving the example of "worship" in Rev 13, not the whole picture of who the beats is and what the mark is.
He was answering the charge that the chapter didn't actually show worship extended to the church goers.
2. The kind of worship being talked about is concerning church members because the bible isn't about devil worshippers.
3. To understand what the "beast" is requires much more than Rev.13
4. To understand what the mark is requires more study than Rev 13 also.
You really don't understand SDA theology, because if you did, you'd understand the beast and the mark, even if you didn't agree. These are very easy to see FROM SCRIPTURE as TEACHINGS and not just interpretations, although interpretation is improtant. The difference is that we allow the bible to interpret itself and show us the truth. We don't rely on the words of men which are often twisted to suit a preconceived notion such as an "immortal soul" that many teach about.
The beast and the mark are real. These are not parables, or just examples of something or an idea.
We also believe the judgement of those claiming to be Christians is taking place as we write here. The bible, in Rev. 14 states that the "hour of His judgement is come", not will come, or is coming, but is here.
This is BEFORE the mark becomes mandatory.
Many names will be erased from the book before Jesus returns.
It is very important to realize the truth of the scriptures and to adhere to that truth which is a true Christian life of obedience to God and the keeping of His commandments.
[/color] |
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Jul 20, 2004 7:53:01 GMT -5
Who worships bread? Is that some new age religion. Sure glad that as a Roman Catholic I do not fall into idol worship. I only worship The Holy Triune God we all love. Blessings to all, Ann Do you believe the bread is the real body, soul and Divinity of Jesus as the Rcc teacvhes?
If you do, then you certainly do worship that bread.
If not then tell that to your priest and he will refuse to give you communion.
If a Rc denies that bread is the real body, soul and Divinity of God, communion will be denied if that profession is made by a Rc and is heard by a "priest".
[/color] |
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Jul 20, 2004 7:54:47 GMT -5
Congratulations, LauraJean!!! You now have a firm grasp of SDA doctrine. Sorry, but you don't have a clue to SDA theology or the truth of the scriptures. [/color] |
|
|
|
Post by TarueBeliever on Jul 20, 2004 10:45:40 GMT -5
No, you don't KNOW that, you assume that because you don't accept the understanding that the whole plane of salvation and the law was given to Adam. Instead, you wish to pretend there was no law given until Sinai as if God all of a sudden decided to make some new laws for the Israelites only.[/color] [/quote] How can I accept what is not written in the scriptures? Not only is it not written that Adam received the whole plan of salvation and "the Law," the scriptures tell us "the Law" came later ...And all the people gathered as one man at the square which was in front of the Water Gate, and they asked Ezra the scribe to bring the Book of the Law of Moses which the LORD had given to Israel.Nehemiah 8:1 NASBThe Lord gave ISRAEL the whole Law thru Moses. Not before.16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, "And to seeds," as referring to many, but rather to one, "And to your seed," that is, Christ. 17 What I am saying is this: the Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise.Galatians 3:16-17 NASBPaul wrote that "the Law" came hundreds of years after Abraham. Abraham came about two thousand years after Adam. Thus, "the Law" came thousands of years after Adam. You may try to deduce what you may through human reasoning, but this is what is WRITTEN.
TB |
|
|
|
Post by HomeAtLast on Jul 20, 2004 11:11:27 GMT -5
Who worships bread? Is that some new age religion. Sure glad that as a Roman Catholic I do not fall into idol worship. I only worship The Holy Triune God we all love. Blessings to all, Ann Do you believe the bread is the real body, soul and Divinity of Jesus as the Rcc teacvhes?
If you do, then you certainly do worship that bread.
If not then tell that to your priest and he will refuse to give you communion.
If a Rc denies that bread is the real body, soul and Divinity of God, communion will be denied if that profession is made by a Rc and is heard by a "priest".
[/color][/quote] gene, Of course I believe that the Eucharist is the body, blood and divinity of our risen Saviour because Jesus as well as the early church fathers said it was: Jn 6:35-71 Mt 26:26 1 Cor 10:16 1 Cor11:23-29 Ex 12:8, 46 Jn 1:29 1 Cor 5:7 Jn 4:31-34 Mt 16:5-12 1 Cor 2:14-3:4 Ps 14:4 St Ignatious (110 A.D.) - letter to Smyrnaeans St. Justin Martyr (150 A.D.) - First Apology St. Iraneous of Lyons (195 A.D.) - Against Heresies St. Cyril of Jerusalem (350 A.D.) - Catechetical lectures Mystagogic Thus worshipping Jesus, not bread. I call Jesus my Saviour, not; bread, my saviour. Blessings, Ann |
|
