The Lord's Day

[GeeMail]

SDA sewer, madness, hallucinate.... Why are you throwing endless ad hominem in this manner? Is it possible to make your  point like a true believer?

You posted the verses above supposedly to make the point that Col 2:16 is referring to the Sabbath of the fourth commandment.

There is a pattern; Annual-Monthly-Weekly. And there is a Deaf and Dumb spirit.

The point is the plural of SABBATH don't mean 'ceremonial' sabbaths nor does the singular mean weekly sabbath unless I have sold my brains to EGW

Voke,
You have quoted Col 2:16 over and over, so let's deal with it before we go to Leviticus or any other verse.You  attempt to claim that Col 2:16 supports Sunday worship, that verses using "the Sabbath" and "sabbath" are arbitrary (and you proceeded to give Col 2:16 in ESV but not KJV and RSV which blow your arbitrary theory high out of the water). You are right that the use of sabbaths without capitalization may not always be clear (not arbitrary as you say, and there's a difference). But that's not the point. It is both the capitalization of Sabbath as well as the use of the definite article as in "the Sabbath," or the indefinite article "a sabbath" which in plural are "sabbaths" (like KJV and RSV do) .

Col 2:16 (RSV)
16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a sabbath.

Col 2:16 (KJV)
16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

Col 2:16 (ESV)
16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.

If capitalization of sabbath is indeed arbitrary as you say, how can you explain ESV's sudden capitalization of Sabbath in this verse? In normal writing, letters remain uncapitalized unless you are referring to a specific noun (e.g. Voke of this thread as opposed to other vokes of the Protestant world). The conclusion is that ESV is a mischievous attempt to bring confusion to water down the fourth commandment.

But the greatest problem with using Col 2:16 against the Sabbath commandment is not even capitalization or lack thereof. Note that Bible writers neither used capitalization nor punctuation. These were added much later. So how do we know whether Paul was referring to ceremonial sabbaths or the Sabbath of the fourth commandment? You know the answer and you tend to avoid it. Context. Your problems begin here, and we will use ESV to demolish your misinterpretation.

Points to note:
Verses 1-5 talk about the "mystery of God" as being understood (revealed) in Christ. Then verse 9 summarizes it by saying in Christ the fullness of God dwells bodily. Verses 11, 12, 13 talks about circumcision of the heart. It is clear that Paul addresses an audience that knew about circumcision in Israelite tradition (a ceremonial practice). Then verse 14 talks about the legal demands of the ceremonial laws that were against "us" (Colossians and Paul included), with circumcision used as the example. He concludes these "ordinances (KJV)" were "nailed to the cross". So far, the Sabbath or any of the Ten Commandments have not been mentioned.

The oft-quoted verse 16 then says: 16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.

Therefore, if you read without capitalizing "sabbath," it becomes extremely tenuous to bring in the Sabbath commandment here. This simplified contextual interpretation finds the translators of ESV to be at fault.

[GeeMail]

Nuff Sed,
The word of God is like a hammer, it shatters harebrained theories into smithereens
Jeremiah 23:29 (ESV)
29 Is not my word like fire, declares the Lord, and like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?

Study this verse closely. I noted you deliberately omitted it in your last rant for obvious reasons; it spells doom for your puny theories.

https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Exodus%2031:13

Sabbaths ye shall keep; for it is a sign between Me and you throughout your generations, that ye may know that I am the Lord who doth sanctify you.
Exodus 31:13 (ASV) | In Context | Whole Chapter

13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily ye shall keep my sabbaths: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am Jehovah who sanctifieth you.

Exodus 31:13 (AMP) | In Context | Whole Chapter

13 Say to the Israelites, Truly you shall keep My Sabbaths, for it is a sign between Me and you throughout your generations, that you may know that I, the Lord, sanctify you [set you apart for Myself].
Exodus 31:13 (BRG) | In Context | Whole Chapter

13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbathsSabbathShabbats; for this is a sign between me and you through all your generations; so that you will know that I am Adonai, who sets you apart for me.

Just about EVERY version renders the word sabbath in plural. Is this a 'ceremonial' sabbath of a weekly sabbath?

What about This? Is it a weekly or 'ceremonial' sabbath?
https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Leviticus%2019:3
Leviticus 19:3 (KJ21) | In Context | Whole Chapter

3 Ye shall fear every man his mother and his father, and keep My Sabbaths: I am the Lord your God.
Leviticus 19:3 (ASV) | In Context | Whole Chapter

3 Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father; and ye shall keep my sabbaths: I am Jehovah your God.

Leviticus 19:3 (AMP) | In Context | Whole Chapter

3 Each of you shall give due respect to his mother and his father, and keep My Sabbathssabbaths:


The point is the plural of SABBATH don't mean 'ceremonial' sabbaths nor does the singular mean weekly sabbath unless I have sold my brains to EGW

Voke,
These verses do not help the Sunday keeping cause. Exodus, Jeremiah, Deut, Jeremiah etc are all from the OT where both the ceremonial and weekly Sabbaths (plural, referring to the fourth commandment) were observed. Let's be clear here. The Israelites knew the difference between the law of Moses (ceremonial) the Ten Commandments (God's eternal law). Ceremonial laws pointed to Christ's sacrifice (e.g. the Passover lamb pointed to Christ as the Lamb of the Lord that taketh away the sins of the world (John 1:29). It is only after Christ's crucifixion that the difference between ceremonial sabbaths and the Sabbath commandment become apparent to non-Israelites.

When you look at Col 2:16 from the Israelite understanding of OT ceremonial laws, you will see that Paul addresses Colossians in that context and lays it bare in verses 1-16. Picking out Col 2:16 and using it to argue against the Fourth Commandment is to argue as if the OT did not exist, nor the 15 verses before it. Forcing in the Sabbath like ESV cleverly attempts is out of context.

[vooke]

Voke,
These verses do not help the Sunday keeping cause. Exodus, Jeremiah, Deut, Jeremiah etc are all from the OT where both the ceremonial and weekly Sabbaths (plural, referring to the fourth commandment) were observed.

Nuff Sed,
This is quite a useless point. To the Jews belong Torah in its entirety. Colossians is talking about Jewish annual,monthly and weekly observations. Sabbaths(plural of sabbath or sabbaton) as I have shared enough evidence,does not mean 'ceremonial'/non-weekly sabbaths. Do you understand? Banging your head against the wall or denying this fact won't change nothing. Bachiocchi your boy, understood this

Let's be clear here. The Israelites knew the difference between the law of Moses (ceremonial) the Ten Commandments (God's eternal law).

The distinction between the 'Law of Moses' and the Ten Commandments is artificial and it would do you well cease imagining that Israelites were SDAs nor was Paul.

Ceremonial laws pointed to Christ's sacrifice (e.g. the Passover lamb pointed to Christ as the Lamb of the Lord that taketh away the sins of the world (John 1:29).

Hebrews 4 is quite clear that Sabbath points to Christ. The ENTIRE Law pointed to Christ

It is only after Christ's crucifixion that the difference between ceremonial sabbaths and the Sabbath commandment become apparent to non-Israelites.

Presumption is your surname. There is nothing like 'ceremonial sabbath', just sabbaths, weekly,monthly,annual. Gentiles are not and have never been under no obligation to observe any. The key to observing Torah was circumcision. Acts 15 dispensed away with that and after that, there is no way Gentiles were expected to observe ANY OTHER Part of the Law.

When you look at Col 2:16 from the Israelite understanding of OT ceremonial laws, you will see that Paul addresses Colossians in that context and lays it bare in verses 1-16. Picking out Col 2:16 and using it to argue against the Fourth Commandment is to argue as if the OT did not exist, nor the 15 verses before it. Forcing in the Sabbath like ESV cleverly attempts is out of context.

There is no 'Israelite understanding of OT ceremonial laws'. To them, there was just Moses, Torah, the Law. This distinction is an imaginary one invented to prop sabbatarianism.
Colosse is a predominantly Gentile region and they came under attack from the Circumcision who attempted to impose Judaism on them using the very scriptures they shared as a basis of their faith namely OT. Paul's encouragement was singular; 'nobody should judge you over shadows when you have the reality in you'. Note Paul was not dismissive of the ceremonies; he gives them some force or acknowledges their legitimacy. But he is very clear the real deal is Christ.

[vooke]

Voke,
You have quoted Col 2:16 over and over, so let's deal with it before we go to Leviticus or any other verse.You  attempt to claim that Col 2:16 supports Sunday worship,

See why I call them sewers? You misrepresent a position and then attack it vigorously.
Sunday worship/fellowship is a tradition that need no scriptures to support it any more than closing your eyes during prayers.

What Col2:16 does is to in the most eloquent manner dispense with the necessity of observing Jewish days including the weekly sabbath which is your distinguishing mark. It pretty much renders Sabbatarianism sect hollow; God is completely indifferent to sabbath keeping.

that verses using "the Sabbath" and "sabbath" are arbitrary (and you proceeded to give Col 2:16 in ESV but not KJV and RSV which blow your arbitrary theory high out of the water).

The difference between a weekly sabbath and others is the frequency; there is a higher likelihood of breaching your most regular activity and that's why there is heavy emphasis on the weekly. Otherwise there is no difference between sabbaths.

I have shared as many versions as I could possibly paste and share the source;biblegateway. I have over and over again asked you to share with me the version of scripture that you believe supports your position so we could use it. The reason is, NONE of my points is based on words or English unlike yours

You are right that the use of sabbaths without capitalization may not always be clear (not arbitrary as you say, and there's a difference). But that's not the point. It is both the capitalization of Sabbath as well as the use of the definite article as in "the Sabbath," or the indefinite article "a sabbath" which in plural are "sabbaths" (like KJV and RSV do) .

Please quit digressing and misrepresenting me. We may do more than follow capitalization; go Greek. Explain to us why Col 2:16 sabbaton can't possibly be referring to the weekly sabbath.
Am sorry I erred and mentioned that sabbaton appears 10 times in NT. It appears 69 times and in 68 of those, SDAs agree it means either a week or weekly sabbath. They then proceed to tie themselves in hopeless theological loops on Col2:16. Such a pathetic dishonest bunch

Col 2:16 (RSV)
16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a sabbath.

Col 2:16 (KJV)
16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

Col 2:16 (ESV)
16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.

If capitalization of sabbath is indeed arbitrary as you say, how can you explain ESV's sudden capitalization of Sabbath in this verse? In normal writing, letters remain uncapitalized unless you are referring to a specific noun (e.g. Voke of this thread as opposed to other vokes of the Protestant world). The conclusion is that ESV is a mischievous attempt to bring confusion to water down the fourth commandment.

Here is the point, the plural or singular form of that word does not substract NOTHING from the message. The reason is plurality or singularism of SABBATH does not affect the meaning of the word, especially where use of other related days (new moons,feasts) CLEARLY eliminates them as probable candidates.

But the greatest problem with using Col 2:16 against the Sabbath commandment is not even capitalization or lack thereof. Note that Bible writers neither used capitalization nor punctuation. These were added much later. So how do we know whether Paul was referring to ceremonial sabbaths or the Sabbath of the fourth commandment? You know the answer and you tend to avoid it. [b]Context.[/b] Your problems begin here, and we will use ESV to demolish your misinterpretation
 
Points to note:
Verses 1-5 talk about the "mystery of God" as being understood (revealed) in Christ. Then verse 9 summarizes it by saying in Christ the fullness of God dwells bodily. Verses 11, 12, 13 talks about circumcision of the heart. It is clear that Paul addresses an audience that knew about circumcision in Israelite tradition (a ceremonial practice). Then verse 14 talks about the legal demands of the ceremonial laws that were against "us" (Colossians and Paul included), with circumcision used as the example. He concludes these "ordinances (KJV)" were "nailed to the cross". So far, the Sabbath or any of the Ten Commandments have not been mentioned.

The oft-quoted verse 16 then says: 16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.

Therefore, if you read without capitalizing "sabbath," it becomes extremely tenuous to bring in the Sabbath commandment here. This simplified contextual interpretation finds the translators of ESV to be at fault.

Nuff Sed you suffer comprehension defects from excessive indoctrination.
Here is what you are saying;
1. There are 'ceremonial' and 'non-ceremonial' laws
2. The 'legal demands of the ceremonial laws' is what was AGAINST us
3. Christ fulfilled/nailed to the cross 'legal demand of the ceremonial laws'
4. Weekly sabbath is NOT part of the 'ceremonial law'.

Now,
1. Define from the scriptures ceremonial and non-ceremonial laws
2. Demonstrate that it is just the 'legal demands of the ceremonial laws' that was against us and not the entire Law- Galatians 3:10
3. Demonstrate that Christ nailed to the cross just the 'ceremonial laws' and not the entire law
4. Closely related to #1. demonstrate that the weekly sabbath is not a 'ceremonial law'

[GeeMail]

Col 2:16 is a reference to ceremonial sabbaths and not the Sabbath day of the fourth commandment. I can see you avoided the context of Col 2 like the plague. Not the first time you are quoting the Bible out of context like in Matthew 4. The difference between sabbath(s) and the Sabbath is hidden in plain sight.

2 Chronicles 8:13
Even after a certain rate every day, offering according to the commandment of Moses, on the sabbaths, and on the new moons, and on the solemn feasts, three times in the year, even in the feast of unleavened bread, and in the feast of weeks, and in the feast of tabernacles.

Nehemiah 9:13-15King James Version (KJV)
13 Thou camest down also upon mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments:
14 And madest known unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant:

Nehemiah 13:19 And it came to pass, that when the gates of Jerusalem began to be dark before the sabbath, I commanded that the gates should be shut, and charged that they should not be opened till after the sabbath: and some of my servants set I at the gates, that there should no burden be brought in on the sabbath day.

Isaiah 56 King James Version (KJV)
1Thus saith the Lord, Keep ye judgment, and do justice: for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.
2 Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth hold on it; that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil.
3 Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the Lord, speak, saying, The Lord hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.
4 For thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;
5 Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.
6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the Lord, to serve him, and to love the name of the Lord, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;

[GeeMail]

Nuff Sed you suffer comprehension defects from excessive indoctrination.
Here is what you are saying;
1. There are 'ceremonial' and 'non-ceremonial' laws
2. The 'legal demands of the ceremonial laws' is what was AGAINST us
3. Christ fulfilled/nailed to the cross 'legal demand of the ceremonial laws'
4. Weekly sabbath is NOT part of the 'ceremonial law'.

Now,
1. Define from the scriptures ceremonial and non-ceremonial laws
2. Demonstrate that it is just the 'legal demands of the ceremonial laws' that was against us and not the entire Law- Galatians 3:10
3. Demonstrate that Christ nailed to the cross just the 'ceremonial laws' and not the entire law
4. Closely related to #1. demonstrate that the weekly sabbath is not a 'ceremonial law'

1. Define from the scriptures ceremonial and non-ceremonial laws

Ceremonial laws were written by Moses in a book and put in the side of the ark of the covenant.
Deut 31
9 And Moses wrote this law, and delivered it unto the priests the sons of Levi, which bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord, and unto all the elders of Israel.
10 And Moses commanded them, saying, At the end of every seven years, in the solemnity of the year of release, in the feast of tabernacles,
11 When all Israel is come to appear before the Lord thy God in the place which he shall choose, thou shalt read this law before all Israel in their hearing.
12 Gather the people together, men and women, and children, and thy stranger that is within thy gates, that they may hear, and that they may learn, and fear the Lord your God, and observe to do all the words of this law:
...
24 And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished,
25 That Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord, saying,
26 Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.

Ten Commandments were written by God with His own finger.
(The Ten Commandments in full are in Exodus 20, and how God spoke them to all Israel).

Deut 5
22 These words the Lord spake unto all your assembly in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice: and he added no more. And he wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto me.

2. Demonstrate that it is just the 'legal demands of the ceremonial laws' that was against us and not the entire Law- Galatians 3:10

Next time you quote Gal 3:10, do so in context. Biblegateway always gives you that option.

10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

I'll use two examples, the Passover feast and circumcision. One of the most solemn ceremonial laws was the passover (marked for the first time in Egypt). In NT, Paul describes Christ as the Passover Lamb.

I Cor 5:7
Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
Any home in Egypt who did not have blood on their doorposts had the firstborn killed by the angel. This law was against "us" who were in Egypt (unbelief). The fulfillment of this is further demonstrated in Luke 23:45 where the veil in the temple was torn from top to bottom.

The irrelevance of circumcision to salvation is well documented by Paul in Galatians 2,3 and 5. In Gal 2, Paul draws the distinction between his ministry (to the Gentiles) and Peter's (to the Jews) and talks about circumcision. If the Sabbath was just for Jews, Paul would have left it to Peter, but by his example to the very Gentiles he was ministering to, he condemned circumcision and followed the Sabbath.

Acts 13:14 But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down.

Acts 13:42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.

Acts 13:44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.

Acts 16:13 And on the sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made; and we sat down, and spake unto the women which resorted thither.

Acts 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,

Acts 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

Is the moral law for or "against us?"

Rom 7
12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

Mark 2:27 King James Bible
And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:

3. Demonstrate that Christ nailed to the cross just the 'ceremonial laws' and not the entire law.

Context brother. I'll repeat. Context. Col 2:14
Ceremonial laws were for a time and would not be observed once they were fulfilled. Christ observed them before they were fulfilled (for example He participated in the Passover feast before the crucifixion, but never after).
"having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross". What was the handwriting of the requirements? Remember the handwriting on the wall in Daniel 5:5 against Belshazzar? Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin. It was not the handwriting of law itself that was against us but its legal requirements (death to the sinner). How did Christ blot out the handwriting? By paying the debt on the cross. He did not set aside the law, otherwise he would not need to die. Instead, He paid the price. So, "nailing them to the cross" does not mean the ceremonial law was destroyed, but was, rather, fulfilled in Christ.

"For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins...By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus once for all" (Heb 10:4,10).

4. Closely related to #1. demonstrate that the weekly sabbath is not a 'ceremonial law'

The Sabbath is not a ceremonial law, for it was contained in the Ten Commandments spoken by God and written with his own finger, placed IN the ark of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were perpetual in nature and Isaiah and John the Revelator show us why.

Isaiah 56:4 For thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;

Isaiah 56:6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the Lord, to serve him, and to love the name of the Lord, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;

Isaiah 66
23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord.

Revelation 11
19 And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail.

My Comment:
Did you see the ark of the testament in that verse? What was IN the ark of the covenant?

Isaiah 66
23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord.

Rev 12:17
"And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ".
Rev 14:12
"Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus".

Rev 22:14
Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city.

You cannot preach heaven while at the same time disobey the commandments that give you the right to the tree of life. Do not be deceived my brother. God is not mocked.

[vooke]

Col 2:16 is a reference to ceremonial sabbaths and not the Sabbath day of the fourth commandment. I can see you avoided the context of Col 2 like the plague. Not the first time you are quoting the Bible out of context like in Matthew 4. The difference between sabbath(s) and the Sabbath is hidden in plain sight.

You are the Queen of dithering. You threw in 'context' and failed to demonstrate how the same leads you to sabbaths in Col being any other than weekly

2 Chronicles 8:13
Even after a certain rate every day, offering according to the commandment of Moses, on the sabbaths, and on the new moons, and on the solemn feasts, three times in the year, even in the feast of unleavened bread, and in the feast of weeks, and in the feast of tabernacles.

Nehemiah 9:13-15King James Version (KJV)
13 Thou camest down also upon mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments:
14 And madest known unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant:

Nehemiah 13:19 And it came to pass, that when the gates of Jerusalem began to be dark before the sabbath, I commanded that the gates should be shut, and charged that they should not be opened till after the sabbath: and some of my servants set I at the gates, that there should no burden be brought in on the sabbath day.

Isaiah 56 King James Version (KJV)
1Thus saith the Lord, Keep ye judgment, and do justice: for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.
2 Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth hold on it; that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil.
3 Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the Lord, speak, saying, The Lord hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.
4 For thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;
5 Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.
6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the Lord, to serve him, and to love the name of the Lord, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;

What is the purpose of these wonderful verses?

[vooke]

1. Define from the scriptures ceremonial and non-ceremonial laws

Ceremonial laws were written by Moses in a book and put in the side of the ark of the covenant.
Deut 31
9 And Moses wrote this law, and delivered it unto the priests the sons of Levi, which bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord, and unto all the elders of Israel.
10 And Moses commanded them, saying, At the end of every seven years, in the solemnity of the year of release, in the feast of tabernacles,
11 When all Israel is come to appear before the Lord thy God in the place which he shall choose, thou shalt read this law before all Israel in their hearing.
12 Gather the people together, men and women, and children, and thy stranger that is within thy gates, that they may hear, and that they may learn, and fear the Lord your God, and observe to do all the words of this law:
...
24 And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished,
25 That Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord, saying,
26 Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.

Ten Commandments were written by God with His own finger.
(The Ten Commandments in full are in Exodus 20, and how God spoke them to all Israel).

Deut 5
22 These words the Lord spake unto all your assembly in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice: and he added no more. And he wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto me.

Now in your element reciting SDA sewers
1. What is the BASIS for you concluding that 'ceremonial' laws were placed outside?
2. Does it bother you that the GREATEST COMMANDMENTS given by Jesus were OUTSIDE and were written by Moses?
3. Do you have non-'ceremonial' laws outside?

2. Demonstrate that it is just the 'legal demands of the ceremonial laws' that was against us and not the entire Law- Galatians 3:10

Next time you quote Gal 3:10, do so in context. Biblegateway always gives you that option.

10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

I'll use two examples, the Passover feast and circumcision. One of the most solemn ceremonial laws was the passover (marked for the first time in Egypt). In NT, Paul describes Christ as the Passover Lamb.

I Cor 5:7
Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
Any home in Egypt who did not have blood on their doorposts had the firstborn killed by the angel. This law was against "us" who were in Egypt (unbelief). The fulfillment of this is further demonstrated in Luke 23:45 where the veil in the temple was torn from top to bottom.

The irrelevance of circumcision to salvation is well documented by Paul in Galatians 2,3 and 5. In Gal 2, Paul draws the distinction between his ministry (to the Gentiles) and Peter's (to the Jews) and talks about circumcision. If the Sabbath was just for Jews, Paul would have left it to Peter, but by his example to the very Gentiles he was ministering to, he condemned circumcision and followed the Sabbath.

Acts 13:14 But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down.

Acts 13:42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.

Acts 13:44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.

Acts 16:13 And on the sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made; and we sat down, and spake unto the women which resorted thither.

Acts 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,

Acts 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.[

[/quote]
Nuff Sed,
You are incoherent
 The CURSE in Galatians is for breaking any of the 613 laws..that is what Christ redeemed us from unless you are saying that Christ shed his blood so you can stop observing Passover.

Is the moral law for or "against us?"

Rom 7
12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

Mark 2:27 King James Bible
And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:

You are putting words in Paul's mouth Paul says the LAW not moral law is good. he said the Law

Read Romans 7 properly
3 Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress.

4 Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. 5 For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. 6 But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.[c]
What law is he talking about? moral or ceremonial?

3. Demonstrate that Christ nailed to the cross just the 'ceremonial laws' and not the entire law.


Context brother. I'll repeat. Context. Col 2:14
Ceremonial laws were for a time and would not be observed once they were fulfilled. Christ observed them before they were fulfilled (for example He participated in the Passover feast before the crucifixion, but never after).
"having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross". What was the handwriting of the requirements? Remember the handwriting on the wall in Daniel 5:5 against Belshazzar? Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin. It was not the handwriting of law itself that was against us but its legal requirements (death to the sinner).

Now you contradict yourself
You just quoted instance of meetings on sabbath as proof that it was kept after crucifixion so it can't have been ceremonial yet you flat out reject recorded observation of Jewish feasts and Vows.

Christ remained on earth for just one month and ten days after resurrection whereas the next Passover would have been over ten months away...so that's a bad example seeing there was no other opportunity to celebrate it.

The Law demanded that breaking ANY of them made you guilty of all and placed you under a curse. The requirement to KEEP the Law to please God is what was taken away. Your job was to demonstrate that this was restricted to the 'ceremonial laws' ALONE.

How did Christ blot out the handwriting? By paying the debt on the cross. He did not set aside the law, otherwise he would not need to die. Instead, He paid the price.

Ephesians 2:14-15
(ESV) 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility 15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace

So, "nailing them to the cross" does not mean the ceremonial law was destroyed, but was, rather, fulfilled in Christ.

"For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins...By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus once for all" (Heb 10:4,10).

Romans 10:4 (ESV)
4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.[/quote]

Galatians 3:24 (ESV)
24 So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian
Ask yourself what Law this verse is talking about

4. Closely related to #1. demonstrate that the weekly sabbath is not a 'ceremonial law'

The Sabbath is not a ceremonial law, for it was contained in the Ten Commandments spoken by God and written with his own finger, placed IN the ark of the covenant. The Ten Commandments were perpetual in nature and Isaiah and John the Revelator show us why.[/quote]
This is circular argument
Who said the Ten Commandments can't contain 'ceremonial' laws?
Who said what God wrote in his own hand can't contain 'ceremonial' laws?
Who said what was kept INSIDE the ark can't contain 'ceremonial' laws?
Do we have non-'ceremonial' laws OUTSIDE the ark?
How comes the greatest 2 commandments were written by Moses and housed outside?
These are a priori assumptions

Let's examine these verse one by one

Isaiah 56:4 For thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;


Isaiah 56:6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the Lord, to serve him, and to love the name of the Lord, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;

Isaiah 66
23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord.

Isaiah mentions NEW MOON. These verses don't tell you a lot. If there will be sabbath in heaven, then there will be NEW MOONS as well

Revelation 11
19 And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail.

My Comment:
Did you see the ark of the testament in that verse? What was IN the ark of the covenant?

Nuff Sed, please grow up.
-Seeing there is neither marrying nor giving in marriage, how would you commit adultery with your next door tall dark and handsome single NFL player (former)
-Will you be giving birth in heaven so your kids can honor you?
-Do you need to be told not to kill seeing your neighbors will be clothed in immortality and death will be no more
-And what will be the point of commandments when they are already in your heart?

Point is presence of the ark in heaven whether literally or metaphorically does not add nothing to your sabbatarianism

Isaiah 66
23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord.

Sure, there will be New Moon and sabbath in heaven. Negro learn to think

Rev 12:17
"And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ".
Rev 14:12
"Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus".

Rev 22:14
Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city.

You cannot preach heaven while at the same time disobey the commandments that give you the right to the tree of life. Do not be deceived my brother. God is not mocked.

Now, the question is, are the COMMANDMENTS mentioned in these verses the ten and the ten alone?
What is a commandment?
Every time you see the word, you are conditioned by SDA sewers to see the Ten Commandments. Nothing could be further from the truth.


Just ask Jesus what is the greatest commandment

Matthew 22:36-40King James Version (KJV)

36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

You can see that COMMANDMENTS don't automatically mean the Ten Commandments....thinking for the indoctrinated is quite a task but you are doing fine

John the Revelator wrote the epistles and he uses the word commandment there. Please look it up

[GeeMail]

Voke calling me Nuffsed is provocation (its like me calling you Troi Andreola).
This is 11 pages of discussion, debate and (unfortunately), name calling and ad hominem. Some day you might be shocked by a list of ad hominems you have thrown in this thread alone. It seems to me that you are perfectly convinced that Sunday keeping as opposed to Sabbath keeping is the way to go. I have asked several times for the protestant justification for Sunday worship and so far, you have mentioned convenience (like saying that's the day apostles could find crowds), expedience and tradition (alleged apostolic practice without scriptural backing). On the other hand, the fourth commandment is plain, started in Eden and repeated in Sinai. Sabbath keeping by Christ, disciples and the apostles is well documented in Acts 13, 17 and 18 (unlike the so-called apostolic practice). I have given all this in various posts in this thread.

So, what more can be said? Not much. In summary,

1. There is no scriptural basis for calling Sunday the "Lord's Day".
2. There is no scriptural reason for Sunday worship.
3. Sunday keeping protestants are following Rome's tradition (also convenience and expediency, maybe).
4. On the basis of Sunday worship, which it originated in opposition to God's commandments, Rome openly questions the basis for protestantism's slogan of "sola scriptura". See http://www.romeschallenge.com/
5. Since Sunday worship lacks scriptural backing, Rome has the audacity to invite her lost daughters back, and rightly so. Following tradition in Sunday worship confirms the old adage, like mother, like daughter.
6. Since Sunday keeping protestants have no solid ground to stand on, rather than turning to scripture for truth, they deflect attention from this contradiction, and join Rome in ridiculing Sabbath-keeping. If the ad hominems in this thread are anything to go by, the Sunday-keeping student has outperformed her master. The only thing missing is Rome's faggots.
7. Which proves Bible prophecy right. Daniel and Revelation depict a subtle beast (little horn) creeping into the church, taking the place of Christ and substituting His authority for her own. The antichrist is not he who is violently opposed to Christ, but stealthily replaces His authority over His own church (applause from the Protestant cabin). In this regard, apostate Christianity (Protestantism) joins hands with Rome and the state to oppress anybody opposed to her authority. In this thread and in Rome's Challenge, Adventists are spelled out as Rome's thorn in the flesh. Without Jews and Adventists, it is likely the world would not know what Rome did to the Ten Commandments. Nowhere is this better demonstrated than on the Sabbath question.

You attack my adventist beliefs but you have not told us what you believe. Which is your church so we can also examine its doctrines? I'll add you a little entertainment here: http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3D4uattHh1PDY

I will endeavor to give updates on developments towards the full unity of the threesome in fulfillment of Bible prophecy. I rest my case.

[vooke]

Voke calling me Nuffsed is provocation (its like me calling you Troi Andreola).
This is 11 pages of discussion, debate and (unfortunately), name calling and ad hominem. Some day you might be shocked by a list of ad hominems you have thrown in this thread alone.

Nuff Sed,
If you are not Nuff Sed or you have never had such a handle just say so and I will duly apologize. You need to go through a list of the things EGW called Christians which you know to temper your sanctimonious nose.

It seems to me that you are perfectly convinced that Sunday keeping as opposed to Sabbath keeping is the way to go.

SDA Sewers Inc. Misrepresenting and attacking misrepresentation?And winning medals for the victory since 1840.. Sunday worship is a tradition, sabbath keeping is a realized shadow.. Holy Spirit is indifferent to both.

I have asked several times for the protestant justification for Sunday worship and so far, you have mentioned convenience (like saying that's the day apostles could find crowds), expedience and tradition (alleged apostolic practice without scriptural backing). On the other hand, the fourth commandment is plain, started in Eden and repeated in Sinai.

Don't know what you are smoking. Sabbath started with Moses,and was for the Jews just as circumcision was

Sabbath keeping by Christ, disciples and the apostles is well documented in Acts 13, 17 and 18 (unlike the so-called apostolic practice). I have given all this in various posts in this thread.

Jesus,the apostles, they all kept Jewish feasts as well. When you start keeping those and taking Nazirite vows, come looking for me. And next time you go evangelizing the Samburu, take a FGM cut so that the gospel be not hindered.

So, what more can be said? Not much. In summary,

1. There is no scriptural basis for calling Sunday the "Lord's Day".  Sunday is the Lord's Day, has been, always will as long as the earth remains
2. There is no scriptural reason for Sunday worship. There need not be basis for worship on any day seeing God has left us to determine these things unlike how many men you should sleep with
3. Sunday keeping protestants are following Rome's tradition (also convenience and expediency, maybe). Observing any day is purely discretional..if I chose to keep Friday because my employer only allows me that, Holy Spirit is cool with that
4. On the basis of Sunday worship, which it originated in opposition to God's commandments, Rome openly questions the basis for protestantism's slogan of "sola scriptura". See http://www.romeschallenge.com/. Only deranged Sabbatarians lurkin in the shadows see commandments where non exists...they also see vegetarianism as a holy command and not even Jesus eating fish will convince them otherwise
5. Since Sunday worship lacks scriptural backing, Rome has the audacity to invite her lost daughters back, and rightly so. Following tradition in Sunday worship confirms the old adage, like mother, like daughter. Saturday keeping is no different from circumcision or keeping Jewish feasts...funny grown ups are chasing shadows just as Paul said it
6. Since Sunday keeping protestants have no solid ground to stand on, rather than turning to scripture for truth, they deflect attention from this contradiction, and join Rome in ridiculing Sabbath-keeping. If the ad hominems in this thread are anything to go by, the Sunday-keeping student has outperformed her master. The only thing missing is Rome's faggots. The only truth is Holy Spirit is INDIFFERENT to days...this means I can keep ANY day for whatever reason or not keep any at all
7. Which proves Bible prophecy right. Daniel and Revelation depict a subtle beast (little horn) creeping into the church, taking the place of Christ and substituting His authority for her own. The antichrist is not he who is violently opposed to Christ, but stealthily replaces His authority over His own church (applause from the Protestant cabin). In this regard, apostate Christianity (Protestantism) joins hands with Rome and the state to oppress anybody opposed to her authority. In this thread and in Rome's Challenge, Adventists are spelled out as Rome's thorn in the flesh. Without Jews and Adventists, it is likely the world would not know what Rome did to the Ten Commandments. Nowhere is this better demonstrated than on the Sabbath question. Ever thought how retarded it is to believe in spiritual gifts and prophecies but to claim that in 1900 years ONLY 1 deranged and sick whacko called EGW is God's prophet?

You attack my adventist beliefs but you have not told us what you believe. Which is your church so we can also examine its doctrines? These are not your beliefs. You are being fed with this garbage from EGW. You are not allowed to think on your own. Like Bob Marley sang, emancipate yourself from this mental slavery. I can see you don't even believe them, you are just scared of dumping the only lies you have ever known...
Let me help you, it is time you met Christ and got life in abundance

I will endeavor to give updates on developments towards the full unity of the threesome in fulfillment of Bible prophecy. I rest my case.  I will keep you posted on a list of retarded prophecies EGW cooked and how they have been whitewashing them for the hopelessly ignorant like you

[vooke]

Here is why Nuff Sed thinks am blasphemous in attacking her Godess

We believe the revelation and inspiration of both the Bible and Ellen White's writings to be of equal quality.equal in quality to those received by Bible writers,

https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/1981/10/ellen-whites-role-in-doctrine-formation
https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archives/1981/MIN1981-10.pdf


To Nuff Sed, Paul and Ellen White are equals

[vooke]

SDA sewer, madness, hallucinate.... Why are you throwing endless ad hominem in this manner? Is it possible to make your  point like a true believer?

Why do I call them sewers?

First note what they claim about her writings above (inspired) and below.

As the church engages in its theological task of formulating the fruits of exegesis into doctrine, it welcomes the prophetic influence (Ellen White's 'inspired writings) as it chooses to expound and emphasize certain teachings of Scripture and not others. Thus Mrs. White does not prove for us that the seventh day is the Sabbath, nor is she the standard or norm for that belief, but by emphasizing the importance of the Sabbath in our relationship with God, she influences us to give special attention to this particular teaching of Scripture.

So all she is basically doing in her writings is EMPHASIZING scriptures,right?

Let us examine one of her most outrageous and embarassing statements namely AMALGAMATION of Man and Beast

Ellen White the one prophet inspired equally as Paul and who emphasized scriptures is telling us that Nuff Sed is a product of Beastiality!

Every species of animal which God had created were preserved in the ark. The confused species which God did not create, which were the result of amalgamation, were destroyed by the flood. Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men."2

You can read the retarded excuse for this right here

[GeeMail]

Thanks for bringing up the amalgamation text in EGW's writings. I have never seen an adult African man shaken so by the writings of a woman long dead. We must ask then, why that is so. I venture to say it is because what she says is truth. I must applaud you for linking the articles on amalgamation. For the first time, we have contextual interpretation coming from your keyboard, even if only as a link to someone else's work. In the article you have linked, there is a perfectly scriptural and rational explanation of the amalgamation passages.

Thus, unfortunately for Sabbath commandment critics, the statements by E.G. White on amalgamation do not detract from the validity and sanctity of the Ten Commandments, including the fourth. To you, the messenger may look "mad, from the sewers, deranged, hallucinating" (your own words in this thread) and so on. What remains is that God spoke and it was so until men started to insinuate and impregnate the divine word with their own vain imaginations, deliberate misinterpretations, traditions, conveniences and expedience (the excuses you have ventured in this thread).

But let's even assume your allegations against E.G. White are valid, and her writing gives you nightmares. How does that help the Sunday keeping protestant? You have the Bible (sola scriptura, remember?). So far, no scriptural justification has been offered for Sunday worship. In fact, the originator of Sunday worship (Rome) has ridiculed Protestant Sunday keepers and challenged them from scripture (of all things) to follow the truth or convert to Romanism. Stop making the suicidal and self-contradictory argument for Sunday worship, she tells Sunday keeping protestants to their face. And your answer? Ridicule Ellen G. White, dither and meander with the suicidal argument and generally throw muddy ad hominems in the face of an Adventist. What is your church so we can also examine what you believe? Can you rise and face Rome's Challenge?

SDA sewer, madness, hallucinate.... Why are you throwing endless ad hominem in this manner? Is it possible to make your  point like a true believer?

Why do I call them sewers?

First note what they claim about her writings above (inspired) and below.

As the church engages in its theological task of formulating the fruits of exegesis into doctrine, it welcomes the prophetic influence (Ellen White's 'inspired writings) as it chooses to expound and emphasize certain teachings of Scripture and not others. Thus Mrs. White does not prove for us that the seventh day is the Sabbath, nor is she the standard or norm for that belief, but by emphasizing the importance of the Sabbath in our relationship with God, she influences us to give special attention to this particular teaching of Scripture.

So all she is basically doing in her writings is EMPHASIZING scriptures,right?

Let us examine one of her most outrageous and embarassing statements namely AMALGAMATION of Man and Beast

Ellen White the one prophet inspired equally as Paul and who emphasized scriptures is telling us that Nuff Sed is a product of Beastiality!

Every species of animal which God had created were preserved in the ark. The confused species which God did not create, which were the result of amalgamation, were destroyed by the flood. Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men."2

You can read the retarded excuse for this right here

[vooke]

Thanks for bringing up the amalgamation text in EGW's writings. I have never seen an adult African man shaken so by the writings of a woman long dead. We must ask then, why that is so. I venture to say it is because what she says is truth. I must applaud you for linking the articles on amalgamation. For the first time, we have contextual interpretation coming from your keyboard, even if only as a link to someone else's work. In the article you have linked, there is a perfectly scriptural and rational explanation of the amalgamation passages.

Nuff Sed,
You know the beauty of it all is not everybody following this is as retarded, and they can make their minds on SDA garbage. Man made in the image of God sleeping with another man made in the image of God corrupts the image of God, and give rise to 'certain races' and species among animals as well?

My job has been to save the braindead from hellfire and Veritas afforded me a platform. Vera,May Jesus bless you mightily. Nipate.org has made it so easy. I usually refer them here.

Thus, unfortunately for Sabbath commandment critics, the statements by E.G. White on amalgamation do not detract from the validity and sanctity of the Ten Commandments, including the fourth. To you, the messenger may look "mad, from the sewers, deranged, hallucinating" (your own words in this thread) and so on. What remains is that God spoke and it was so until men started to insinuate and impregnate the divine word with their own vain imaginations, deliberate misinterpretations, traditions, conveniences and expedience (the excuses you have ventured in this thread). But let's even assume your allegations against E.G. White are valid, and her writing gives you nightmares. How does that help the Sunday keeping protestant? You have the Bible (sola scriptura, remember?). So far, no scriptural justification has been offered for Sunday worship. In fact, the originator of Sunday worship (Rome) has ridiculed Protestant Sunday keepers and challenged them from scripture (of all things) to follow the truth or convert to Romanism. Stop making the suicidal and self-contradictory argument for Sunday worship, she tells Sunday keeping protestants to their face. And your answer? Ridicule Ellen G. White, dither and meander with the suicidal argument and generally throw muddy ad hominems in the face of an Adventist. What is your church so we can also examine what you believe? Can you rise and face Rome's Challenge?

Nuff Sed,
Imagine somebody aksin you 'what is the SCRIPTURAL basis for the color of your top or skirt or bra?' That is exactly how I feel when a Sabbatarian aks me the basis of Sunday worship.
There is no scriptural basis for wearing a blue,white or gray shirt.
Doesn't that make wearing a gray shirt UNBIBLICAL seeing you are wearing it WITHOUT SCRIPTURAL BASIS?
Nope. It means the scriptures are INDIFFERENT to the color of your shirt



The highlighted captures EGW the best. Ellen Gould White is equally inspired as Paul. Do you believe this?

[vooke]

Nuff Sed,
I would have thought after EGW called you a product of beastiality she had it.
She went on to see tall jamaaz on Jupiter!

This is your goddess?
This is the MOST venerated person in SDA, whose writings are christened 'Spirit of Prophecy', a mad woman who 'saw' Enock living on Jupiter?

And am supposed to sit and learn about the future and ecumenism from her? Unthaw your brain my dear sista

[GeeMail]

Retarded and braindead have been added to the ad hominem lexicon.
I get it now. Apparently you are miffed by the fact that a 19th century woman is getting as much attention as Paul. Let's note a few things.

1. Not all prophets get the same attention at the same time. Isaiah's prophecies were considered differently when Jesus stood up in the temple and read the scrolls about himself. Paul's prophecies didn't make sense to many in his time, and they rejected him flat leading him to say he will now go to the Gentiles. If Jesus could be rejected and Paul could be treated thus, who is EGW?

2. Prophecy is a gift of the Holy Spirit just like the other spirit gives the gift of ad hominem (evidently). Voke and DB have no role in where, when and on whom prophecy falls.

1 Corinthians 12:9-11King James Version (KJV)
9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

3. The Bible foretells of a time when the gift of the Holy Spirit shall fall greater than the former rain (Pentecost). See Joel 2:28. Prophecy as a gift is not limited to the past. Indeed, as the end nears, the gift is needed more now that wolves have gone out in sheep's clothing.

4. Paul tells us to "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." 1 Thessalonians 5:21. If you can prove EGW is deceiving you, by all means go ahead and reject her message.

[vooke]

Retarded and braindead have been added to the ad hominem lexicon.
I get it now. Apparently you are miffed by the fact that a 19th century woman is getting as much attention as Paul.

What are you smoking Nuff Sed?
1. Attention by whom? Am shocked at the amount of thinking an Adventist has to suspend before swearing allegiance to EGW....
2. Is EGW getting a fraction of Paul's attention? Lord have mercy on whatever is left of your brains

Let's note a few things.

1. Not all prophets get the same attention at the same time. Isaiah's prophecies were considered differently when Jesus stood up in the temple and read the scrolls about himself. Paul's prophecies didn't make sense to many in his time, and they rejected him flat leading him to say he will now go to the Gentiles. If Jesus could be rejected and Paul could be treated thus, who is EGW?

This is not even ganja; this is congenial.
Mormons could equally argue that Joseph Smith was rejected, persecuted and 'matryed' just like Peter so he was a prophet.

Rejection is no proof of your authenticity; sometimes all it takes is common sense to separate delusional sewer rats from the real deal

2. Prophecy is a gift of the Holy Spirit just like the other spirit gives the gift of ad hominem (evidently). Voke and DB have no role in where, when and on whom prophecy falls.

1 Corinthians 12:9-11King James Version (KJV)
9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

Does it bother you that in 1900 years, the gift fell on one woman who you vowed to believe as you was baptized?
You might as well say you believe God shut the prophetic for 1900 years, released it on EGW and then shut it forever.

3. The Bible foretells of a time when the gift of the Holy Spirit shall fall greater than the former rain (Pentecost). See Joel 2:28. Prophecy as a gift is not limited to the past. Indeed, as the end nears, the gift is needed more now that wolves have gone out in sheep's clothing.

Adventists are not interested in a 'greater fall', they have ALL they need in their inspired godess

Note, Joel 2:28 stood fulfilled in Acts 2, so it is not referring to a futuristic event. In any case, how would emergence of one 'prophet' prove that that the latter fall shall be greater?

4. Paul tells us to "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." 1 Thessalonians 5:21. If you can prove EGW is deceiving you, by all means go ahead and reject her message.

Nuff Sed, what spirit showed her tall dudes on Jupiter?
Does it bother you that her inter-galactic hallucinations matched the then EXISTING knowledge of science?

Why did she see only what astronomers had already seen?

When Mrs. White had her "vision" in 1846 it was common knowledge that Jupiter had four moons. The fifth was not discovered until 1892. In 1846, it was thought that Saturn had seven moons. The 8th moon was discovered shortly thereafter, in 1848. After the discovery, an account of the "vision" was modified to say "eight" instead of "seven". Mrs. White's vision did not reveal anything that could not have been obtained from an Astronomy book or even from a newspaper article! The only difference between what Mrs. White saw and what the astronomers saw through their telescopes was those "tall, majestic people"!

What About those Tall, Majestic People?

While Adventist historians, such as A.W. Spalding, used to trumpet the fact that Mrs. White saw tall people on Jupiter and/or Saturn in her visions, after the middle of the twentieth century, when science began to show the improbability of such, Ellen White's comments about tall, majestic people living on these planets stopped showing up in Adventist books.

The question is, if Mrs. White did not see this in vision, where did she get the notion that there were "tall people" living on the planets? Perhaps she got the idea from French author Voltaire, who in his popular 1752 story Micromegas wrote of "citizens" of Saturn who were "a thousand fathoms" tall.

I weep for you my sista...EGW is both dead and buried and probably in hell....you who have sworn allegiance to a mad woman who believed you was a product of man and monkey humping, and Enock is living in an island on Jupiter at subzero temperatures.
Nuff Sed, do you see how you blaspheme Holy Spirit by ascribing such lunacy to Him?

[GeeMail]

I weep for you rivers my brother. That a woman you admit is dead and buried is giving a living African male pastor such nightmares leaves a lot to be desired. Is it because she wrote the truth?

In highlighting what you use for EGW, you forgot to highlight "traditions, conveniences and expedience (the excuses you have ventured in this thread)." You almost succeeded in deflecting attention by ad hominem, meandering, dithering and all manner of obfuscation from why Protestants observe Sunday while ridiculing Sabbath keepers. Failing to find an answer, Ellen G. White has become your perpetual nightmare. Weep for yourself my brother.

[vooke]

I weep for you rivers my brother. That a woman you admit is dead and buried is giving a living African male pastor such nightmares leaves a lot to be desired. Is it because she wrote the truth?

Nuff Sed,
If truth is you are a product of man and monkey,and Enock lives in Jupiter, then you have a point

In highlighting what you use for EGW, you forgot to highlight "traditions, conveniences and expedience (the excuses you have ventured in this thread)." You almost succeeded in deflecting attention by ad hominem, meandering, dithering and all manner of obfuscation from why Protestants observe Sunday while ridiculing Sabbath keepers. Failing to find an answer, Ellen G. White has become your perpetual nightmare. Weep for yourself my brother.

There is no reason to keep sabbath any more than there is to chop foreskins. But we do chop foreskins don't we?

Why don't you share with me another dumb 'contextual' understanding of what on earth Enock is doing in Jupiter?

BTW, Joseph Smith was also shown ETs in another planet....same spirit of prophecy I tell you

[vooke]

And here is your goddess teaching Nuff Sed that masturbation cause blindness,rheumatism

SDAs have been looking in vain for 100+ years to find some scientific validation for her statements but science continues to find new evidence proving her statements wrong.

Again you can see her 'visions' mirror prevailing or sections of prevailing knowledge.

Please confirm to us whether you believe her writings were EQUALLY inspired as Paul's....why are u ashamed of your sect?