#161528 - 03/15/08 04:41 PM
Re: Some Challenging Questions For a Challenger of Our Faith
[Re: A_G_Brito]
|
Craftsman
Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 3513
Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m
|
But tell me, what did Martin Luther teach about the seventh-day Sabbath? The Sabbath of the Third Commandment? (Lutheran/Catholic version) How about Calvin's teaching on the seventh-day Sabbath?
Dave
Edited by David Koot (03/15/08 04:46 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#161692 - 03/16/08 03:55 AM
Re: Some Challenging Questions For a Challenger of Our Faith
[Re: John317]
|
Registered: 04/28/07
Posts: 127
|
I'm very interested in your posts here, but do not presently have time to study it all in detail. I'll be returning to do just that. Meantime thanks very much for posting this material.
Hi sister, thanks for your kind words and for valuing our efforts to promote the truth in confronting the error and distortions of our real sentiments and teachings. I have to correct a few errors that later on showed up as I reread the material, but I am waiting for Bro. Stan grant me time for having the editing capability (again. . .). Well, one solution for having ways of reading the entire material is copying it and saving in a fold, then you can dedicate yourself to read and analyze it all as you find time for that, not depending of being online. As to what this other gentleman asks, yes, Luther was rather ambiguous about the Sabbath (Calvin too), for in the Small Catechism he presents all the 10 Commandments as binding to the Christian, and about the 3rd Commandment (which should be 4th, but for some reason he follows the Roman Catholic numbering of the Decalogue), he even stresses--"Keep the rest day". But, then, remember that what he said regarding the law was misunderstood, and the reason he wrote the "Treatise Against the Antinomians" was exactly to correct the misconceptions that some of his remarks caused in the minds of many. So, couldn't that include his ambiguity regarding the Sabbath subject? By the way, Luther was also ambiguous regarding the condition of the dead, for he clearly condemned the immortality of the soul doctrine as something inherited from Rome that should be discarded, but later on expressed ideas in accordance to the popular dualistic views. Anyway, how about what Baptists, Methodists, Anglicans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists finally defined as best interpretation of the Bible in their consideration, which includes (in the confessional documents): a - the 10 Commandments being the "law of God" to be respected wholly by the Christian community; b - the Sabbath commandment as stemming from the Creation of the world, thus being of universal character, to be obeyed with abstention of any secular or recreational activities (Note: the fact that they reinterpret it to apply to Sunday--which is an error--doesn't affect the ideological basis of the principle). c - the understanding of God's law as being "divided" into "Moral Law" (the Decalogue), "Ceremonial Law" (ended at Christ's death), "Civil Law", etc. is CORRECT? So, the fact is that the most representative Churches of Protestant/Evangelical confessions adopt these three concepts, despite the brain washing caused by the new teachers of this "other gospel" (Gal. 1:8) of semi-antinomianism/dispensationalism having led most Evangelical Christians to imagine that the Orthodoxy of the Evangelical thought are these notions of "abolished law" and similar ideas, which are not. Best regards
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#161958 - 03/18/08 03:21 AM
Re: Some Challenging Questions For a Challenger of Our Faith
[Re: Stan Jensen]
|
Carpe Diem!!!
Registered: 09/15/06
Posts: 3680
Loc: 49.05° Lat- 122.3° Long
|
ahemmmm
Let's try and keep this section to the topic ok? Did someone miss this?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#161960 - 03/18/08 03:40 AM
Re: Some Challenging Questions For a Challenger of Our Faith
[Re: A_G_Brito]
|
Registered: 11/13/05
Posts: 9026
Loc: CA
|
[quote] Anyway, how about what Baptists, Methodists, Anglicans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists finally defined as best interpretation of the Bible in their consideration, which includes (in the confessional documents):
a - the 10 Commandments being the "law of God" to be respected wholly by the Christian community;
b - the Sabbath commandment as stemming from the Creation of the world, thus being of universal character, to be obeyed with abstention of any secular or recreational activities (Note: the fact that they reinterpret it to apply to Sunday--which is an error--doesn't affect the ideological basis of the principle).
c - the understanding of God's law as being "divided" into "Moral Law" (the Decalogue), "Ceremonial Law" (ended at Christ's death), "Civil Law", etc. is CORRECT?
So, the fact is that the most representative Churches of Protestant/Evangelical confessions adopt these three concepts, despite the brain washing caused by the new teachers of this "other gospel" (Gal. 1:8) of semi-antinomianism/dispensationalism having led most Evangelical Christians to imagine that the Orthodoxy of the Evangelical thought are these notions of "abolished law" and similar ideas, which are not.... Good point. What you say is very true. I have several study Bible's, one entitled, "Reformation Study Bible," and the other, "The Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible," and both quote the Reformers as saying exactly what you have said in your post. The Spirit of the Reformation Bible contains all of the primary creeds of the Reformation, and all of them insist that the Ten Commandments, including the Sabbath commandment, remain obligatory for all mankind. PS. Just to nip any mistake in the bud, I will say that the picture on my posts is now no longer of me or of my wife but of my eldest daughter. It's how I saw her sitting next to me in church one Sabbath. After church, I simply asked her sit for me as I'd seen her earlier. A note added much later: I change the picture from time to time. Right now the picture on my posts is one I took of myself with my view camera.
_________________________
Turning and turning in the widening gyre/ The falcon cannot hear the falconer;/ things fall apart; the center cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world... Surely some revelation is at hand;/Surely the Second Coming is at hand. W.B. Yeats
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#161986 - 03/18/08 01:43 PM
Re: Some Challenging Questions For a Challenger of Our Faith
[Re: Stan Jensen]
|
Craftsman
Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 3513
Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#162525 - 03/22/08 08:11 PM
Re: Some Challenging Questions For a Challenger of Our Faith
[Re: A_G_Brito]
|
Craftsman
Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 3513
Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m
|
As to what this other gentleman asks, yes, Luther was rather ambiguous about the Sabbath (Calvin too), for in the Small Catechism he presents all the 10 Commandments as binding to the Christian, and about the 3rd Commandment (which should be 4th, but for some reason he follows the Roman Catholic numbering of the Decalogue), he even stresses--"Keep the rest day".
But, then, remember that what he said regarding the law was misunderstood, and the reason he wrote the "Treatise Against the Antinomians" was exactly to correct the misconceptions that some of his remarks caused in the minds of many. So, couldn't that include his ambiguity regarding the Sabbath subject?
Ambiguous? I don't think so. Certainly not in regard to the seventh-day Sabbath. Do you have a compendium of Herr Luther's statements about the seventh-day Sabbath? I certainly have read some of them. Nothing ambiguous about it. Granted that the Synod of Dordt ('Dort') adopted the Scottish Presbyterian/English Puritan view about the Lord's Day, even there, the consensus was that the 4th commandment is partly ceremonial and part moral. Calvin, I recall, averred that Christians should pick a time for corporate worship, and that such was important. Calvin taught AGAINST the one-day-in-seven view. Just pick a day and time for worship. Sunday was the generally-agreed upon day. HOWEVER, it was only a set time for worship, not the entire day. One thing that would help give the appearance of objectivity, Monsieur, would be for you to cite ALL the significant statements of Luther and Calvin about the Sabbath. Do you have those available? Don't merely present statements which seem to support the position you are taking. Tell the rest of the story as well. Dave
Edited by David Koot (03/22/08 08:29 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#162633 - 03/23/08 03:55 PM
Re: Some Challenging Questions For a Challenger of Our Faith
[Re: David Koot]
|
Craftsman
Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 3513
Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m
|
What I am suggesting is this: Right now, you seem to be selecting snippets and pieces of info which appear to support your position. In addition, your remarks suggest that you are in fact attempting to use those items to support your position. This does not give the appearance of objectivity.
Instead of that, may I suggest that you let the evidence speak for itself. Present ALL the evidence--or at least, if you are going to select snippets, then give a balanced selection--and let the evidence speak for itself. Let the evidence determine the position, rather than looking for items of evidence that appear to support a position.
Dave
Edited by David Koot (03/23/08 07:56 PM)
_________________________
"Study to show yourself approved by God, a good workman who needs not be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of truth." 2 Timothy 2:15
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#162662 - 03/23/08 07:07 PM
Re: Some Challenging Questions For a Challenger of Our Faith
[Re: David Koot]
|
Swiss n Swedish American
Registered: 12/09/06
Posts: 7766
Loc: A citizen of Heaven
|
Right now, you seem to be selecting snippets Wait a minute. I'm the only one who is allowed to display snippets on this forum.
_________________________
Another one of Woodies Goodies Our Mama Beats Your Obama. And don't forget ... Love WON Another.
Redwood
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#162670 - 03/23/08 07:54 PM
Re: Some Challenging Questions For a Challenger of Our Faith
[Re: Redwood]
|
Craftsman
Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 3513
Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m
|
Yeah, the famous Redwood snippets. Here we have the Brito snippets. Hey Redwood, maybe he should get the Redwood Award! (which reminds me, I haven't received that award yet. And here I thought I was your friend!)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
79 Registered (aldona, BEEKIND, Beryl, bkopplin, Bravus, Bruce_G, carolaa, ChildofChrist, CoAspen, DanC, Dee007, DenBorg, Denise, dgrimm60, Dottie, fccool, fun2believe, Gerry Cabalo, Gladussee, Gus Foster, Jerry D Thomas, John Blake, John317, Kevin H, Kountzer, lazarus, LifeHiscost, Lineman, Liz, LLBeck, Loren Fenton, Mable, mannybr2003, 27 invisible),
618
Guests and
152
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|

Be sure to click on the free shipping at the checkout else you get charged.
- - - - - -

|
|
Come Chat with others, open 24/7
- - - - - -
The following are google ads, these help to pay for the google ads we buy. Some are great, some are just strange. Report any nasty ones to Stan.
|
|
RU4Christ, jd serhan, blessed1, Francis Kamuyu, zxatl, john sandifer, lilmogirl2267, princess sherly, ruthxa, BroRollo, nasiaki, JazzieBenzimsq, Mark Anthony, thegermanSDA, simonjonez, Fitz31, mensk, Michaelangelo, Brother Job, peacekeeper, Robert Alves, EastCoastRemnant, zen, Google, Pat Humphrey, SCRIPTAX2000, sKera9, Anders Branderud, BobRyan, califhsmom
2928 Registered Users |
|
2928 Members
126 Forums
16973 Topics
162089 Posts
Max Online: 1237 @ 04/20/07 08:43 PM
|
|
To become a full member, and view more forums.
Please contact Stan, if you live in a developing Country or have other financial hardships, for a scholarship.
This income helps pay for hosting, advertising, domain names, software support etc etc
IF YOUR COUNTRY IS NOT LISTED OR IF YOU LIVE IN THE UNITED STATES
- - - - - - - - - - -
IF YOU LIVE IN NEW ZEALAND
- - - - - - - - - - -
IF YOU LIVE IN AUSTRALIA
- - - - - - - - - - -
IF YOU LIVE IN GREAT BRITAIN
- - - - - - - - - - -
IF YOU LIVE IN EUROPE
- - - - - - - - - - -
LIVE IN MEXICO
* * * NEW * * * NEW * * * NEW * * *
|
|
|