| 1. | |
Doctrine From Hell By Adventist Walter Veith | Self-Contradicting Anti-Scripture Auto-Refutation |
| 0:00 Heat.0:26 Heat. Heat. Heat.1:11 Hello and welcome to another | |
| episode of What's Up Prof. Goodday, Walter. I'm waiting for you | |
| to say that.1:18 How are you? Are you going to say that as well? | |
| to say that.1:18 How are you? Are you going to say that as well? | |
| Yes. Yeah. People who say, "I never answered that question." | |
| So, let me say I'm fine.1:29 I'm glad you're fine. How are you? | |
| Fine. Why? We're living in troubles times. Why are1:35 you fine? | |
| I'm keeping my anchor to where it's supposed to be.1:41 I | |
| see. Okay. Yes. We're in troubles times, that's for1:46 sure. Yes. | Daniel 9:25 |
| But uh no need to complain because we've been waiting for | |
| them for a long1:52 time. That's for sure as well. Yes. The | |
| problem is some people say it is not1:59 so. Well, that's their | |
| problem. Let's open with a word of prayer. Our2:06 heavenly | |
| father, we are in momentous times and we ask that you please | |
| in this2:13 discussion, help us again that we | |
| can talk and deliberate on what you want2:20 us to say in Jesus | |
| name. Amen. Amen2:25 Well, Martin, will you stand? And I think | Exodus 14:13 |
| the backdrop2:30 is very appropriate. There's an iceberg ahead | |
| and the only way to deal with it2:38 is not to brush by it like the | |
| Titanic and rip your side open and sink.2:43 Yeah. Even though | |
| you're supposedly unsinkable. Mhm. But to meet it. And if you | |
| the chances that uh the ship will3:00 be terribly shaken are | |
| the chances that uh the ship will3:00 be terribly shaken are | |
| pretty good. Right. Hey, that's for sure. Do you think some | |
| could fall overboard?3:05 Yes. A real shake. So, when you know | |
| there's a iceberg3:11 ahead and the command is meet it. Meet | |
| it. Isn't that a good time to fasten your3:17 seat belt? Yes. So that | |
| you don't go overboard. And add a little bit of super glue.3:23 So | |
| that you don't go overboard as you said. What do you think? | |
| Definitely. I think the time is now.3:30 All right. So, we're not | |
| going to do rocket science in this one. We're not3:35 going to talk | |
| about the events in part two. We'll do do that. We'll talk | |
| about3:41 some of the events taking place now. But just uh a | |
| little grounding again into3:47 the basics of what the | |
| confrontation is all about and why it is necessary to3:52 meet | |
| the iceberg. Yeah. Yeah. The thing is, um, we've done so many | |
| episodes and it's been so many3:59 years. I mean, there were | |
| some questions you sent me of people and then I went back | |
| to2021 and I saw, wow, maybe we4:08 can just refresh some of | |
| these things again because I don't know how many people go | |
| back and see all of that. No, they don't. How many are there | |
| now?4:15 I don't even know how many there are just of the | |
| WhatsApp prof series. Yeah, 233 or this is 234.4:22 Okay. So | |
| people don't want to rehash 2344:28 videos of an hour and a half | Sunday Iceberg 4 |
| or longer each, right? I understand that. So we want to do a4:34 | |
| little summary of what the real issue is and why it is important | |
| that we prepare4:41 for meeting this iceberg. Yeah. In fact, |
Doctrine from hell
- Thread starter GerhardEbersoehn
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
| 6. | |
| the15:12 uh historic part of the chiastic structure of the book of revelation.15:18 | |
| So you have the historic arm, you have the historic climax | |
| and then you have15:24 the eschatological arm. | |
| Now when it falls into the historic arm, then conservative15:32 uh commentators | |
| will try to fit the events into a historic context15:40 because | |
| it leads up to current day events in Revelation 1115:47 | |
| onwards 12, 13, 14 with some recaps of past history. | |
| But once you get to15:55 Revelation 13, 14, etc., then we are | |
| dealing with events that are16:02 now current. The rest are | |
| eschatological events as to how this will play out.16:09 | |
| Revelation 14, of course, also is very important. | The first Church of chapter 2 is not any “angel” of chapter 14; The first Christian Church was the 1st century, Apostolic, Congregational, all Greco-Jewish Church in Jerusalem and Palestine-Judea and elsewhere at the time. https://www.christistheway.com/pdfs/KJVnew.pdf |
| Go to Revelation16:14 chapter 2 it starts off with | |
| the first church16:21 because this is addressed to the | |
| churches. So obviously we're dealing with the | |
| churches and we're16:26 dealing with the philosophy of the | |
| churches and the teaching of the churches and we're | |
| dealing with the16:34 conditions which they face. | |
| Now I'm not going to do a Bible study on the seven | |
| churches. Now that's not our16:41 point here. | |
| The first church was pure. It was a16:47 church that had the | |
| truth. But they were becoming complacent.16:53 So they | |
| were falling asleep. They were becoming puffed up16:59 | |
| complacent. So it says, "I know thy works and thy labor and | |
| thy patience, and how they can bear them that are17:06 | |
| evil, and thrived them which say that they are apostles and | |
| are not, and has17:11 found them liars." | |
| Now, how do you find someone a17:11 liar?. | |
| You must have a basis in17:17 order to determine truth | |
| from error, right? You have to have the truth. | |
| Okay. So, what was their basis?17:23 | |
| The Bible. All right. | |
| Was there a Catholic church in this time? No. | |
| And was there a pope? No.17:28 | |
| So unfortunately, he couldn't help them with his | |
| infallibility. Right? | |
| No. | |
| So, how would they been then able to interpret the | |
| Scripture then?17:35 I | |
| don't know, these poor people were popeless. | |
| It's such a ridiculous statement that,17:41 you know, | |
| he would make me nauseous. But nevertheless, and then | |
| he talks about uh hast born and17:49 has patience and for My | |
| Name's sake, thou has labored and has not fainted.17:55 | |
| The early church was very active, right? But then he says, | |
| You know, you've18:01 lost your fire. Yeah. Now what | |
| rekindled fire? The18:07 rekindling of the fire comes in the |
| 8. | |
| He's officiating as a23:00 priest currently in heaven. Yes. | Christ is not <officiating as a priest currently in heaven> but as “HEAD HIS HEAVENLY MAJESTY given to the Church ”, as “God’s Right Hand EXALTED GOD-HEAD”—, as He, who in Person is the ‘Place’, the ‘Holy Place’, the ‘Most Holy Place’ of SOVEREIGN KING— 21 far above all ‘principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come : of SOVEREIGN KING— “GOD, who put all things under his feet, and gave HIM(self) to His Body the Church as HEAD OVER ALL, filling all in all” with GLORY all His Own and His Alone.22,23 |
| So if you follow the blueprint of23:05 the earthly sanctuary | No <blueprint of the earthly sanctuary> was ever <printed> or ever existed other than as the “pattern–plan–picture shown” Moses, Aaron, David, Solomon through visions in their minds as God showed them “by the Finger of God” His Holy Spirit as if in, not above, earth’s heaven. So, if any ‘blueprint’ had to be be followed, it would have to be “the blueprint of23:05 the earthly sanctuary”— |
| then at his ascension he must have gone into the23:10 holy place. Yeah, to perform the mediation. | —not of a supposed <holy place currently in heaven> into which, allegedly, He went <at his ascension>. Yeah, and what does <to perform the mediation> mean?— |
| And he23:16 would be seen standing in front of the of the altar of incense23:23 applying the prayers of the saints to his mediation and to his character and23:31 making them acceptable to God. | That <he would be seen standing in front of the of the altar of incense applying the prayers of the saints to altar of incense applying the prayers of the saints to his mediation and to his character and making them acceptable to God>? Would it not mean, He, would be seen “Seated The Right Hand of God Exalted”, the Trone, Altar of Incense, the Sweet Savour—, for the prayers of the saints? Yeah, He, Altar and Incense applied—, to the prayers of the saints? Yeah, He, Mediator and Mediation—, He, His Character, <making them acceptable to God>! |
17. Doctrine from hell 9 minutes ago#15 20251128Vrydag
Veith:
Why Why didn't they come on the Saturday which was after the 1:27:00 crucifixion?
Reply:
https://x.com/i/grok?conversation=1994701638603325715
This post partially transcribes Walter Veith's video argument at timestamp 1:27:00, where he posits that the women avoided the tomb on Saturday post-crucifixion due to Sabbath observance, reinforcing Saturday as the biblical rest day.
Author Gerhard Ebersöhn, a critic of Seventh-day Adventist theology, brands Veith's view "doctrine from hell" in a series of posts debating Sabbath timing, linking to his Christianity Board thread started November 2, 2025.
Accompanying images from Ebersöhn's feed emphasize Ephesians 1:18-20, highlighting "resurrected late on the Sabbath" to counter Sunday-centric interpretations while accusing Protestant views of Jesuit influence.
https://x.com/i/grok?conversation=1994701638603325715
Summary of the Christianity Board ThreadBased on the context of the referenced X post by Gerhard Ebersöhn (dated November 27, 2025), the linked thread appears to be a recent discussion he initiated on Christianity Board around November 2, 2025, focusing on the timing of Jesus' resurrection and the biblical Sabbath. Ebersöhn, a prolific poster on the forum known for his critiques of mainstream Christian theology (particularly Seventh-day Adventist and Sunday-observance views), uses the thread to challenge Walter Veith's arguments and broader "Sunday resurrectionist" doctrines. While exact thread details are sparse due to the recency, available snippets from Ebersöhn's writings and related forum activity indicate the following structure and content:Thread Overview
My Reply to Grok:
Thanks my pal, I could not answer better than you do on my behalf. I have one complaint though, the same as you would have noticed right through everything I ever have been engaged in protesting and debating on just about every medium for publication possible and available: YOUR TOTAL, TOTAL LACK, OF BIBLE AND BIBLICAL ARGUMENT. Otherwise, I pushed the ‘Like’ button for you. Keep up your excellent work, my courageous comrade!
erhard Ebersöhn
@Gerhard_Eberso
My
Veith:
Why Why didn't they come on the Saturday which was after the 1:27:00 crucifixion?
Reply:
| Why--- ? Why didn't they come on the Saturday? Because they did not come on the <Saturday>— it was “the Sabbath”. More important, it was not on the Saturday because it <was after the crucifixion>. Where do you read it <was after the crucifixion>? You don’t! Before Matthew 28:1-4, there is Matthew 27:66 back in time until Matthew 27:57; and before that, there is Matthew 27:56 back in time until Matthew 26:33 when they were come unto Golgatha before the crucifixion. Now if Matthew 28:1 means the two Marys, <didn't come on the Saturday which was after the crucifixion>, what does it mean? It means that Martin here objects, reacting on Veith’s quoting the KJV, “in the end of the Sabbath”. Martin objects as <modern Protestants> do, who <use Matthew 28:1> not the KJV way, but the modern Protestant way, which instead of “in the end of the Sabbath” is “after the Sabbath”, for example the NIV—a ‘modern Protestant’ version. |
This post partially transcribes Walter Veith's video argument at timestamp 1:27:00, where he posits that the women avoided the tomb on Saturday post-crucifixion due to Sabbath observance, reinforcing Saturday as the biblical rest day.
Author Gerhard Ebersöhn, a critic of Seventh-day Adventist theology, brands Veith's view "doctrine from hell" in a series of posts debating Sabbath timing, linking to his Christianity Board thread started November 2, 2025.
Accompanying images from Ebersöhn's feed emphasize Ephesians 1:18-20, highlighting "resurrected late on the Sabbath" to counter Sunday-centric interpretations while accusing Protestant views of Jesuit influence.
https://x.com/i/grok?conversation=1994701638603325715
Summary of the Christianity Board ThreadBased on the context of the referenced X post by Gerhard Ebersöhn (dated November 27, 2025), the linked thread appears to be a recent discussion he initiated on Christianity Board around November 2, 2025, focusing on the timing of Jesus' resurrection and the biblical Sabbath. Ebersöhn, a prolific poster on the forum known for his critiques of mainstream Christian theology (particularly Seventh-day Adventist and Sunday-observance views), uses the thread to challenge Walter Veith's arguments and broader "Sunday resurrectionist" doctrines. While exact thread details are sparse due to the recency, available snippets from Ebersöhn's writings and related forum activity indicate the following structure and content:Thread Overview
- Title: Likely titled something like "The Resurrection on the Sabbath: Refuting Walter Veith and Sunday Doctrine" or similar, based on his pattern of provocative headings (e.g., past threads like "The Sabbath Round 2: Ebersöhn versus John MacArthur").
- Start Date: November 2, 2025.
- Main Poster: Gerhard Ebersöhn, who posts lengthy, scripture-heavy arguments.
- Length: Approximately 15–20 posts (mostly from Ebersöhn, with limited replies from critics like SDA-affiliated users or Sunday advocates), typical for his threads which often devolve into unilateral exposition rather than dialogue.
- Core Topic: A biblical exegesis arguing that Jesus resurrected "late on the Sabbath" (Saturday), not on Sunday morning, as per a literal reading of passages like Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1–2, Luke 24:1, John 20:1, and Ephesians 1:18–20. Ebersöhn accuses Sunday-centric views of being "doctrine from hell," influenced by Jesuit tampering with translations, and calls Veith's Sabbath-observance explanation for the women's delay in visiting the tomb "blasphemous nonsense."
- Resurrection Timing:
- The women did not visit the tomb on Saturday (Sabbath) because it was already late in the day after the resurrection occurred "opse de sabbatōn" (Greek for "late on the Sabbaths" in Matthew 28:1), interpreted as the end of the Sabbath at sunset.
- Sunday visits were post-resurrection discoveries, not the event itself. He claims mistranslations (e.g., "first day of the week") obscure this to promote Sunday worship.
- Critique of Walter Veith:
- Veith (at 1:27:00 in his video) argues the women waited until Sunday due to Sabbath rest laws, reinforcing Saturday Sabbath-keeping. Ebersöhn dismisses this as "ignorant" and "from hell," asserting the empty tomb was found Saturday evening, making Veith's delay explanation unnecessary and theologically flawed.
- Accuses Veith and SDAs of inconsistency: If Sabbath is binding, why not address the "true" late-Sabbath resurrection?
- Broader Theological Claims:
- Links to Ephesians 1:18–20, emphasizing Christ's resurrection as the ultimate Sabbath fulfillment for Christians, rendering all other holy days obsolete.
- Blasts "Protestant Sunday resurrectionists" as pawns of Catholic/Jesuit agendas to shift worship from God's seventh-day Sabbath.
- Calls for Christians to observe Saturday as the resurrection day, warning of judgment for Sunday observance.
- Limited Engagement: Replies (if any) come from a few users, including SDA defenders like "Reg" (from past similar threads), who counter with arguments for a Wednesday crucifixion and Sunday resurrection to fit three full nights in the tomb (Matthew 12:40). Ebersöhn often responds aggressively, declaring debates "final" and accusing opponents of "lies upon lies."
- Tone: Heated and polemical, with Ebersöhn using bold caps, exclamation points, and phrases like "concocted of lies" or "supreme blasphemer." No consensus; it remains a one-sided rant with sporadic pushback.
- Related Media: Ebersöhn embeds images from his feed, including annotated Bible verses and anti-SDA memes, echoing the X post's visuals.
My Reply to Grok:
Thanks my pal, I could not answer better than you do on my behalf. I have one complaint though, the same as you would have noticed right through everything I ever have been engaged in protesting and debating on just about every medium for publication possible and available: YOUR TOTAL, TOTAL LACK, OF BIBLE AND BIBLICAL ARGUMENT. Otherwise, I pushed the ‘Like’ button for you. Keep up your excellent work, my courageous comrade!
erhard Ebersöhn
@Gerhard_Eberso
My
Veith: 20251130Sondag – 2.
https://x.com/i/grok?conversation=1994701638603325715
Poster:
https://x.com/i/grok?conversation=1994701638603325715
Gerhard Ebersöhn, who posts lengthy, scripture-heavy arguments
with limited replies from critics, typical for his threads which
often devolve into unilateral exposition rather than dialogue.
Reply:
Thanks again, courageous Comrade Grok! Had Walter Veith answered me nearly so considerately, how much face would he save himself, the indefatigable Professor in Palaeontology I believe, maybe I’m wrong, in other sciences as well I believe, Dietary and Nutrition? So how do you think can my arguments not devolve into unilateral exposition rather than dialogue? Be reasonable Grok my pal?
https://x.com/i/grok?conversation=1994701638603325715
Poster:
https://x.com/i/grok?conversation=1994701638603325715
Gerhard Ebersöhn, who posts lengthy, scripture-heavy arguments
with limited replies from critics, typical for his threads which
often devolve into unilateral exposition rather than dialogue.
Reply:
Thanks again, courageous Comrade Grok! Had Walter Veith answered me nearly so considerately, how much face would he save himself, the indefatigable Professor in Palaeontology I believe, maybe I’m wrong, in other sciences as well I believe, Dietary and Nutrition? So how do you think can my arguments not devolve into unilateral exposition rather than dialogue? Be reasonable Grok my pal?
Veith: 20251130Sondag – 3.
Veith:
And when the Sabbath was passed, 1:27:18 says Mark, and he actually tells you that Mary Magdalene, 1:27:24 mother of James and Salon, had brought sweet spices that they might come and anoint him. So, it was a common working 1:27:30 day for them, right? The Sunday. Yeah. But they didn't do it on the Sabbath. So, it's just a historic fact. 1:27:36 There's no change of worship here. No. It's actually um acknowledging the the Sabbath. 1:27:41 The Sabbath. Yeah. And then Mark also says and very early in the morning in the first day of the 1:27:47 week they came unto the sephila at the rising of the sun. This is a historic statement. 1:27:53
Banned off internet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFn0djUre7M&t=10s 20251027Maandag
Facebook
web.facebook.com
Grok:
• Core Topic: A biblical exegesis arguing that Jesus resurrected "late on the Sabbath" (Saturday), not on Sunday morning, as per a literal reading of passages like Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1–2, Luke 24:1, John 20:1, and Ephesians 1:18–20. Ebersöhn accuses Sunday-centric views of being "doctrine from hell," influenced by Jesuit tampering with translations, and calls Veith's Sabbath-observance explanation for the women's delay in visiting the tomb "blasphemous nonsense."
Reply:
The <Core Topic> of my thread on christianityboard.com has been dual, To answer the Adventists’ ‘Doctrine from hell’– ‘The Investigative Judgement’ as discussed by Professor Veith on youtube.com/watch?v=aFn0djUre7M&t=10s; and pit him and me together in critical theological discussion on christianityboard.com Professor Walter Veith versus Gerhard Ebersöhn.
I would through <biblical exegesis argue>:- That Jesus completed Atonement for full Salvation according to Scripture, 1Corinthians 15: 3 first of all that Christ DIED for our sins according to the scriptures 4 and that He was BURIED and that He ROSE again the third day according to the Scriptures which according to all Scripture from Genesis to Revelation once for all in Matthew 27:62 to 28:4 would culminate “the day after the Preparation…He said” would be “the third day I rise” and “indeed on the Sabbath…the angel cast the stone away from the sepulchre”.
While Adventists like Veith in fact argue that Jesus did not complete Atonement or Salvation according to Scripture when He DIED, was BURIED, or, ROSE again NOR DID HE ON EITHER OF THE DAYS HE DIED, WAS BURIED OR ROSE AGAIN, BUT, STARTED final atonement – as if his atonement ON EARTH had not been total – only after He ascended and began his ministry in the heavenly sanctuary.
Dear courageous Comrade Grok, kindly familiarize yourself with this background of these threads on christianityboard.com.
Veith:
And when the Sabbath was passed, 1:27:18 says Mark, and he actually tells you that Mary Magdalene, 1:27:24 mother of James and Salon, had brought sweet spices that they might come and anoint him. So, it was a common working 1:27:30 day for them, right? The Sunday. Yeah. But they didn't do it on the Sabbath. So, it's just a historic fact. 1:27:36 There's no change of worship here. No. It's actually um acknowledging the the Sabbath. 1:27:41 The Sabbath. Yeah. And then Mark also says and very early in the morning in the first day of the 1:27:47 week they came unto the sephila at the rising of the sun. This is a historic statement. 1:27:53
Banned off internet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFn0djUre7M&t=10s 20251027Maandag
web.facebook.com
Grok:
• Core Topic: A biblical exegesis arguing that Jesus resurrected "late on the Sabbath" (Saturday), not on Sunday morning, as per a literal reading of passages like Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1–2, Luke 24:1, John 20:1, and Ephesians 1:18–20. Ebersöhn accuses Sunday-centric views of being "doctrine from hell," influenced by Jesuit tampering with translations, and calls Veith's Sabbath-observance explanation for the women's delay in visiting the tomb "blasphemous nonsense."
Reply:
The <Core Topic> of my thread on christianityboard.com has been dual, To answer the Adventists’ ‘Doctrine from hell’– ‘The Investigative Judgement’ as discussed by Professor Veith on youtube.com/watch?v=aFn0djUre7M&t=10s; and pit him and me together in critical theological discussion on christianityboard.com Professor Walter Veith versus Gerhard Ebersöhn.
I would through <biblical exegesis argue>:- That Jesus completed Atonement for full Salvation according to Scripture, 1Corinthians 15: 3 first of all that Christ DIED for our sins according to the scriptures 4 and that He was BURIED and that He ROSE again the third day according to the Scriptures which according to all Scripture from Genesis to Revelation once for all in Matthew 27:62 to 28:4 would culminate “the day after the Preparation…He said” would be “the third day I rise” and “indeed on the Sabbath…the angel cast the stone away from the sepulchre”.
While Adventists like Veith in fact argue that Jesus did not complete Atonement or Salvation according to Scripture when He DIED, was BURIED, or, ROSE again NOR DID HE ON EITHER OF THE DAYS HE DIED, WAS BURIED OR ROSE AGAIN, BUT, STARTED final atonement – as if his atonement ON EARTH had not been total – only after He ascended and began his ministry in the heavenly sanctuary.
Dear courageous Comrade Grok, kindly familiarize yourself with this background of these threads on christianityboard.com.
Similar threads
