Mantis
Well-Known Member
Do you guys see how this “us against them attitude” of the world is in just about every thread now??? We should not have that hatred but it sure looks like we do in every thread.
The Insanity of the "right" to have guns!
- Thread starter ByGraceThroughFaith
- 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!
- Status
quietthinker
Well-Known Member
Bible Highlighter
Well-Known Member
No. I have read up on SDA’s and their beliefs. Some (Maybe not all) say you will not eventually be saved if you don’t keep the Sabbath.
Here are two source links:
Link #1:
Do Seventh Day Adventists believe people who attend church on Sunday will go to hell?
Link #2:
The Sabbath ~ and Salvation
Even Ellen G White says, ““I would like to keep the Sabbath,” says one, but my business will not let me.” Well, if this is really the case, then get some other business that will not hinder. If you saw that your present business was greatly injuring your health, and would cause your death in a few months, unless abandoned, you would lose no time in changing your occupation. But by disobeying God you lose his favor, and this will bring eternal death.”
Side Note:
I forgot SDA’s believe hell is the grave. So they don’t believe in a literal hell. But I do agree with them that the Lake of Fire is a place where the wicked will be destroyed. But I disagree with them on hell. For I believe hell is a real place based on the plain reading of the Bible.
Anyways, my issue with SDA is not only are they seeking to push the Sabbath that is no longer binding, but they push the Sabbath in such a way that is all they seem to ever talk about. Every conversation comes back to the Sabbath. But the Bible is not about the Sabbath but it’s about Jesus. Our conversation should always come back to Jesus and not the Sabbath. For the true Sabbath rest is actually Jesus Christ.
Last edited:
? Care to explain your accusation?
That's a rule God intends for His people to ignore.
How can those who are lost know they are lost if they think they are saved?
Mark 16:15-16 ; Matthew 28:19.
Admission that you knew that I was non-threatening yet you reported me to the administrators.
More admission you knew I really did not threaten anyone with violence on here, yet you falsely accused me and reported me.
More admission you knew I had not threatened anyone with physical violence.
So, now you are making false accusations against innocent folks?
Thanks for admitting I was no threat to anyone including yourself.
You admitted I was no threat when you wanted to give me your home address.
If you thought I was a real threat. As you made this big stink. You would not be encouraging
Bible Highlighter
Well-Known Member
It’s nice we can agree on this topic. While that is a good term (love your neighbor as yourself), I was thinking the following terms would bring more clarity on the topic here.
#1. Temporal Non-Violence or
#2. New Covenant Non-Violence.
Violence is defined in the dictionary as:#2. New Covenant Non-Violence.
Behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.
Source:
VIOLENCE English Definition and Meaning | Lexico.com
The idea of resistance can be confusing because we are to resist the devil, and this world. Paul escaped in a basket (he resisted those who wanted to capture him and he did not turn himself in). I think the word “resist” can be a little confusing to some people. I think they mean that we are not allowed to run or escape if we are faced with a threatening situation.
Anyways, may God’s good ways shine upon you today.
Last edited:
Another way of saying pacifism.
Heres a list of types of Pacifism,
Absolute Pacifism: does not allow violence for self-defense
Conditional Pacifism
Selective Pacifism
Active Pacifism
Universal Pacifism
Anti-war Pacifism
Private Pacifism
Buddhists also deny being Pacifists.
They claim budda taught non-violence.
This one line from Zechariach 4:6 says it all on this
‘Not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit,’
‘Not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit,’
Can Christians Use Self-defense and Lethal Force?
Main point in this lesson: There are not different laws for the non-Christian and Christian.
Example, if a homosexual is "married" to his partner and they both desire to become saved Christians.
They cannot get saved and somehow God pardons, justifies the sin of their homosexual fornication
No, they must stop the sin. They must no longer practise homosexuality. Or God will not save them.
This applies to ALL sin before someone desires to be saved.
You cannot practise sin, say be a serial killer and go get saved and the sin of murder is magically no longer murder in Gods eyes.
His law does not change.
Important note: I am not teaching the old covenant law of Moses.
I will only be referring to the law of Christ, the new testament covenant, Galatians 6:2.
Fact: all are under the same law.
There is not a law for the non-Christian and another law for the christian.
Example: Idolatry is a sin under Christs law for both non and Christian alike,
Revelation 21:8.
Now heres the Biblical evidence for why pacifism is not Gods will for mankind.
Pacifist's who claim to be christians teach non-christians can take jobs that use lethal force,
Examples, Police officer, military soldiers.
But a christian cannot.
It is also true that you are guilty of sin even if you ask someone else to commit the sin for you.
Example, hire a hitman.
Remember we are all held accountable to Jesus' law.
So, if a Christian calls 911 to get a police officer to kill a spouse that has told you she is going to murder you.
And has the weapon in hand. You are guilty of sin if the police officer kills your spouse.
Heres why,
Since the non-christian police office is under Christs law just as christians are.
If he uses lethal force, he has sinned if Bible Highlighter's interpretation of the scriptures is true.
Also the christian who calls upon the police officer to defend, protect him is guilty of sin because he is requesting the police officer "violate Gods law by killing another person if need be."
So, it must be true since non-christians and christians alike are under the same law.
Therefore christians can be police officers and vice versa.
If Bible Highlighter is correct. A Christian cannot call on a non-Christian like a police officer to do his "dirty work".
Proof that God approves of jobs that require physical violence.
Romans 13:1,
-let every soul be subject to the government authorities. For there is no authority except from God and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.
Police officers are Gods enforcers.
God approves of violence when justice is being carried out.
John told the Roman soldiers they had to repent.
He did not tell them they had to quit being soldiers! John did not teach pacifism.
Luke 3:14,
-Likewise the soldiers asked him, saying "And what shall we do"?
So John said to them, Do not intimidate anyone or accuse falsely, and be content with your wages.
Did John tell the soldiers to repent from their violent occupations?
Did John tell the Roman soldiers to give up being soldiers for the Roman government?
No he did not!
God approves of his people working in violent occupations.
Next example,
Cornelius was a military officer, Acts 10:1,7
-There was a certain man in Ceasera called Cornelius a centurian of what is called the Italian Regiment.
-and when the angel who spoke to him had departed, Cornelius called two of his household servants and a devout soldier from those who waited on him continually.
Cornelius is lost.
Peter commanded by God comes to Cornelius to preach the gospel to him that he might be saved.
Acts 10:34-48
Now notice, does Peter tell Cornelius he must no longer be a soldier to be a Christian?
Does Peter condemn his violent occupation?
No, Peter has no problem with Cornelius being a Christian soldier.
Peter approves of Christians in jobs that require lethal force.
Next example, the Philippian Jailer.
The Jailer job involves carrying a sword to kill if nessary.
Does Paul tell the Philippian Jailer he must quit his job to become a Christian?
No!
Paul says nothing about the Jailer carrying a sword.
Paul does not see the Philippian Jailers occupation as sinful,
Acts 16:26,27,28
-suddenly there was a great earthquake so that the foundations of the prison were shaken: and immediately all the cell doors were opened and everyone's chains were loosed.
-and the keeper of the prison awaking from sleep and seeing the prison doors open, supposing the prisoners had fled, drew his sword and was about to kill himself.
-But Paul called with a loud voice, saying Do yourself no harm, for we are all here.
Now Paul is going to preach the gospel to the Jailer.
The Jailer obeys the gospel and is saved,
Acts 16:29-36.
Did Paul teach the Jailer he could no longer use a sword being a converted christian?
No!
Paul approves of his occupation as a now born again christian using a sword.
Now for the individual protection of self and others,
Matthew 26:52, Jesus teaches a sword has its place. Not to be used for revenge.
1Timothy 5:8,
-but if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
We must provide for our families!
Now, that includes food so they do not starve.
Does anyone think that also does not include protection from child-raptists?
Of course God expects us to provide, that must include protection from those who would do our families harm!
The golden rule must be obeyed!
We are instructed to treat others the same as we would want to be treated,
Matthew 7:12,
-Therefore whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.
This commandment of Jesus makes christians obligated to not allow things to happen to others that we would not want to be done to us!
If you have been given the ability by God to rescue a person who is being attacked wrongly with physical violence.
If you are capable to protect that person, you are obligated to do unto others as you would have men do unto you!
If wicked men were trying to kill you.
Would you not want other men to help you out?
Of course you would.
This is why you must defend others who are being abused if God has given you ability to do so.
The Jews were guilty of violence even though they had the Romans murder Jesus,
Acts 2:23,
Since the Jews were guilty of using other men to enact violence on Jesus.
A Christian would also be guilty if we requested a police officer to become violent with a problem.
But the Jews did this AGAINST THE LAW.
But as you see, if Bible Highlighter is correct, then Christians would be guilty if we called on the Police.
Last Paul requested help from soldiers to protect him.
Paul is requesting men that can legally be violent for his protection.
Remember all under the same law.
Therefore non-christians and christians are held to the same standard.
If it is sinfull for the non-Christians to protect Paul.
Then it is sinfull for the christian to request soldiers to protect him with violence if nessary.
Acts 23:10; 17; 23-24
Acts 23:23-24
Main point in this lesson: There are not different laws for the non-Christian and Christian.
Example, if a homosexual is "married" to his partner and they both desire to become saved Christians.
They cannot get saved and somehow God pardons, justifies the sin of their homosexual fornication
No, they must stop the sin. They must no longer practise homosexuality. Or God will not save them.
This applies to ALL sin before someone desires to be saved.
You cannot practise sin, say be a serial killer and go get saved and the sin of murder is magically no longer murder in Gods eyes.
His law does not change.
Important note: I am not teaching the old covenant law of Moses.
I will only be referring to the law of Christ, the new testament covenant, Galatians 6:2.
Fact: all are under the same law.
There is not a law for the non-Christian and another law for the christian.
Example: Idolatry is a sin under Christs law for both non and Christian alike,
Revelation 21:8.
Now heres the Biblical evidence for why pacifism is not Gods will for mankind.
Pacifist's who claim to be christians teach non-christians can take jobs that use lethal force,
Examples, Police officer, military soldiers.
But a christian cannot.
It is also true that you are guilty of sin even if you ask someone else to commit the sin for you.
Example, hire a hitman.
Remember we are all held accountable to Jesus' law.
So, if a Christian calls 911 to get a police officer to kill a spouse that has told you she is going to murder you.
And has the weapon in hand. You are guilty of sin if the police officer kills your spouse.
Heres why,
Since the non-christian police office is under Christs law just as christians are.
If he uses lethal force, he has sinned if Bible Highlighter's interpretation of the scriptures is true.
Also the christian who calls upon the police officer to defend, protect him is guilty of sin because he is requesting the police officer "violate Gods law by killing another person if need be."
So, it must be true since non-christians and christians alike are under the same law.
Therefore christians can be police officers and vice versa.
If Bible Highlighter is correct. A Christian cannot call on a non-Christian like a police officer to do his "dirty work".
Proof that God approves of jobs that require physical violence.
Romans 13:1,
-let every soul be subject to the government authorities. For there is no authority except from God and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.
Police officers are Gods enforcers.
God approves of violence when justice is being carried out.
John told the Roman soldiers they had to repent.
He did not tell them they had to quit being soldiers! John did not teach pacifism.
Luke 3:14,
-Likewise the soldiers asked him, saying "And what shall we do"?
So John said to them, Do not intimidate anyone or accuse falsely, and be content with your wages.
Did John tell the soldiers to repent from their violent occupations?
Did John tell the Roman soldiers to give up being soldiers for the Roman government?
No he did not!
God approves of his people working in violent occupations.
Next example,
Cornelius was a military officer, Acts 10:1,7
-There was a certain man in Ceasera called Cornelius a centurian of what is called the Italian Regiment.
-and when the angel who spoke to him had departed, Cornelius called two of his household servants and a devout soldier from those who waited on him continually.
Cornelius is lost.
Peter commanded by God comes to Cornelius to preach the gospel to him that he might be saved.
Acts 10:34-48
Now notice, does Peter tell Cornelius he must no longer be a soldier to be a Christian?
Does Peter condemn his violent occupation?
No, Peter has no problem with Cornelius being a Christian soldier.
Peter approves of Christians in jobs that require lethal force.
Next example, the Philippian Jailer.
The Jailer job involves carrying a sword to kill if nessary.
Does Paul tell the Philippian Jailer he must quit his job to become a Christian?
No!
Paul says nothing about the Jailer carrying a sword.
Paul does not see the Philippian Jailers occupation as sinful,
Acts 16:26,27,28
-suddenly there was a great earthquake so that the foundations of the prison were shaken: and immediately all the cell doors were opened and everyone's chains were loosed.
-and the keeper of the prison awaking from sleep and seeing the prison doors open, supposing the prisoners had fled, drew his sword and was about to kill himself.
-But Paul called with a loud voice, saying Do yourself no harm, for we are all here.
Now Paul is going to preach the gospel to the Jailer.
The Jailer obeys the gospel and is saved,
Acts 16:29-36.
Did Paul teach the Jailer he could no longer use a sword being a converted christian?
No!
Paul approves of his occupation as a now born again christian using a sword.
Now for the individual protection of self and others,
Matthew 26:52, Jesus teaches a sword has its place. Not to be used for revenge.
1Timothy 5:8,
-but if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
We must provide for our families!
Now, that includes food so they do not starve.
Does anyone think that also does not include protection from child-raptists?
Of course God expects us to provide, that must include protection from those who would do our families harm!
The golden rule must be obeyed!
We are instructed to treat others the same as we would want to be treated,
Matthew 7:12,
-Therefore whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.
This commandment of Jesus makes christians obligated to not allow things to happen to others that we would not want to be done to us!
If you have been given the ability by God to rescue a person who is being attacked wrongly with physical violence.
If you are capable to protect that person, you are obligated to do unto others as you would have men do unto you!
If wicked men were trying to kill you.
Would you not want other men to help you out?
Of course you would.
This is why you must defend others who are being abused if God has given you ability to do so.
The Jews were guilty of violence even though they had the Romans murder Jesus,
Acts 2:23,
Since the Jews were guilty of using other men to enact violence on Jesus.
A Christian would also be guilty if we requested a police officer to become violent with a problem.
But the Jews did this AGAINST THE LAW.
But as you see, if Bible Highlighter is correct, then Christians would be guilty if we called on the Police.
Last Paul requested help from soldiers to protect him.
Paul is requesting men that can legally be violent for his protection.
Remember all under the same law.
Therefore non-christians and christians are held to the same standard.
If it is sinfull for the non-Christians to protect Paul.
Then it is sinfull for the christian to request soldiers to protect him with violence if nessary.
Acts 23:10; 17; 23-24
Acts 23:23-24
BarneyFife
Well-Known Member
More misinformation than in your last post.
And I don't have time right now to address it all.
All Noah talked about for 120 years was a catastrophic flood that seemed impossible for the world to believe.
Interesting that Jesus says:
"But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."
Anti-Adventism is just like any other conspiracy theory.
You don't have time to really investigate all the information you're just taking as being reliable and conclusive.
I've been an avidly studious Adventist for 32 years.
Do you really think you know more than I do about what I believe?
Really?
Do you know how many times I've fielded the very arguments you're throwing together here?
I admit I haven't read the Sabbath/Salvation article by Dr. Erwin Gane (at least, not recently), but as much as I respect his contribution to Adventist education, he is wrong when he states:
"Hence, Matthew 24:20 is Jesus' command for end-time Christians to keep holy the seventh-day Sabbath."
Theologians are like politics—they ruin everything.
I don't debate, btw—I only discuss.
Would you like me to give you a dozen or so quotes from Mrs. White very similar to the one you've copied and pasted here?
I could save you some time.
I could also provide you with lots of other derogatory information about Adventists and the church.
AND IT DON'T MEAN DIDDLY.
Or you could just point your browser to nonsda.org or just Google "SDA" and feast on some real trash.
That's what most people do.
There comes a time when you really have to decide who's interested in truth and who's just piling up cannon fodder so they won't have to think about something they don't want to.
Who are you?
Gotta go.
You had better believe it: And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear Him which is able to destroy* both soul and body in hell [Gehenna = the Lake of Fire]. (Mt 10:28)
*Strong's Concordance
apollumi: to destroy, destroy utterly
Original Word: ἀπόλλυμι
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: apollumi
Phonetic Spelling: (ap-ol'-loo-mee)
Definition: to destroy, destroy utterly
Usage: (a) I kill, destroy, (b) I lose, mid: I am perishing (the resultant death being viewed as certain).
Amen,
Ecclesiastes 12:13-14,
-Let us hear the whole conclusion of the matter,
-Fear God and keep His commandments for this is mans all.
-for God will bring every work into judgement,
Including every secret thing, whether good or evil
Well, you better give up your kitchen knives, and gardening tools, etc.
BarneyFife
Well-Known Member
You're about to do that for me just below:
See?
Effectively, "God intends for people to agree to rules they do not intend to keep."
Simple
I didn't report you for threatening anyone.
I didn't report you for threatening anyone.
I didn't report you for threatening anyone.
I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
I didn't report you for threatening anyone.
I didn't report you for threatening anyone.
Actually, all I remember saying in my report (as if it were any of your business) was "This looks really bad." I know I said more, but I do remember I was careful NOT to say you were threatening anyone since I didn't believe you were actually threatening anyone. I told you exactly why I reported your post.
Here, let me try it again:
The language you chose to illustrate your point was wildly inappropriate.
Now that's purely my opinion but, as it turns out, not only mine.
Is this a sentence or 3 sentences or...?
-and-
I didn't report you for threatening anyone.
Well, we're not communicating on a meaningful level, anyway.
Tell me, does God command Christians to keep laws, rules that go against Gods law.
Acts 5:29
quietthinker
Well-Known Member
do we 'fear' God because he has an attitude of destruction towards sinners or are we drawn to him because his mercy is greater and outside of anything we can comprehend? ie, what the carnal man can imagine.
How do we determine this? .....is it not by seeing God in action in Jesus?
Bible Highlighter
Well-Known Member
More misinformation than in your last post.
And I don't have time right now to address it all.
All Noah talked about for 120 years was a catastrophic flood that seemed impossible for the world to believe.
Interesting that Jesus says:
"But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."
Anti-Adventism is just like any other conspiracy theory.
You don't have time to really investigate all the information you're just taking as being reliable and conclusive.
I've been an avidly studious Adventist for 32 years.
Do you really think you know more than I do about what I believe?
Really?
Do you know how many times I've fielded the very arguments you're throwing together here?
I admit I haven't read the Sabbath/Salvation article by Dr. Erwin Gane (at least, not recently), but as much as I respect his contribution to Adventist education, he is wrong when he states:
"Hence, Matthew 24:20 is Jesus' command for end-time Christians to keep holy the seventh-day Sabbath."
Theologians are like politics—they ruin everything.
I don't debate, btw—I only discuss.
Would you like me to give you a dozen or so quotes from Mrs. White very similar to the one you've copied and pasted here?
I could save you some time.
I could also provide you with lots of other derogatory information about Adventists and the church.
AND IT DON'T MEAN DIDDLY.
Or you could just point your browser to nonsda.org or just Google "SDA" and feast on some real trash.
That's what most people do.
There comes a time when you really have to decide who's interested in truth and who's just piling up cannon fodder so they won't have to think about something they don't want to.
Who are you?
Gotta go.
I had discussions with SDA’s before. Whenever they talk it is Sabbath this, and Sabbath that. They make it all about the Sabbath when it is no longer a command that is in effect (Colossians 2:14-17).
But this Facebook Page is a good source for exposing some of the silly things in the SDA church.
Ellen G White Lies - Facebook
Last edited:
Bible Highlighter
Well-Known Member
After thinking it over more, I now believe Non-Resistance may not be the best way to describe my position of what I believe the New Covenant teaches.
I believe the terms… “Temporal Non-Violence” or “New Covenant Non-Violence” would be more accurate to expressing what I believe the Bible says.
Last edited:
Whatever you label your doctrine.
It will never be the new law of Christ.
This may mean nothing to you.
I hope you know I truly love you.
I would never wish any harm on you, physically or spiritually.
BarneyFife
Well-Known Member
He most certainly does. He also tells them to keep their vows and to do everything as to the LORD. If a Christian believes he cannot agree to the rules of an organization, he should abstain from its membership. It is not necessary to tell people point-blank that they are lost, unsaved, or unchristian to preach the Gospel. It is a universal fact that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. This message can be preached on this forum without breaking the rules. I have never called into question someone's standing with God here. But I have labored for souls with satisfactory results and reward, all glory to God.
- Status
Similar threads
