Sabbath Day Salvation

YeshuaFan

Well-known member
Now here's a welcome voice we haven't heard in a long time!
I have never understood why certain people are drawn to the SDA church, but considering the personality traits their members display does offer some explanation. I see the same phenomenon on the RCC forum, too.
Think that the main agreement between Mormons, JW, Sda, and Rome is their theology satanic in origin, and pride, as all see themselves as ONLY true church!
 

Icyspark

Active member
💡The Epistles are the NT books that describe what we hold and believe in, so why NO Sabbath keeping in any of them? [Non sequitur]


Hi YeshuaFan,

Why are you ignoring all the points I made and continuing to change the subject?

Let's review what in my responses you've ignored in your ever-shifting unrelated, unbiblical responses to my posts:

You claimed that there was an "historical transisition [sic] from old to new Covenant, as now under the NC, 9 of the OT Commandments were brought back over to the Church, but the Sabbath never was!"

To which I asked if you had ever tried to validate this claim? Then I went on to reveal that the command not to take the Lord's name in vain is not "brought back over to the church" and asked if you think it's now ok to take the Lord's name in vain? Your response? ::Crickets:: 🦗 Why won't you even stay on topic in your own diversionary attempts?

Then I asked if you could supply the words of Jesus indicating His intent to bring His holy day to an end? Your response? ::Crickets:: 🦗 Why can't you defend your own assertions?

Another diversion of yours I addressed was your attempt to marginalize the Lord's day by calling it "the Jewish Sabbath." I revealed to you the truth about this assertion in that the Bible knows no such thing as "the Jewish Sabbath" and that God claims the Sabbath as belonging to Himself--He calls it "MY holy day." How are you going to strip ownership from the Lord of the Sabbath to a group of people which the Bible makes no such claims? Your response? ::Crickets:: 🦗

If you want to have a dialogue then can we stay on topic? 💡

I pray this helps.
 

YeshuaFan

Well-known member
Hi YeshuaFan,

Why are you ignoring all the points I made and continuing to change the subject?

Let's review what in my responses you've ignored in your ever-shifting unrelated, unbiblical responses to my posts:

You claimed that there was an "historical transisition [sic] from old to new Covenant, as now under the NC, 9 of the OT Commandments were brought back over to the Church, but the Sabbath never was!"

To which I asked if you had ever tried to validate this claim? Then I went on to reveal that the command not to take the Lord's name in vain is not "brought back over to the church" and asked if you think it's now ok to take the Lord's name in vain? Your response? ::Crickets:: 🦗 Why won't you even stay on topic in your own diversionary attempts?

Then I asked if you could supply the words of Jesus indicating His intent to bring His holy day to an end? Your response? ::Crickets:: 🦗 Why can't you defend your own assertions?

Another diversion of yours I addressed was your attempt to marginalize the Lord's day by calling it "the Jewish Sabbath." I revealed to you the truth about this assertion in that the Bible knows no such thing as "the Jewish Sabbath" and that God claims the Sabbath as belonging to Himself--He calls it "MY holy day." How are you going to strip ownership from the Lord of the Sabbath to a group of people which the Bible makes no such claims? Your response? ::Crickets:: 🦗

If you want to have a dialogue then can we stay on topic? 💡

I pray this helps.
Sabbath in the OT ONLY was given to national Israel, as a sign of their Old Covenant relationship with Yahweh, and whre is the NT that shows to us that Sabbath was given to the Church?
 

Icyspark

Active member
Sabbath in the OT ONLY was given to national Israel, as a sign of their Old Covenant relationship with Yahweh, and whre is the NT that shows to us that Sabbath was given to the Church? [Non sequitur]


Hi YeshuaFan,

I find that when people don't answer my questions it's almost always a sign that they realize the error in their position. Would you like to confirm that that's your reason for ignoring my questions?

Here. I'll consolidate my questions and concisely repeat them for you:
  1. Do you accept that the command not to take the Lord's name in vain is not repeated in the new covenant?
  2. If you agree with question 1 does that mean you now feel free to use flippantly God's name?
  3. Where do you find that Jesus said He was bringing His holy day to an end? Text please.
  4. Where do you find the seventh day ever called "the Jewish Sabbath"?
  5. Do you accept that God claims ownership of the Sabbath by calling it "My holy day"?
I pray this helps.
 

YeshuaFan

Well-known member
Hi YeshuaFan,

I find that when people don't answer my questions it's almost always a sign that they realize the error in their position. Would you like to confirm that that's your reason for ignoring my questions?

Here. I'll consolidate my questions and concisely repeat them for you:
  1. Do you accept that the command not to take the Lord's name in vain is not repeated in the new covenant?
  2. If you agree with question 1 does that mean you now feel free to use flippantly God's name?
  3. Where do you find that Jesus said He was bringing His holy day to an end? Text please.
  4. Where do you find the seventh day ever called "the Jewish Sabbath"?
  5. Do you accept that God claims ownership of the Sabbath by calling it "My holy day"?
I pray this helps.
There is NO mention in any NT passage that states that after the Church was founded at Pentacost that God had instituted Sabbath upon her!
 

Icyspark

Active member
There is NO mention in any NT passage that states that after the Church was founded at Pentacost that God had instituted Sabbath upon her!
[Non sequitur]


Hi YeshuaFan,

People wonder why I have to ask the same questions over and over again. Oy! :rolleyes:

I've been answering your unrelated questions and I have questions that relate to my answers. Why do you find it so difficult to respond?

Third time:
  1. Do you accept that the command not to take the Lord's name in vain is not repeated in the new covenant?
  2. If you agree with question 1 does that mean you now feel free to use flippantly God's name?
  3. Where do you find that Jesus said He was bringing His holy day to an end? Text please.
  4. Where do you find the seventh day ever called "the Jewish Sabbath"?
  5. Do you accept that God claims ownership of the Sabbath by calling it "My holy day"?
God bless!
 

pythons

Active member
Hi YeshuaFan,

People wonder why I have to ask the same questions over and over again. Oy! :rolleyes:

I've been answering your unrelated questions and I have questions that relate to my answers. Why do you find it so difficult to respond?

Third time:
  1. Do you accept that the command not to take the Lord's name in vain is not repeated in the new covenant?
  2. If you agree with question 1 does that mean you now feel free to use flippantly God's name?
  3. Where do you find that Jesus said He was bringing His holy day to an end? Text please.
  4. Where do you find the seventh day ever called "the Jewish Sabbath"?
  5. Do you accept that God claims ownership of the Sabbath by calling it "My holy day"?
God bless!

The question is easily answerable as Colossians 2, 16 is very clear that the Jewish Feasts are not obligatory on Christians - the Sabbath being the 1st of the Feasts mentioned in Leviticus 23. Had God created a flat earth (something God could have easily done) you'd have a point if the Book of Colossians didn't exist - as it is the earth is round and someone can be working and not be violating the Sabbath while another person on another part of the globe is observing the Sabbath. This is not how natural or "moral" laws (which are perpetually binding) work. Moral laws are in force 24 hours a day 7 days a week & 365 days a year.

All the Feasts found in the Book of the Law are identified as "God's Feasts" so the argument you promote would require you to observe all the Feasts "of the Lord" because God claims ownership of all of them.

The fact is that Christians were commanded to assemble 'themselves' together and by default assembling with Jews practicing Judaism at the temple or even the social experience at the Synagogues wouldn't fulfil the command to assemble themselves together. The practice of Christian assembly on the 1st day of the week is absolutely Apostolic in origin.

In saying this I don't condemn you for your or SDA's for their Devotion to the Sabbath day - you are most welcome to observe those devotions that mean something special to you. I think the problem most folks have with SDA's and the Sabbath is that is pushed well past a Devotion - with the false accusation that Sunday's origin is pagan, and that the Apostles and earliest Christians were holding Christian assembly on the equivalent of a Gregorian Saturday - which is simply not true.
 

pythons

Active member
Statements such as the ones below are, in my view, cause individuals to identify the SDA Church as a cult.

Here we find the mark of the beast. The very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, on the part of the Catholic church, without any authority from the Bible.” (Ellen G. White, The Mark of the Beast, page 23).

"The change of the Sabbath is the sign or mark of the authority of the Romish church.” ... “The keeping of the counterfeit Sabbath is the reception of the mark.” (Ellen G. White, Great Controversy, Vol. 4, page 281).

"Sunday-keeping is an institution of the first beast, and ALL who submit to obey this institution emphatically worship the first beast and receive his mark, 'the mark of the beast.' .... Those who worship the beast and his image by observing the first day are certainly idolaters, as were the worshippers of the golden calf.” (Advent Review Extra, pages 10 and 11, August, 1850).

From what I've seen all SDA teaching on the origins of Sunday is a regurgitation of the above. It's important to note that in addition to the SDA teaching on the Sabbath AT THE SAME TIME this was going on the SDA Church has officially conceded that the SDA Church was teaching heresy, heretical doctrines about Christ. I would urge SDA's to consider this fact when looking into the reasons other Christians opt to assemble on the 1st day of the week.
 

YeshuaFan

Well-known member
The question is easily answerable as Colossians 2, 16 is very clear that the Jewish Feasts are not obligatory on Christians - the Sabbath being the 1st of the Feasts mentioned in Leviticus 23. Had God created a flat earth (something God could have easily done) you'd have a point if the Book of Colossians didn't exist - as it is the earth is round and someone can be working and not be violating the Sabbath while another person on another part of the globe is observing the Sabbath. This is not how natural or "moral" laws (which are perpetually binding) work. Moral laws are in force 24 hours a day 7 days a week & 365 days a year.

All the Feasts found in the Book of the Law are identified as "God's Feasts" so the argument you promote would require you to observe all the Feasts "of the Lord" because God claims ownership of all of them.

The fact is that Christians were commanded to assemble 'themselves' together and by default assembling with Jews practicing Judaism at the temple or even the social experience at the Synagogues wouldn't fulfil the command to assemble themselves together. The practice of Christian assembly on the 1st day of the week is absolutely Apostolic in origin.

In saying this I don't condemn you for your or SDA's for their Devotion to the Sabbath day - you are most welcome to observe those devotions that mean something special to you. I think the problem most folks have with SDA's and the Sabbath is that is pushed well past a Devotion - with the false accusation that Sunday's origin is pagan, and that the Apostles and earliest Christians were holding Christian assembly on the equivalent of a Gregorian Saturday - which is simply not true.
The main fault have with sda is that their church bases salvation upon sabbath keeping and obeying the law, so hold to another Gospel!
 

YeshuaFan

Well-known member
Statements such as the ones below are, in my view, cause individuals to identify the SDA Church as a cult.

Here we find the mark of the beast. The very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, on the part of the Catholic church, without any authority from the Bible.” (Ellen G. White, The Mark of the Beast, page 23).

"The change of the Sabbath is the sign or mark of the authority of the Romish church.” ... “The keeping of the counterfeit Sabbath is the reception of the mark.” (Ellen G. White, Great Controversy, Vol. 4, page 281).

"Sunday-keeping is an institution of the first beast, and ALL who submit to obey this institution emphatically worship the first beast and receive his mark, 'the mark of the beast.' .... Those who worship the beast and his image by observing the first day are certainly idolaters, as were the worshippers of the golden calf.” (Advent Review Extra, pages 10 and 11, August, 1850).

From what I've seen all SDA teaching on the origins of Sunday is a regurgitation of the above. It's important to note that in addition to the SDA teaching on the Sabbath AT THE SAME TIME this was going on the SDA Church has officially conceded that the SDA Church was teaching heresy, heretical doctrines about Christ. I would urge SDA's to consider this fact when looking into the reasons other Christians opt to assemble on the 1st day of the week.
Np problem if Sda wants to keep sabbath still, heresy when they make it mandatory and binding on all as a salvation issue!
And the early Sda founders were indeed Arians in regards to Jesus Christ!
 

YeshuaFan

Well-known member
Hi YeshuaFan,

People wonder why I have to ask the same questions over and over again. Oy! :rolleyes:

I've been answering your unrelated questions and I have questions that relate to my answers. Why do you find it so difficult to respond?

Third time:
  1. Do you accept that the command not to take the Lord's name in vain is not repeated in the new covenant?
  2. If you agree with question 1 does that mean you now feel free to use flippantly God's name?
  3. Where do you find that Jesus said He was bringing His holy day to an end? Text please.
  4. Where do you find the seventh day ever called "the Jewish Sabbath"?
  5. Do you accept that God claims ownership of the Sabbath by calling it "My holy day"?
God bless!
If you keep the sabbath , are obligated to keep it all. as would require devotion to mosaic law!
 

Icyspark

Active member
If you keep the sabbath , are obligated to keep it all. as would require devotion to mosaic law!


Strike three. You're out!

I'm not going to waste my time responding to someone who isn't interested in a discussion. You seem to be only interested in disseminating your disconnected propaganda. Have at it but without me as your enlightened and truthful foil.
 

John t

Super Member
I find that when people don't answer my questions it's almost always a sign that they realize the error in their position. Would you like to confirm that that's your reason for ignoring my questions?

You are presenting a big logical fallacy above, and expecting us to believe a fallacious argument called "argument from silence".

People wonder why I have to ask the same questions over and over again. Oy! :rolleyes:

I've been answering your unrelated questions and I have questions that relate to my answers. Why do you find it so difficult to respond?

Third time: <SNIPPED>

As has been explained to you several times by me (and perhaps others), "The ONLY thing that silence proves is silence on that particular issue. Yet, you are pushing one more logical fallacy, both of which invalidate your efforts to make a point. The repetitive posting of unanswered questions will not cause them to be answered because that is just another form of "magical thinking".

It is my opinion that the reason no one answers your questions is because they see the inherent trap in each of them.

Then, this clip of your own words reveals much about your position:

I'm not going to waste my time responding to someone who isn't interested in a discussion. You seem to be only interested in disseminating your disconnected propaganda. Have at it but without me as your enlightened and truthful foil.

You must see by now that the Evangelical position, especially in the NT is exegetically based, but the positions your SDA friends take is opinion based. Here is the difference in the approaches

The SDA position is opinion based, meaning that Ellen, or other SDA higher ups believe that these disconnected verses when strung together teach certain SDA doctrines so they are presented as truth.

On the other hand, the Evangelicals believe in the plenary inspiration of Scripture that the words used, their context, meaning, grammar and syntax are all equally and divinely inspired. Taken as a whole they present a context that is never changing, and plainly point to a singular interpretation. On those building blocks we build our doctrinal foundation.

Here is the proof that you place yourself as an authority for SDA things, and in the process run down others not believing as you do:

Have at it but without me as your enlightened and truthful foil.


Really, Icy? You have that high of an opinion about your beliefs?

I guess you really believe that because you condesendingly posted:

I find that when people don't answer my questions it's almost always a sign that they realize the error in their position

Do you use a crystal ball or anything similar to project your imagined mind reading ability onto other posters as you claimed above? :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

John t

Super Member
Here. I'll consolidate my questions and concisely repeat them for you:
  1. Do you accept that the command not to take the Lord's name in vain is not repeated in the new covenant?
  2. If you agree with question 1 does that mean you now feel free to use flippantly God's name?
  3. Where do you find that Jesus said He was bringing His holy day to an end? Text please.
  4. Where do you find the seventh day ever called "the Jewish Sabbath"?
  5. Do you accept that God claims ownership of the Sabbath by calling it "My holy day"?

You SDA guys seem to be adept at ignoring what the Bible says MANY TIMES (as if saying it once is insufficient for comprehension).

Go argue with the Apostle Paul about what he wrote:

  1. "For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace." Romans 6:14.
  2. Christians are dead to the law." Romans 7:4.
  3. "If ye be led by the Spirit, ye are not under the law" Galatians 5:18.
  4. Christians are "delivered from the law." Romans 7:6.
  5. "Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster[the law]. Galatians 3:24-25.
  6. For Christians, the Law is "that which is done away." II Corinthians 3:11.
  7. For Christians, the Law is "that which is abolished." II Corinthians 3:13.
  8. For Christians, Jesus, on the Cross, was "blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us." Colossians 2:14.
  9. For Christians, the Law is taken "out of the way" and nailed "to his cross." Colossians 2:14.
  10. "When God speaks of a new [covenant or agreement], He makes the first one obsolete (out of use). And what is obsolete (out of use and annulled because of age) is ripe for disappearance and to be dispensed with altogether." Hebrews 8:13, The Amplified Version
Because of what Paul wrote, your questions are all irrelevant because they are all assuming that the Law is still in effect. More to the point, by a score of 10 to zero, there are TEN verses that say that the Christian is NOT under the Law, as you SDA people want to convince us And there are ZERO verses in the New Covenant which states Christians remain under the Law.

That is not an argument from silence, because all 10 of the verses are about being under the Law, which is the subject of this post.
 

Buzzard

Well-known member
  1. "Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster[the law]. Galatians 3:24-25.
What "Law" set up the Authority of these "School Masters"
these Tutors and Governors

Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child,
differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all;
2 But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.
..
Howbeit then, when ye knew not God,
ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.
9 But now, after that ye have known God,
or rather are known of God,
how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements,
whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

Why do you turn again into Bondage
too a bunch of Tutors and Governors
======================================================

Who spake / ordained the !0 Commandments
[ ] God
[ ] Angels

Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions,
till the seed should come to whom the promise was made;
and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

Galations 4:​
But Jerusalem which is above is free,
which is the mother of us all.


Proverbs 6:20
My son, keep thy father's commandment,
and forsake not the law of thy mother:
21 Bind them continually upon thine heart,
and tie them about thy neck.

22 When thou goest, it shall lead thee;
when thou sleepest, it shall keep thee;
and when thou awakest, it shall talk with thee.

23 For the commandment is a lamp;
and the law is light;
and reproofs of instruction are the way of life
:

and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

What or Who is a a mediator.

Who were all these
Tutors and Governors we are no longer subject to
Maybe Icy can tell us
 
Last edited:

YeshuaFan

Well-known member
Strike three. You're out!

I'm not going to waste my time responding to someone who isn't interested in a discussion. You seem to be only interested in disseminating your disconnected propaganda. Have at it but without me as your enlightened and truthful foil.
Still waiting to see from you what NT verses plainly stated that the Church was placed back under the Jewish sabbath!
Also show to me where the Investigative Judgement of Ellen White can be found!
 

YeshuaFan

Well-known member
You are presenting a big logical fallacy above, and expecting us to believe a fallacious argument called "argument from silence".



As has been explained to you several times by me (and perhaps others), "The ONLY thing that silence proves is silence on that particular issue. Yet, you are pushing one more logical fallacy, both of which invalidate your efforts to make a point. The repetitive posting of unanswered questions will not cause them to be answered because that is just another form of "magical thinking".

It is my opinion that the reason no one answers your questions is because they see the inherent trap in each of them.

Then, this clip of your own words reveals much about your position:



You must see by now that the Evangelical position, especially in the NT is exegetically based, but the positions your SDA friends take is opinion based. Here is the difference in the approaches

The SDA position is opinion based, meaning that Ellen, or other SDA higher ups believe that these disconnected verses when strung together teach certain SDA doctrines so they are presented as truth.

On the other hand, the Evangelicals believe in the plenary inspiration of Scripture that the words used, their context, meaning, grammar and syntax are all equally and divinely inspired. Taken as a whole they present a context that is never changing, and plainly point to a singular interpretation. On those building blocks we build our doctrinal foundation.

Here is the proof that you place yourself as an authority for SDA things, and in the process run down others not believing as you do:




Really, Icy? You have that high of an opinion about your beliefs?

I guess you really believe that because you condesendingly posted:



Do you use a crystal ball or anything similar to project your imagined mind reading ability onto other posters as you claimed above? :rolleyes:
where are those passages that teach to us the Sabbath for the Church, and the Investigative Judgement found?
 

YeshuaFan

Well-known member
You SDA guys seem to be adept at ignoring what the Bible says MANY TIMES (as if saying it once is insufficient for comprehension).

Go argue with the Apostle Paul about what he wrote:

  1. "For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace." Romans 6:14.
  2. Christians are dead to the law." Romans 7:4.
  3. "If ye be led by the Spirit, ye are not under the law" Galatians 5:18.
  4. Christians are "delivered from the law." Romans 7:6.
  5. "Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster[the law]. Galatians 3:24-25.
  6. For Christians, the Law is "that which is done away." II Corinthians 3:11.
  7. For Christians, the Law is "that which is abolished." II Corinthians 3:13.
  8. For Christians, Jesus, on the Cross, was "blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us." Colossians 2:14.
  9. For Christians, the Law is taken "out of the way" and nailed "to his cross." Colossians 2:14.
  10. "When God speaks of a new [covenant or agreement], He makes the first one obsolete (out of use). And what is obsolete (out of use and annulled because of age) is ripe for disappearance and to be dispensed with altogether." Hebrews 8:13, The Amplified Version
Because of what Paul wrote, your questions are all irrelevant because they are all assuming that the Law is still in effect. More to the point, by a score of 10 to zero, there are TEN verses that say that the Christian is NOT under the Law, as you SDA people want to convince us And there are ZERO verses in the New Covenant which states Christians remain under the Law.

That is not an argument from silence, because all 10 of the verses are about being under the Law, which is the subject of this post.
If the sda want to remain under the law, they are fallen from Grace!
 

SDAchristian

Well-known member
Prologue:
AV Jn 1:36 And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!
You SDA guys seem to be adept at ignoring what the Bible says MANY TIMES (as if saying it once is insufficient for comprehension).
Go argue with the Apostle Paul about what he wrote:
  1. "For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace." Romans 6:14.
  2. Christians are dead to the law." Romans 7:4.
  3. "If ye be led by the Spirit, ye are not under the law" Galatians 5:18.
  4. Christians are "delivered from the law." Romans 7:6.
  5. "Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster[the law]. Galatians 3:24-25.
  6. For Christians, the Law is "that which is done away." II Corinthians 3:11.
  7. For Christians, the Law is "that which is abolished." II Corinthians 3:13.
  8. For Christians, Jesus, on the Cross, was "blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us." Colossians 2:14.
  9. For Christians, the Law is taken "out of the way" and nailed "to his cross." Colossians 2:14.
  10. "When God speaks of a new [covenant or agreement], He makes the first one obsolete (out of use). And what is obsolete (out of use and annulled because of age) is ripe for disappearance and to be dispensed with altogether." Hebrews 8:13, The Amplified Version
Because of what Paul wrote, your questions are all irrelevant because they are all assuming that the Law is still in effect. More to the point, by a score of 10 to zero, there are TEN verses that say that the Christian is NOT under the Law, as you SDA people want to convince us And there are ZERO verses in the New Covenant which states Christians remain under the Law.
That is not an argument from silence, because all 10 of the verses are about being under the Law, which is the subject of this post.
OT Version: AV Isa 33:22 For the LORD [is] our judge, the LORD [is] our lawgiver, the LORD [is] our king; he will save us.

NT Version: AV Ja 4:11-12 Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of [his] brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge. 12 There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?

When those who judge, judge with death in the place of GOD for their own spiritual reasons, then "to destroy" will come from GOD to them.

AV Ga 3:11 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.

Please give us an example of "justified by the law in the sight of God" from the OT, for comparison and contrast then ???

Yours in Christ, Michael
 

SDAchristian

Well-known member
Prologue:
AV Jn 1:36 And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!
If the sda want to remain under the law, they are fallen from Grace!
What, or which "the law" are YOU referring to, with a Bible reference ???

AV Ga 3:11 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.

Please give us an example of "justified by the law in the sight of God" from the OT, for comparison and contrast then ???

Yours in Christ, Michael
 
Top