Michelle Obama-Jesus a Socialist

[Rifleman]

Originally Posted by Bemused

This point needs more clarification. That is why I say that the conversation is worth having. Note that my position is not absolute. I do not claim capitalism is evil, or the tool of Satan. I do claim that there is a moral component, and that that moral component is the point of the exercise.

Let me put it this way. Unless you are Barack Obama, you will realize that American style Capitalism is a blessing to mankind, a system, which although imperfect, is capable of providing goods and servaces to mankind on a massive scale, unmatched by prior systems. Socialism, OTOH is a parasite, and inevitably leads to need and hunger. If fact, Socialism is designed to grant near absolute power to a single person or a group of elite individuals, which is why that most often happens. Sure there is a possibility that Socialism could at least be moderately sustainable, if ALL fo those in charge were honest and beneficial.

Interested in researching. You got links?

That's just from scripture.

Well, I get your opinion and I have no response. The Mormons believe in Jesus. So do the Witnesses and the Adventists.

Remember the quote: Not everyone that sayeth unto me "Lord", "Lord" will enter into the Kingdom of Heavan, but he that doeth the will of My Father"? Or "The Demons also believe and tremble"? Mormons rely on the Book of Morman, not the Bible. Jehovah's Witnesses reject the divinity of the Christ, seemingly to go over his Head. Both Witnesses and Adventists rely of a group of "Prophets" to direct their doctrine. So how would an outsider, know which set of Prophets were correct, when they both claim to speak to God, yet have different messages?

My question to you is this: What about the so called Christians who burn Korans? How about the so called Christians who who disrupt the funerals of our service people because they dont like Dont Ask Dont Tell? And howe abojt those Christian Militias who plot to kill law enforcement and judicial officials? Are THOSE folks CHRISTIAN?

Easy! No! Judiaism was characterized by a nation and ancestry, Christians are characterized by their spiritual resemblance to Christ.

I hate to nit pik here, but as someone who is familiar with societies through the world, my take is that "socialism" make a LOT of sense in certain situations. If you were living in a hunter gatherer band in central Africa, for example, which makes it more likely that your group of 50-100 people will survive? "Free market capitalism" (keep and eat only for you and your family what you kill?) or "socialism" (share your kill with all the group?) My reading of small population groups world wide is that there we see true democracy. Not "totalitarianism".

Socialism ONLY works in small groups, it is a disaster in large groups. Think of the Donner Party. Whatever Socialism that existed, ended when the survivors ate the dead. Capitalism doesn't prohibit cooperation, nor even religion. But Socialsim generally prohibits Capitalism.

Not everything is a yes/no answer.

I agree.

[Rifleman]

Originally Posted by dcannady

That is a complete mischaracterization of free market capitalism. Free market capitalism operates under the very strict rules of supply and demand. There is nothing apt in your analogy. Anyone who engages in free market capitalism is wholly dependent on selling a good or service for which there is demand. On the other hand, primitive hunter/gatherer societies require the participation of every member of the tribe. There is no "one" hunter who goes out and makes a kill and brings it home exclusively to their family. Those primitive societies work together, share the responsibilities and the rewards of their efforts. But, they don't have much.

If you live in a hut, carry your water from the river and eat an antelope around a communal fire and believe that is "socialism", your worldly experiences are strange indeed.

Yes I see it now: Sitting naked in a cave with other members of the tribe Oog speaks up, "Oog demands Free Health care"! OOG want to form Union of Great Hunters to collectively bargain with Chief! Oog is then bashed in the head by Gargmar when he suggests an end to Hunting because it damages the Planet....

[Rafael]

Originally Posted by Rifleman

Adventists rely of a group of "Prophets" to direct their doctrine.

*All* the doctrines of Seventh-day Adventists are from the Bible. So, yeah, a group of prophets, all of whom are in the Bible.

[Rafael]

Originally Posted by Rifleman

But Socialism generally prohibits Capitalism.

Socialism prohibits individual freedom.

[luknikfan]

Originally Posted by Rifleman

No sorry, Paul prophesied about the end of miracles and other miraculous spiritual gifts, and the heresy only reemerged in the modern era. The ability to grant spiritual gifts, ended with the death of the final Apostle, and the last disciple whome they had laid hands upon.

I was where you are once. I was as deep in heresy as you are now. From an historical Biblical/Christian perspective.

I suspect I know the verse you claim supports your infallible, innerant, direct from God - whatever you want to call it - assertion that miracles do not occur. Post the death of the last Apostle. Let's say for almost 2000 years now.

But I won't put verses into your mouth - which verse do you base your assertion on that miracles do not occur in Christianity. Or have not since the death of the last Apostle?

Waiting for your ex-cathedra pronouncement with baited breath.

[Rifleman]

Originally Posted by luknikfan

I was where you are once. I was as deep in heresy as you are now. From an historical Biblical/Christian perspective.

I suspect I know the verse you claim supports your infallible, innerant, direct from God - whatever you want to call it - assertion that miracles do not occur. Post the death of the last Apostle. Let's say for almost 2000 years now.

But I won't put verses into your mouth - which verse do you base your assertion on that miracles do not occur in Christianity. Or have not since the death of the last Apostle?

Waiting for your ex-cathedra pronouncement with baited breath.

Heresy? Apparantly you aren't even aware of what heresy is! What standard do you use? You criticize Protestants as being heretic, yet use Catholic Terms to describe it. Is the Catholic doctrine your basis?

But yes, there are a few:

Acts 8:9 But there was a certain man called Simon, who previously practiced sorcery in the city and astonished the people of Samaria, claiming that he was someone great, 10 to whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, “This man is the great power of God.” 11 And they heeded him because he had astonished them with his sorceries for a long time. 12 But when they believed Philip as he preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized. 13 Then Simon himself also believed; and when he was baptized he continued with Philip, and was amazed, seeing the miracles and signs which were done.

The Sorcerer’s Sin
14 Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them, 15 who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. 16 For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

18 And when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Spirit was given, he offered them money, 19 saying, “Give me this power also, that anyone on whom I lay hands may receive the Holy Spirit.”

20 But Peter said to him, “Your money perish with you, because you thought that the gift of God could be purchased with money! 21 You have neither part nor portion in this matter, for your heart is not right in the sight of God. 22 Repent therefore of this your wickedness, and pray God if perhaps the thought of your heart may be forgiven you. 23 For I see that you are poisoned by bitterness and bound by iniquity.”

24 Then Simon answered and said, “Pray to the Lord for me, that none of the things which you have spoken may come upon me.”

As can be seen from the boldened passage, the gifts of the Holy Spirit came from the laying on of the Apostles hands. And Simon saw this and sought to buy that gift.

Acts 6:5 And the saying pleased the whole multitude. And they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch, 6 whom they set before the apostles; and when they had prayed, they laid hands on them.

7 Then the word of God spread, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith.

Stephen Accused of Blasphemy
8 And Stephen, full of faith[b] and power, did great wonders and signs among the people. 9 Then there arose some from what is called the Synagogue of the Freedmen (Cyrenians, Alexandrians, and those from Cilicia and Asia), disputing with Stephen. 10 And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the Spirit by which he spoke.

And as we see, Stephen one of the first Deacons, recieved his gifts from the laying on of the Apostles hands as well.

As for the end of miracles:

1 Corinthians 13:8 Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part. 10 But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away.

And to top it off:

John 20:24 Now Thomas, called the Twin, one of the twelve, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 The other disciples therefore said to him, “We have seen the Lord.”

So he said to them, “Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.”

26 And after eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, “Peace to you!” 27 Then He said to Thomas, “Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing.”

28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

29 Jesus said to him, “Thomas,[d] because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

That You May Believe
30 And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

As one should learn from reading the passage, The Lord didn't intend the performance of miracles to be the basis of belief, and in belief, Salvation. And regarding those that claim to be performing miracles, they have a different doctrine than the 1st Century Church. Why would God give the power to perfrom miracles to people who believe something different?

[Rifleman]

Originally Posted by Rafael

*All* the doctrines of Seventh-day Adventists are from the Bible. So, yeah, a group of prophets, all of whom are in the Bible.

Not according to the Adventist website:

18. The Gift of Prophecy:
One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White . As the Lord's messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. (Joel 2:28, 29; Acts 2:14-21; Heb. 1:1-3; Rev. 12:17; 19:10.)

If "prophecy" is in agreement with the Bible, what is the need for the gift? The words they describe her writings are similar to the writings of Paul describing scripture:

2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/fundamental/index.html

I believe there is another doctrine which the Adventists missed the memmo, [quote]20. Sabbath:
The beneficent Creator, after the six days of Creation, rested on the seventh day and instituted the Sabbath for all people as a memorial of Creation. The fourth commandment of God's unchangeable law requires the observance of this seventh-day Sabbath as the day of rest, worship, and ministry in harmony with the teaching and practice of Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath. The Sabbath is a day of delightful communion with God and one another. It is a symbol of our redemption in Christ, a sign of our sanctification, a token of our allegiance, and a foretaste of our eternal future in God's kingdom. The Sabbath is God's perpetual sign of His eternal covenant between Him and His people. Joyful observance of this holy time from evening to evening, sunset to sunset, is a celebration of God's creative and redemptive acts. (Gen. 2:1-3; Ex. 20:8-11; Luke 4:16; Isa. 56:5, 6; 58:13, 14; Matt. 12:1-12; Ex. 31:13-17; Eze. 20:12, 20; Deut. 5:12-15; Heb. 4:1-11; Lev. 23:32; Mark 1:32.)

Acts 20:7 Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and continued his message until midnight. 8 There were many lamps in the upper room where they[a] were gathered together. 9 And in a window sat a certain young man named Eutychus, who was sinking into a deep sleep. He was overcome by sleep; and as Paul continued speaking, he fell down from the third story and was taken up dead. 10 But Paul went down, fell on him, and embracing him said, “Do not trouble yourselves, for his life is in him.” 11 Now when he had come up, had broken bread and eaten, and talked a long while, even till daybreak, he departed. 12 And they brought the young man in alive, and they were not a little comforted.

16 Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given orders to the churches of Galatia, so you must do also: 2 On the first day of the week let each one of you lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper, that there be no collections when I come. 3 And when I come, whomever you approve by your letters I will send to bear your gift to Jerusalem. 4 But if it is fitting that I go also, they will go with me.

[Rafael]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafael
*All* the doctrines of Seventh-day Adventists are from the Bible. So, yeah, a group of prophets, all of whom are in the Bible.


Not according to the Adventist website:

Quote:
18. The Gift of Prophecy:
One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White . As the Lord's messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction.

*** They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. ***

This part of your quote just agrees with my comment. What is ALL teaching to be tested with? THE BIBLE! Should Adventists be ashamed of that?

(Joel 2:28, 29; Acts 2:14-21; Heb. 1:1-3; Rev. 12:17; 19:10.)


If "prophecy" is in agreement with the Bible, what is the need for the gift? The words they describe her writings are similar to the writings of Paul describing scripture:

You are saying that any writing that agrees with the Bible ... WHAT? Do you ever read something that agrees with the Bible? If so, why?

[luknikfan]

Originally Posted by Rifleman

Heresy? Apparantly you aren't even aware of what heresy is! What standard do you use? You criticize Protestants as being heretic, yet use Catholic Terms to describe it. Is the Catholic doctrine your basis?

But yes, there are a few:



As can be seen from the boldened passage, the gifts of the Holy Spirit came from the laying on of the Apostles hands. And Simon saw this and sought to buy that gift.



And as we see, Stephen one of the first Deacons, recieved his gifts from the laying on of the Apostles hands as well.

As for the end of miracles:

And to top it off:

As one should learn from reading the passage, The Lord didn't intend the performance of miracles to be the basis of belief, and in belief, Salvation. And regarding those that claim to be performing miracles, they have a different doctrine than the 1st Century Church. Why would God give the power to perfrom miracles to people who believe something different?

Please - are you serious? The verses you quote say nothing about miracles ceasing with the death of the last Apostle. I am waiting for that verse from you.

You are clearly twisting Scripture to fit your man-made doctrine that miracles have ceased in Christianity.

Ain't true. Indeed if you read history many early church martyrs in particular manifest miraculous events in their martyrdom.

Miracles never ceased - Scripture sure nowhere says that they did.

As for 1 Cor: 13:8 the reference to these signs ceasing when the perfect returns is to the Second Coming. The end of time.

The Reformers were the first to create this "new" doctrine of miracles not occurring. It is false.

In the early 1900s Pentecostal Chrisitans suddenly claimed miraculous events and they became the first Protestants to reject the Refomers erroneous doctirne. They came up with the equally erroneous doctrine that mircales ceased for more thena millenium but suddenly re-appeared with the birth of their movement.

In truth miracles have always been present in Christianity.

Course the Pentecostals went overboard - everyone wanted to be a prophet or heal. The same abuses which occurred in Corinth which Paul had to correct.. IMO most of the miraculous manifestations in pentecosatlism are false. Certainly one must test the spirit as Scripture says.

Of course Scripture doesn't teach/require that the gifts be manifest by every Christian or even most Christians. This is where Pentecostals go off the deep end. Though w/in that movement there is a re-assesment going on by some of the abuse of the gifts.

The only gift required is that of love. The greatest gift.

[luknikfan]

Originally Posted by Rafael

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafael
*All* the doctrines of Seventh-day Adventists are from the Bible. So, yeah, a group of prophets, all of whom are in the Bible.


Not according to the Adventist website:

Quote:
18. The Gift of Prophecy:
One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White . As the Lord's messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction.

*** They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. ***

This part of your quote just agrees with my comment. What is ALL teaching to be tested with? THE BIBLE! Should Adventists be ashamed of that?

(Joel 2:28, 29; Acts 2:14-21; Heb. 1:1-3; Rev. 12:17; 19:10.)


If "prophecy" is in agreement with the Bible, what is the need for the gift? The words they describe her writings are similar to the writings of Paul describing scripture:

You are saying that any writing that agrees with the Bible ... WHAT? Do you ever read something that agrees with the Bible? If so, why?

The place where the SDA's seem to go wrong IMO is the insistence that Saturday worship is Biblical/required or one is basically an apostate.

There is no New Testament record of a voice from the heaven instructing the Church, "Thou shalt change the day of thy worship and rest from Saturday to Sunday," but Adventists are mistaken in their belief that there is no New Testament evidence that supports such a change, there is an impressive amount of evidence from Scripture that Jesus and the apostles changed their day of corporate worship from Saturday to Sunday.

The Old Testament Sabbath commandment contains two elements. The primary element, and the one that binds Christians as it does Jews, is the moral obligation to set aside time for the purpose of divine worship. This can't be abrogated.

The secondary element was ceremonial and therefore could be abolished—and non-Saturday worshipping Christians believe was abolished by Jesus’ death on the cross (Col 2:12–17).

The secondary ceremonial element was that the particular day chosen to meet the moral obligation of the law was Saturday, so that the Jews would remember and memorialize the creation of the earth.

Jesus seems to have begun to prepare the way for changing Sabbath worship from "the letter of the law" to "the spirit of the law."

One of his greatest arguments with the Pharisees concerned Sabbath worship. He constantly rebuked them for placing the rigid observance of mere details above the spirit of setting aside a day to rest from unnecessary servile work and to worship God. By this Jesus made it clear that the Sabbath may be changed to meet the needs of man. By effecting these changes as "the Son of Man," Jesus used his "human authority" to show he is "Lord even of the Sabbath" (Mk 2:28).

Special honor is shown to Sunday throughout the NT. Christ "rose" from the dead on Sunday, and first appeared to his disciples that Easter Sunday evening (Jn 20:19). One week later—from the context we can see that this meant the following Sunday—Jesus appeared to them again when Thomas was present (John 20:26). Luke records that Sunday was observed by the Christian community from the very beginning: "On the first day of the week when we gathered to break bread" (Acts 20:7). To "break bread" refers to the celebration of communion (Mt 26:26, Mk 14:22). Paul ordered the Corinthians to gather their offertory collections on Sunday (1 Cor 16:2); that set the scriptural precedent most Christians follow today of gathering on Sunday. John in Rev. 1:10 says that he was granted a vision of heaven’s own worship while he was at worship ("caught up in spirit") on "the Lord’s day." John’s disciple Ignatius of Antioch in his Letter to the Magnesians that "the Lord’s day" is not the ancient Sabbath; therefore, "the Lord’s day" must refer to Sunday.

Paul, the verse escapes me now, talks about feat days and moons passing away with the NC. This too implies that SDaturday worhip is not binding on Chritians.

That said, in my Christian days, I took a both and approach. Saturday worship/Sunday worship. Either is fine and indeed Sunday worship is a tradition of men so to speak and not specifically mandated by Scripture.

The Orthodox and, I believe, the Catholics too allow for Saturday worship as fulfilling the Sabbath requirement.

Where I think the SDA's got it wrong is requiring Saturday worship and more or less teaching those who worship on Sunday are anathema.

Likewise, Sunday worship is inferred but not explicit in Scripture. Which is why Sola Scriptura is a false teaching.

[Rifleman]

Originally Posted by luknikfan

Please - are you serious? The verses you quote say nothing about miracles ceasing with the death of the last Apostle. I am waiting for that verse from you.

Nonsense! The example is that only the Apsotles had the power from God to bestow the spiritual gifts that included miraculous powers, speaking in tongues, prophecy, and knowledge of God's word without study.

You are clearly twisting Scripture to fit your man-made doctrine that miracles have ceased in Christianity.

Also nonsense. I am followng scripture while the idea of those spiritual gifts being bestowed by Apostles, not a clearly traced modern doctrine that they are still arbitrarily given directly by God, to the most doctrinally challenged of Christians. So where is there evidence that miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit came spontaneously? And what was the Apostle Paul talking about when he declared that they would cease?

Ain't true. Indeed if you read history many early church martyrs in particular manifest miraculous events in their martyrdom.

Miracles never ceased - Scripture sure nowhere says that they did.

So you deny Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 13? Didn't you just read them? Are you in agreement with one of those modern schoars that denies Paul was a real part of the Church? (And yes, that is a modern philosphy as well. )

As for 1 Cor: 13:8 the reference to these signs ceasing when the perfect returns is to the Second Coming. The end of time.

The Reformers were the first to create this "new" doctrine of miracles not occurring. It is false.

In the early 1900s Pentecostal Chrisitans suddenly claimed miraculous events and they became the first Protestants to reject the Refomers erroneous doctirne. They came up with the equally erroneous doctrine that mircales ceased for more thena millenium but suddenly re-appeared with the birth of their movement.

In truth miracles have always been present in Christianity.

Course the Pentecostals went overboard - everyone wanted to be a prophet or heal. The same abuses which occurred in Corinth which Paul had to correct.. IMO most of the miraculous manifestations in pentecosatlism are false. Certainly one must test the spirit as Scripture says.

Of course Scripture doesn't teach/require that the gifts be manifest by every Christian or even most Christians. This is where Pentecostals go off the deep end. Though w/in that movement there is a re-assesment going on by some of the abuse of the gifts.

The only gift required is that of love. The greatest gift.

So prove it! When Jesus healed someone of leprosy, or raised the dead, or healed the cripled, it was undeniable. When Peter spke in tongues, on the day of Pentecost. In that instance, though Peter spoke in probably Aramaic, the crowd each heard his words in their own native language. When Paul spoke of the abuses of the gifts, he was talking about the miraculous ability of people to speak and understand in a language that they had never studied. The prophesies that the early Christians made occured. And of course, there was the inspiration that Paul later discussed that would distinguish scripture from other writings.

I watched Jimmy Swaggert for years, he had a speaking in tonugues show and one that wasn't. It didn't sound like a language it sounded like gibberish! The miracles and healings performed at such revivals are unconfrimable. The doctrine given at the same is not recognizable. So what assurance of faith is supposed to come from these quasi-miracles? All of the preachers engaged in the worst kind of scandales were knee deep in charismatic belief. Jim Baker, and many of the other crooks. Why would God give a confidence man spiritual gifts?

And then there is the Catholic church, where miracles have seemed as foreign to what was in scriptures for centuries. Is a potato or tomato that looks like the caucasian interpretation of what Jesus looked like a miracle?

So please, what undeniable miraculous occurences are yuo talking about? And how would GOd's will be served by fraudulent or wimpy miracles?

[Rifleman]

Originally Posted by luknikfan

The place where the SDA's seem to go wrong IMO is the insistence that Saturday worship is Biblical/required or one is basically an apostate.

There is no New Testament record of a voice from the heaven instructing the Church, "Thou shalt change the day of thy worship and rest from Saturday to Sunday," but Adventists are mistaken in their belief that there is no New Testament evidence that supports such a change, there is an impressive amount of evidence from Scripture that Jesus and the apostles changed their day of corporate worship from Saturday to Sunday.

The Old Testament Sabbath commandment contains two elements. The primary element, and the one that binds Christians as it does Jews, is the moral obligation to set aside time for the purpose of divine worship. This can't be abrogated.

The secondary element was ceremonial and therefore could be abolished—and non-Saturday worshipping Christians believe was abolished by Jesus’ death on the cross (Col 2:12–17).

The secondary ceremonial element was that the particular day chosen to meet the moral obligation of the law was Saturday, so that the Jews would remember and memorialize the creation of the earth.

Jesus seems to have begun to prepare the way for changing Sabbath worship from "the letter of the law" to "the spirit of the law."

One of his greatest arguments with the Pharisees concerned Sabbath worship. He constantly rebuked them for placing the rigid observance of mere details above the spirit of setting aside a day to rest from unnecessary servile work and to worship God. By this Jesus made it clear that the Sabbath may be changed to meet the needs of man. By effecting these changes as "the Son of Man," Jesus used his "human authority" to show he is "Lord even of the Sabbath" (Mk 2:28).

Special honor is shown to Sunday throughout the NT. Christ "rose" from the dead on Sunday, and first appeared to his disciples that Easter Sunday evening (Jn 20:19). One week later—from the context we can see that this meant the following Sunday—Jesus appeared to them again when Thomas was present (John 20:26). Luke records that Sunday was observed by the Christian community from the very beginning: "On the first day of the week when we gathered to break bread" (Acts 20:7). To "break bread" refers to the celebration of communion (Mt 26:26, Mk 14:22). Paul ordered the Corinthians to gather their offertory collections on Sunday (1 Cor 16:2); that set the scriptural precedent most Christians follow today of gathering on Sunday. John in Rev. 1:10 says that he was granted a vision of heaven’s own worship while he was at worship ("caught up in spirit") on "the Lord’s day." John’s disciple Ignatius of Antioch in his Letter to the Magnesians that "the Lord’s day" is not the ancient Sabbath; therefore, "the Lord’s day" must refer to Sunday.

Paul, the verse escapes me now, talks about feat days and moons passing away with the NC. This too implies that SDaturday worhip is not binding on Chritians.

That said, in my Christian days, I took a both and approach. Saturday worship/Sunday worship. Either is fine and indeed Sunday worship is a tradition of men so to speak and not specifically mandated by Scripture.

The Orthodox and, I believe, the Catholics too allow for Saturday worship as fulfilling the Sabbath requirement.

Where I think the SDA's got it wrong is requiring Saturday worship and more or less teaching those who worship on Sunday are anathema.

Likewise, Sunday worship is inferred but not explicit in Scripture. Which is why Sola Scriptura is a false teaching.

I am amazed. You know what the original teachings were yet you refuse to follow them. Church Attendance has become a doctrine unto itself, corrupted by some 2000 years of confusion.

Sunday, or the first day of the week, has the traditional obligation of being the day that Christians gather together "to break Bread", meaning the idea of communion, a symbolic ceremony for Christians to remember the sacrifice of Jesus and their commitment by partaking of fruit of the vine to represent the blood of Christ and of unleavened bread, representing his body.

They were by no means limited to a single day for worship and in Acts, the Christians met every day. And what is clear, from both examples in Acts and the writings of Paul, Christians, even Jewish Christians, were no longer obligated to follow the Law. In fact, the binding of Jewish law upon the Gentiles was condemned by Paul in his writings. If we, as gentiles, are not obligated to follow the Mosaic law, why would we observe the Sabbath? Why would a Christian observe the Sabbath and justify Not performing animal sacrifice? The Law allowed polygamy, and thieves, adulterers, and homosexuals were to be stoned. Yet Christians pick and choose and try to pretend they are following the Law. And that's the very reasoning Paul used!

And it was only much later that the Catholic Church would prevert the idea of Communion, limiting the "blood" to the priest and attaching miraculous occurence to the bread, as well as changing the frequency of the act.

OTOH, since some of you use the excuse that ALL interpretations of scripture are equivalent, and for me to follow the Bible is equal somhow to the Catholic doctrine of infallibility, that would make you a hypocrite since you quote the practices of the very people who created the doctrine of infallibility, and you criticized the doctrine of the Seventh Day Adventists.

[GeronL]

I don't believe in Saints or Apostles having "special gifts", or being able to bestow them (are they deities) or any human being infallible.

To me Christianity is my relationship with God through Jesus. Nothing else. I do not believe a "church" has any special authority either, their job is to share the message of God & Jesus, not accumulate power unto themselves.

To me church is when two or more believers come together to worship.

....

BTW, on the original topic: MO is a donkey's rear

[Rafael]

Originally Posted by luknikfan

The place where the SDA's seem to go wrong IMO is the insistence that Saturday worship is Biblical/required or one is basically an apostate.

I'm sure that I can't say that there are no SDAs who hold any particular view, but I can state without equivocation that SDAs often refer to Jesus' saying that he has many sheep of other folds. Adventists in general believe that being an Adventist doesn't mean salvation nor does NOT being an Adventist forbid it.

Each must serve God as best he understands it. As for me, I believe that loving God and your fellow man is sufficient. Choosing to do differently than you believe means you are rejecting God. Of course one might just reject God period.

I believe that the plan of salvation is so simple that a child can understand it and no one will miss salvation because he misunderstood some Biblical point.