| Author |
Message |
Cindy
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2001 - 7:14 pm: |     |
Max, You are right...God does work in mysterious ways! His Perfect Timing and Sovereignity are things I can now say that I've seen (although very dimly at times) in my life the past two years.
Though circumstances have been very difficult and I have wanted to give it all up many times...I've still kept "clinging heaven by the hems"...
(I love that poem!) :-))
Grace always,
Cindy |
Maryann
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2001 - 8:30 pm: | |
Hi Jag,
That is a cool, fast name! Well, welcome and hope to see more of you here;-)
Maryann |
Valm
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 06, 2001 - 9:31 pm: | |
Jag,
What is your current belief on the Sabbath being the SEAL of GOD?
Valerie |
Max
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2001 - 4:25 pm: | |
Cindy,
I don't know how to say this any other way, so
I'll say it this way: You are so PRECIOUS I just
have a hard time believing you're real! But by
faith I believe in you. --MC |
Max
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2001 - 6:31 pm: | |
Dear Jag,
Know that youíre not alone in feeling alone.
One of my problems is learning from our
uncontrolable Sovereign to allow the Holy
Spirit to be my most intimate companion --
and this involves MORE than just an intense
prayer life. And believe me, He IS teaching me,
whether I want to learn or not! Therefore, bless
you, Jag.
Congratulations on reading Ratzlaffís books.
Especially SABBATH IN CRISIS. Sometimes
his reasoning becomes rather ìclose,î as you
must know from having read him.
Like you, Iíve had great difficulty accepting the
Sabbath as a SHADOW. My breakthrough
came after having read Hebrews 3&4 and
Colossians 2 many times. Then suddenly one
day God hit my mind with this parable:
Imagine youíre walking on a moonless dark
night far from any human lights on a trackless
flat desert. Itís darker than the insides of a
Bactrian camel. Then suddenly the sky begins
to lighten as the sun begins to rise against the
far eastern horizon.
As the darkness fades, a long thin SHADOW
appears. You have no idea whatís casting it.
But you decide to follow it. The desert is so flat
and the horizon is so far away that the
SHADOW -- you discover by following it in the
direction of the sunrise -- is over a mile long.
Eventually you arrive at the REALITY that is
casting the SHADOW -- the tallest palm tree
youíve ever seen standing lonely and proud in
the desert. (And as you know, palm trees in
the desert almost invaribly indicate oasis
water not far below the parched surface.)
And you are so impressed by the REALITY that
cast the SHADOW, that you are suddenly
inspired to whip out your NIV Study Bible out of
your backpack and read some ìSHADOW
texts.î
SHADOW TEXT NO. 1.
Hebrews 8:4-5. ìIf he [Christ] were on earth,
he would NOT be a priest, for there are
ALREADY men who offer the gifts [such as the
temporary forgiveness of sins] prescribed by
the law [not just the Ten Commandments, but
all 613 Old Testament laws]. They [Levitical
priests] serve at a sanctuary that is a COPY
AND SHADOW of what [the sanctuary in
heaven that IS Christ] in heaven.î
Your desert sunrise experience has taught
you the difference between a SHADOW and
the REALITY that casts it. And the above text
shows you how this parable applies to the
relationship between Christ (the REALITY)
and the law (the SHADOW). Now you read
another ìSHADOW text.î
SHADOW TEXT NO. 2.
Hebrews 10:1. ìThe LAW is only a SHADOW of
the good things that are coming -- NOT the
REALITIES themselves. For this reason it [the
law] can NEVER, by the same sacrifices
repeated endlessly year after year, MAKE
PERFECT [righteous = just = sinless = ready
for translation] those who draw near to
worship.î
And so you realize that the entire old covenant
(Old Testament) law -- including laws against
murder, adultery, etc., AND the Fourth
Commandmentís seventh-day Sabbath -- is
only a SHADOW of the REALITY (Christ).
You can think of it this way: The entire Old
Testament is only a SHADOW of the entire
New Testament. And the old covenant (= OT)
is ìdone awayî only in the sense that it has
been fulfilled by something better, something
superior, something perfect (which the old
covenant isnít), something that existed before
the old covenant: This is nothing less than the
EVERLASTING COVENANT. And it is a
PERSON -- NOT something written on stone
even if ìwith the finger of God.î
For, ìThe SON is the radiance of Godís glory
and the EXACT REPRESENTATION OF HIS
BEING [TRANSCRIPT OF GOD'S
CHARACTER], sustaining ALL things by his
powerful word.î Hebrews 1:3.
SHADOW TEXT NO. 3.
Colossians 2:13 When you were dead in
your sins and in the uncircumcision of your
sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ.
He forgave us all our sins,
14 having canceled the WRITTEN CODE [Law
of Moses in its entirity], with its REGULATIONS
[all 613 commandments], that was against us
and that stood opposed to us; he took it away,
nailing it to the cross.
15 And having disarmed the powers and
authorities, he made a public spectacle of
them, triumphing over them by the cross.
16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by
what you eat or drink, or with regard to a
[YEARLY] religious festival, a [MONTHLY] New
Moon celebration or a [WEEKLY] Sabbath day.
17 These are a SHADOW of the things [such
as sinless readiness for the Second Coming]
that were to come; the REALITY, however, is
found in Christ.
18 Do not let anyone who delights in false
humility and the worship of angels disqualify
you for the prize. Such a person [such as Ellen
G. White] goes into great detail about what
[she] has seen, and [her] unspiritual mind
puffs [her] up with idle notions.
19 [She] has lost connection with the Head,
from whom the whole body, supported and
held together by its ligaments and sinews,
grows as God causes it to grow.
May the Lord add his blessing to the reading
of His Word, who is a PERSON, JESUS
CHRIST, testified to by both the Old and the
New Testaments,
Max of the Cross
Ps. More next post |
Max
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2001 - 6:51 pm: | |
Jag again,
^^I read in Romans and Galatians I can't say
for sure when it's talking about the ceremonial
days or the actual 7th day.^^
Try reading Romans and Galatians again,
keeping this in mind:
1. Romans and Galatians are primarily
THEOLOGICAL books (with SOME practical
applications at the end). This is in contrast to
Acts, for example, which is primarily a
HISTORICAL record (with SOME theology
included as the situation requries, such as
Paul before King Agrippa).
2. Whenever the New Testament refers to the
Sabbath in a theological sense, it is ALWAYS
talking about ceremonial days. The New
Testament DOES NOT DISTINGUISH
between the yearly, monthly and weekly
Sabbaths as far as ceremony is concerned.
The cobwebby ghosts of our SDA past still
haunt us sometimes, don't they?
Max of the Cross |
Max
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2001 - 7:32 pm: | |
Fellow former OFTA Jag again,
^^Matt. 5:17 is the sole scripture that I can't link
in with the other scriptures Paul says about
the law being abolished. I reason that if I know
that being in adultery, or a murderer would
reflect that I am not in Christ and the other 9
commandments would indeed not be ignored,
then how does the 4th fit in with that. Jesus
said that not one letter would be changed until
earth and heaven pass away. The fact that he
fulfilled the law's requirements does not mean
then the law is void.^^
Letís read Matthew 5:17-20 NIV:
ìDo not think that I [Christ Jesus] have come to
abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have come
not to abolish them but to FULFILL them. I tell
you the truth, until heaven and earth
disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least
stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear
from the Law until everything is
ACCOMPLISHED. Anyone who breaks one of
the least of these commandments and
teaches others to do the same will be called
least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever
practices and teaches these commands will
be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I
tell you that unless your righteousness
surpasses that of the Pharisees and the
teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter
in the kingdom of heaven.î
Notice that the text does not say Jesus will
NEVER abolish the Law or the Prophets.
Jesus is right here saying just the opposite.
He is saying that the Law and the Prophets
WILL BE ABOLISHED when ìeverything is
ACCOMPLISHEDî which culminated on the
cross when He says, ìIT IS FINISHED!î
Our friends the Adventists (OFTAs) cannot
handle this ìhard sayingî of Christ. Many --
most, in my opinion -- OFTAs interpret this
saying as ìI am finished.î Meaning that Jesus
was saying he was almost dead. This is so
shallow that it hardly deserves mention except
for the fact that so many OFTAs are so
ìbewitchedî (Galatians 3) that they canít see
any other meaning for this POWERFUL outcry
by Christ on the cross.
Note (1): The Law includes the first five books
of the Jewish Scripture: Genesis, Exodus,
Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. (NIV text note.)
Note (2): The Prophets include the following
(NIV text note):
A: The three Latter or Major Prophets: Isaiah,
Jeremiah and Ezekiel.
B. The twelve Minor Prophets which the Jews
of Jesusí time called ìthe Book of the Twelve.î
C. The Former Prophets: Joshua, Judges,
Samuel and Kings.
Say the NIV scholars: ìTaken together, ìthe
Lawî and ìthe Prophetsî designated the
ENTIRE Old Testament, INCLUDING the
Writings [Psalms, Proverbs, etc.], the third
section of the Hebrew Bible. See [Matthew]
13:35, where Matthew introduces a quotation
from the Writings (Ps 78:2) with ëwhat was
spoken through the prophet.íî
NIV text note to the word ìfulfill.î ìJesus
FULFILLED the Law in the sense that he gave
it its full meaning. He emphasized its deep,
underlying principles and total commitment to
it rather than mere external acknowledgment
and obedience.î
More next post,
Max of the Cross |
Max
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2001 - 9:17 pm: | |
Brother Jag again,
^^If I know that being in ADULTERY, or a
MURDERER would reflect that I am not in
Christ and the other 9 commandments would
indeed not be ignored, then how does the 4th
fit in with that. Jesus said that not one letter
would be changed until earth and heaven
pass away. The fact that he fulfilled the law's
requirements does not mean then the law is
void.^^
Letís look at the contextual passage
immediately following Matthew 5:17-20 --
Matthew 5:21-30 NIV, capitalizing those parts
that deal with the two subjects you mention:
ADULTERY and MURDER.
NIV Matthew 5:21 "You have heard that it was
said to the people long ago, `DO NOT
MURDER, and ANYONE WHO MURDERS
WILL BE SUBJECT TO JUDGMENT.'
22 But I tell you that ANYONE WHO IS ANGRY
WITH HIS BROTHER WILL BE SUBJECT TO
JUDGMENT. Again, anyone who says to his
brother, `Raca, ' is answerable to the
Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, `You fool!'
will be in danger of the fire of hell.
23 "Therefore, if you are offering your gift at
the
altar and there remember that your brother
has something against you,
24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First
go and be reconciled to your brother; then
come and offer your gift.
25 "Settle matters quickly with your adversary
who is taking you to court. Do it while you are
still with him on the way, or he may hand you
over to the judge, and the judge may hand you
over to the officer, and you may be thrown into
prison.
26 I tell you the truth, you will not get out until
you have paid the last penny.
27 "You have heard that it was said, `DO NOT
COMMIT ADULTERY.'
28 But I tell you that ANYONE WHO LOOKS AT
A WOMAN LUSTFULLY HAS ALREADY
COMMITTED ADULTERY WITH HER IN HIS
HEART.
29 If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it
out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose
one part of your body than for your whole body
to be thrown into hell.
30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut
it off and throw it away. It is better for you to
lose one part of your body than for your whole
body to go into hell.
Sixth Commandment (Exodus 20:13): OFTAs
tell us that Christís command not to be angry
(with hatred) was a refinement of this
Commandment. But they CANNOT be correct
in this. For the Old Testament (OT) says it is
all right to hate -- as long as the person you
are hating is your enemy.
Proof:
* Matthew 5:43 NIV, Jesus speaking: ìYou
have heard that it was said, ëLove your
neighbor and HATE your enemy.íî
Deuteronomy 23:6; Psalm 139:21-22.
* Matthew 5:44 NIV, Jesus continuing: ìBut I
tell you: LOVE your enemies.î
Therefore OFTAs CANNOT be correct in
saying that Jesus is only REFINING the OT
commandments. He is REPLACING these
inferior laws with superior ones. He us
ABOLISHING these temporary laws (the law
came 450 years AFTER the promise of the
Messiah to Abraham) and reinstating the
permanent and everlasting ones.
The point: The Law of Christ -- love -- like
Christ Himself, PRE-EXISTED the Law of
Moses. How, then, can OFTAs be correct in
saying that Christ only detailed-out what was
already in the Sixth Commandment against
killing with hate (murdering)? (Scripture
nowhere rules out executions nor classifies
judicial killing by the state with murder.)
The same is true of ADULTERY. According to
the old covenant Seventh Commandment,
LOOKING AT A WOMAN WITH LUST IS NOT
COMMANDMENT BREAKING!!!!!
Therefore OFTAs CANNOT be correct in
saying that Christ commandment against lust
was already contained in the Seventh
Commandment.
In his Sermon on Mt. Blessings here, Christ
was NOT speaking out against the
misapplications and misunderstandings of
the Law of Moses by the Jews. HE WAS
SPEAKING OUT AGAINST THE VERY
COMMANDMENTS HE HIMSELF HAD
WRITTEN WITH HIS OWN FINGER ON THE
STONE TABLETS ON MT. SINAI!!
And THIS is the reason Paul could write in
Colossians 2:13-14, ìWhen you [Colossian
Gentile Christians of AD 60] were dead in your
sins ... God made you alive with Christ. He
forgave us all our sins, having CANCELED
THE WRITTEN CODE, with its
REGULATIONS, that was against us and that
stood opposed to us; HE TOOK IT AWAY,
NAILING IT TO THE CROSS.î
We formers need to get the cobwebs out of
our attics and accept the Law of Christ as
WRITTEN ON OUR HEARTS and not on stone
anymore.
Will deal with your Sabbath-keeping longings
next post.
Only blessings, Jag,
Max of the Cross |
Max
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2001 - 10:12 pm: | |
Friend Jag,
^^I don't keep the sabbath in anyway anymore
but I miss it so much and I'm beginning to
understand what it possibly could mean. It is
not salvation but perhaps a blessing is lost by
not enjoying it. I know that Sunday is not holy
and I go to church now on Sunday but it just
isn't the same. If anyone has been struggling
through this, I'd appreciate another viewpoint
to help me out.^^
I kept the Sabbath for ten years after first
leaving the SDA church in 1984. Often I would
go to Mountain View SDA on Sabbath and
Menlo Park or Sunnyvale Presbyterian on
Sunday. So, again, donít feel like the Lone
Ranger.
I take solace in Romans 14 where Paul
writes:
Romans 14:1 ìAccept him whose faith is
weak, without passing judgment on
DISPUTABLE matters.î One of the examples
Paul gives is keeping one day (1st/Lordís day
or 7th/Sabbath day) more sacred than
another.
Romans 14:4 ìWho are you to judge someone
elseís servant? To his own master he stands
or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able
to make him stand.î For formers this SHOULD
come as a stern warning NOT TO ATTACK or
MAKE FUN OF or otherwise hassle
Seventh-day Adventists for keeping the
Sabbath holy. For the issue in Paul here is:
LEAVE PEOPLE ALONE regarding which day
they choose to keep holy!
Romans 14:5-6 ìOne man considers one dayî
-- say Saturday -- ìmore sacred than another;
another man considers every day [Sunday
through Saturday] alike. Each one should be
fully convinced in his own mind. He who
regards one dayî -- say Friday -- ìas special,
DOES SO TO THE LORDî!
Romans 14:7-8 ìFor none of us lives to
himself alone and none of us dies to himself
alone. If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we
die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or
die, WE BELONG TO THE LORD.î
Romans 14:9 ìFor this reason [that we could
live-and-die, die-and-live to the Lord], Christ
died and returned to life so that he may might
be the Lord of both the dead and the living.
You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or
why do you look down on your brother? For we
will all stand before Godís judgment seat.î
Romans 14:13 ìTherefore let us stop passing
judgment on one another. Instead, make up
your mind not ot put any stumbling block or
obstacle in your brotherís way.î
Romans 14:17-19 ìThe kingdom of God [itís
here now, within us, among us! Luke
17:20-21] is ... a matter of ... righteousness,
peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because
anyone who serves Christ in this way [letting
OFTAs continue to keep Sabbath in peace] is
pleasing to God and approved by men. Let us
therefore make every effort to do what leads to
peace and to mutual edification.î
Romans 14:22 ìWhatever you believe about
these things keep between yourself and God.î
Caveat: Notice that Romans 14 doesnít say
not to expose the errors of making the
Sabbath a requirement or a test or the seal of
God or making Sunday worship the mark of
the beast. That is an entirely different matter,
having to do with salvation.
Hope Iíve been some help, Jag.
Only blessings upon your head,
Max of the Cross |
Cindy
| | Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2001 - 6:13 am: | |
Max, A beautiful northwest "starbucks" morning to you... :-)) I still haven't gotten into that grind-your-own coffee beans thing... yet!
Thanks for your kind words above...
In light of our numerous "discussions" of how the "theory" of the Gospel of GRACE is explained... along with LIVING "IN" that GRACE goes,
I thought you might enjoy a "quote-for-the-day". :-)) I think it was G.K. Chesterton who wrote:
"LET YOUR RELIGION BE LESS OF A THEORY,
AND MORE OF A LOVE AFFAIR!"
Do you like that?
I still hold to the objective Gospel message of "Christ crucified for me!" as absolutely the message of FIRST IMPORTANCE; the BEGINNING, MIDDLE, and END of our faith!!
And yet, I realize even this wonderful message can get so theorized, and disected, and explained in "scholarly" terms, that we miss the "love affair" the Holy Spirit wants to invite us into...
Preaching "Christ Crucified" must always be shown to be the greatest "love story" ever told!!
Grace always,
Cindy |
Jtree
| | Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2001 - 4:58 pm: | |
Max, and just think, OUR FRIENDS call this an "ANTI-ADVENTIST site".
HA! It's a PRO-GRACE PLACE, 1000000%
God's
Riches
At
Christ
Expense
---------
GRACE |
Max
| | Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2001 - 5:27 pm: | |
Hey, I like that, Joshua of the Rock!
God's
Riches
At
Christ
Expense
---------
GRACE
Thanks so much!
Max of the Cross |
Jtree
| | Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2001 - 5:56 pm: | |
Max, your so welcome.
Samuel Bacchiocchi, so I'm told, has a new book out. called "The Sabbath Under Crossfire".
Anyone know of this?
Joshua of the Rock! |
Max
| | Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2001 - 6:36 pm: | |
I could hardly care less. No offense intended.
But Bacchiocchi has absolutely no credibility
left with me. Niether as a scholar. Nor as an
apologist for OFTAs. Nor for required Sabbath-
keeping. Nor anything else. Sorry. He had his
chance.
After scrutinizing his book FROM SABBATH TO
SUNDAY, based on his Ph.D. dissertation, I
reached my limit. Through the years I have
cultivated my baloney siffer: Once I see that a
person is posing to be something he isn't --
openminded, scholarly, etc. -- I don't bother
reading further. Believe me, the "bewitchment"
(Galatians 3) extends well into the realm of
academia!
There is too much TRUE biblical scholarship
to read.
Des Ford, on the other hand, is at least a
scholar. It's true, he's mired down in trying to
prove required Sabbath-keeping, but at least
his scholarship is honest. When it comes to
scholarship, here's the truth as I've discovered
it: Ford is wrong, but at least he's a scholar.
Bacchiocchi is wrong.
And if you want a second opinion, here it is:
He's no scholar either!
But thanks for giving me this opportunity to
warn everybody: When it comes to Samuele
Bacchiocchi, PROCEED AT YOUR OWN RISK.
-mc |
Jtree
| | Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2001 - 7:09 pm: | |
Max,
For me, when I connected Arthur Maxwell's books to OFTA "MESSAGE", I was cautious for the context was not SQUARING with Scripture...
That was way back when...when I'd visit my Dentist office, or Doctor's office, when I was a pre-teen or as a teen. Though the pictures were interresting to look at. :-0
When pre-OFTA's pick up books by Samuel Bacchiocchi like "Sabbath to Sunday". What makes pre-OFTA's say "I felt that it was very compelling"? |
Denisegilmore
| | Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2001 - 7:18 pm: | |
Max,
I have that book "From Sabbath to Sunday" and I must say, it sure confused me. But then I'm not a scholar either.
Speaking of Ford, today was a day for an unexpected Bible study with two SDAs.
Ford was put down by the leader of this study. And this leader absolutely believes in the Sabbath as a Salvation issue, you know "the Seal of God."
It wasn't me that even mentioned Fords name, they were naming him as a primary source to the flock falling away from the truth.
The study gave me a great headache as I just sat there listening to how they are not interested in anything besides the "Truth" that they already have.
I was also informed that if I had any information that was not SDA doctrine, that really it's not something they would be interested in hearing or knowing about.
This statement came after I had asked if we could compare notes in examining Scripture and the original languages.
:::sigh::: Think I'll not have more studies because there should at least be some honest searching done by ALL people involved.
But the truth of the matter is, that I went in openminded and they were in no ways interested in being openminded and comparing truths according to Scripture.
Sad. I have a headache and came on here to read people of like mindedness. Looking forward to tomorrow night as I NEED the fellowship.
God Bless all,
DtB
What could I say? I accepted the paperwork given me of 7 pages regarding the day-year/year-day principles of the SDAs. All leading, of course, to the IJ. |
Max
| | Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2001 - 7:40 pm: | |
Yo JOTR!
Cool
:-0
How about with a handlebar moustache?
|:-{
Or glasses?
8-()
Or hightop hat?
=|;-)
Or crowned with a brick?
[]:-o
Nuff dorkin' round. What makes pre-OFTA's
say "I felt that it was very compelling"? I'll
answer with more questions:
What made 30s Germans feel that Hitler was
very compelling?
What makes Trinity Brodcasting Nutwork
addicts think Paul Crouch 'n' gang is
compelling?
Or RAW suckers think fake wrestling is
compelling?
I think OFTA converts are as much
self-selected as hooked in by the likes of
Doug Batchelor.
Makes you wonder: If there were no OFTAs,
would it be necessary to breed some?
Yey, we shoulda put this conversation in the
HUMOR thread.
Cheers! |
Max
| | Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2001 - 7:47 pm: | |
Thanks, Denise,
Maybe you've spent nuff time for a spell with
"people of like maddedness."
Wish I could be with y'all at FAF meeting
tomorrow nite. But I've got other plans. Please
carry my regrets and regards to the group, will
ya?
Love ya,
MC |
Max
| | Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2001 - 8:03 pm: | |
};={)
Faust's Mephistopheles? (One could get
carried away.) |
Denisegilmore
| | Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2001 - 10:27 pm: | |
Hello Max,
You are absolutely right with this statement and I love the phrase in quotes.
You said:
>>Maybe you've spent nuff time for a spell with
"people of like maddedness."<<
I'm learnin..:)
Your message to the group tomorrow night will be relayed...that is a big 10-4 there good buddy.
God Bless you my brother,
DtB, your sister in our Lord Jesus |
Max
| | Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2001 - 10:44 pm: | |
|:??
Elephant? |
Max
| | Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2001 - 10:45 pm: | |
Oops, sorry. The Option+5 key doesn't
translate. |
Denisegilmore
| | Posted on Thursday, February 08, 2001 - 11:23 pm: | |
What a sorry looking elephant at that! :))
Blessings always,
DtB |
Violet
| | Posted on Friday, February 09, 2001 - 10:13 am: | |
If the law is required to be followed to obtain salvation. Grace plus works, perfecting of the character, stop sinning before Jesus can come into your heart, ect ect. How can OFTA justify Queen Ester? I don't think she was just in a beauty contest to become the queen. And what about David, he was pretty underhanded too. I would hate for him to be my husband's friend. If he lived now adays he could of been a major carrier of AIDS. Only through the concept of grace could of these two ever of been saved. |
Max
| | Posted on Saturday, February 10, 2001 - 9:46 am: | |
Dear Violet,
I see you've put your finger on the OFTA pulse.
Since Christ liberated me from its toils, I've
come to see that they don't accept him as
Sovereign. To them David is an unsolvable
puzzle. They cannot understand how Christ
could save him. He doesn't deserve heaven.
For OFTAs, therefore, God must be unjust.
MC |
|
