| Author | Message | ||
| Reb Registered user Username: Reb Post Number: 636 Registered: 5-2007 |
Again please look at Romans 14. I appreciate the advice I get in this forum and I know y'all mean well. But I wish to make one thing clear: For reasons which I have made clear I am CHOOSING to continue to worship on the Sabbath. By not throwing that issue into the "mix" I feel I am best able to witenss to my wife at this point. I UNDERSTAND that the Sabbath is NOT salvific. I UNDERSTAND that Christ IS our Sabbath. I also stand on what Paul wrote in Rom. 14 about the day one chooses to worship on being moot. I applaud those of you who have chosen to worship on Sunday. There is NOTHING wrong with that. I CHOOSE to continue to worship on the Sabbath for multiple reasons and the important thing is that it is MY choice. I respect the right of those who choose to worship on Sunday to do so. I would hope to get the same respect back for my choice to continue to worship on the Sabbath. Please remember what Paul said in Rom. 14, it goes both ways. I feel there are a few people in this forum who seem to be trying to "pressure" me into going to a Sunday church. I have no objection myself to doing so, however, it could again inflame a situation I have just recently defused. I am content to continue to worship on the Sabbath. I love my wife as Christ loves the Church and do not wish to antagonise her over an issue that is really a nonissue. Part of being a leader is keeping a peaceful home. Please try to understand this. Thank you and God Bless. In Christ, Reb Isn't the important thing that I am FREE of Adventism and Ellen White? | ||
| Berit Registered user Username: Berit Post Number: 14 Registered: 7-2007 |
Dear brother Reb, You have my full respect and support! And you are SO right about what you said of leadership and peace at home! It is such a challenge to have different understandings. I guess if there was such a nice SDB church here like the one you have found it would be easier for my husband to come along one day... | ||
| Asurprise Registered user Username: Asurprise Post Number: 173 Registered: 7-2007 |
I for one, am not challenging you, Reb. Paul ends the text in Romans 14:5 "...Let each be fully convinced in his own mind." The reason that I keep bringing up the verses that show that the DAY has been fulfilled and was a shadow of Jesus is because most (if not all) Adventists think that HAVE to observe and keep holy that day. I did when I was an Adventist. Back then I thought it was the seal of God (since Ellen White says so)instead of the REAL Seal of God Who is the Holy Spirit. (Ephesians 1:13) I had the Sabbath shadow stuck to my heart instead of the Holy Spirit dwelling within - I was miserable and didn't know it. Since that day has NOT been changed - it was fulfilled; it doesn't matter in the slightest whether we go to church on Saturday, Thursday or Sunday. It just matters that we meet with other believers. So rest your mind at ease, Reb. I doubt anyone here is criticizing you in the least. They do, however, need to point out it's role as a shadow of Christ to those who are still in bondage, and to those who would reach those in bondage  Dianne | ||
| Reb Registered user Username: Reb Post Number: 637 Registered: 5-2007 |
Dianne, I absolutely agree that it needs to be pointed out as a shadow to those who are still in bondage. I just wanted to clarify my postion on this and that I understand the day was fullfilled by Christ. And Berit, thanks for the kind words. | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 759 Registered: 6-2006  |
Hi Reb, I will never pressure you into going to a Sunday church. (Have you ever heard that from me?) I also don't really believe anyone else here has insisted that you go either, although maybe the suggestions from some here have prompted this thread? No one here believes that you must or have to go to a Sunday church. You keep saying this though - "I am content to continue to worship on the Sabbath. I love my wife as Christ loves the Church and do not wish to antagonise her over an issue that is really a nonissue. Part of being a leader is keeping a peaceful home." Those statements give the impression that that's the whole reason you worship on Sabbath. That you're trying to keep your wife happy, or that you're keeping the peace. Don't say that if that's not how you really feel. If you love your church, and that church meets on Sabbath, then great! Say that. We all know that you're saved and that you know that you're not saved by worshipping on the Sabbath. However, when you make statements like those above, it sounds like you're have no choice, or the responsibility rests on your wife. Now as a wife, let me tell you, that would make me MAD!! I don't want my husand going around telling people that he only goes to church with me and the kids to "keep peace" in our family. That makes it sound like he's afraid I'm going to beat him if he doesn't! I'm not the spokesperson for this forum, but I can tell you that we all love and respect you around here. I can tell from all the posts from the others. Just keep in mind that every time you put the burden of your worship day on your wife, some of us will want to try and help you and give their best advice to you. Believe me, I'm saying this as a wife, and out of love for you dear friend and brother. ((HUG)) Leigh Anne | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 6640 Registered: 12-2003  |
Reb, you are perfectly free to choose to worship on Saturday. I can tell that for you it is not tied to "hedging your bets". As Dianne said above, though, because of the nature of this forum, we have to continue to point out that Sabbath is a fulfilled shadow. The reason we MUST do this is that most Adventists--especially those who were born into it (which you were not, by the way), often use Romans 14 to justify hanging onto the Sabbath without dealing with the risk, fear, and trust involved in giving up the day and allowing Jesus to be all they need. Because of the spiritual significance of Sabbath to an Adventist, in general when a person begins to discover the gospel and to see the heresies implicit in Adventism, usually he must come to the place of abandoning the day and experiencing trusting Jesus alone for salvation. There is a strong spiritual deception associated with the Sabbath within Adventism; it has been identified as the seal of God (or the "sign of the seal"), and only the Holy Spirit is the Seal of God. When a day assumes the role of demonstrating one's fitness for salvation, that day has usurped the role of the Holy Spirit. Adventists have to be willing to give up "hedging their bets" by embracing the gospel on one hand and honoring the Sabbath "just in case" on the other. People leaving Adventism need to place all their eggs in one basket. They need to place ALL their trust in Jesus and give up everything that "might" be important. The Sabbath is to Adventists much like the golden calves were to the Northern Kingdom of Israel when the kings endorsed the worship of Jehovah but built the calves at Dan and Bethel--not to try to portray Jehovah, but to be an "icon" that represented Him. Interestingly, the calves in the Baal religions did not represent the gods; they represented the power and authority of the god, and the pagan gods were pictured riding on those golden calves. When the Israelite kings gave Israel golden calves, unlike the pagans, they did not carve a respresentation of God on those calves. They stood alone. They still believed in Jehovah as the invisible "one God", but they worshiped the calves as representatives of Jehovah and His power and authority. God hated this syncretistic religion, and he punished Israel for its idolatry even though they professed to worship God alone. The Sabbath, to an Adventist, functions in a very similar way to the way the golden calves functioned for ancient Israel. It represents His authority and creative power--so it must be honored. Yet such honoring is idolatry, and Adventists must give up this idolatrous representation of God's power. Reb, it seems you have given up the Sabbath's representation of God--you were willing to attend other churches which met on Sunday. If you still held the day as significant, you would have been reluctant to do that. Your decision may help your wife to see a bigger picture. Ultimately, though, I suspect your own wife, should she discover the true gospel and begin to see the truth of Adventism, will be one who would eventually have to give up worshiping on Sabbath. One can't hedge his bets and simultaneously place his whole faith in Jesus. Colleen | ||
| Reb Registered user Username: Reb Post Number: 638 Registered: 5-2007 |
Thanks, Leigh Anne. I hear what you're saying. God Bless. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 6641 Registered: 12-2003 |
I just saw your post, Leigh Anne. Well said! (And as a wife, I totally agree with you re: not wanting to be made responsible for my husband's decisions!) Colleen | ||
| Reb Registered user Username: Reb Post Number: 639 Registered: 5-2007 |
I would like to clarify that I am not making my wife responsible for my decision. I know I COULD choose to worship on Sunday anyway but I would risk antagonising her to the point she would close her ears to the Gospel I am trying to witness to her. I agree she MAY need to give up the Sabbath once she is free from Adventism. And if she does, I would give it up as well, the day doesn't matter a bit to me. The idea that we can "keep" the Sabbath per the way Adventists think is riduculous on it's face, No ONE but Christ has ever "kept" the Sabbath the way it was supposed to be that it why He is our Sabbath. He kept it for us because we COULDN'T. NO human not Moses, not Enoch, not Elijah, not John the Baptist ever "kept" the Sabbath perfectly as prescribed by the Old Testament. We CAN'T Christ DID so we let Him. If my wife found the True Gospel and wanted to switch to a Sunday Church that would be fine with me. For now I continue to worship on the Sabbath so I can effectively witness the Gospel to her without antagonising her with a nonissue. My mission at this point is to witness the Gospel to her with love and without antagonising her. Someone has suggested I get Dale's wonderful book "Sabbath in Christ" and study it together with her. That is a great book and I would love to do that but this isn't the time. I believe the time for that will come and God will let me know. I need to show her now that I am a better Christian AFTER leaving Adventism and witness the Gospel to her without unduly antagonising her with it. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 6645 Registered: 12-2003 |
Reb, there's something in this situation you need to understand: you say that for yourself the Sabbath is a non-issue. That is not true for your wife. So as you say you're not going to make a big deal out of the Sabbath in order not to antagonize your wife, you're actually welcome to do that, but she will intpret that differently than the way you intend it. Second, loving your wife as Christ loves the church does not mean "keeping the peace". A peacemaker is completely different from a peace-keeper. Peacemakers actually inter the "fray" and encourage people to respect and love one another. Peace-keepers are weak or frightened people who refuse confrontation. Trying to be keep the peace with your wife is not loving her as Christ loves the church. Jesus loves us by persisting in confronting us with the truth. For your wife, the gospel is NOT just the words about Jesus' finished work. She knows those words. For your wife, the true gospel is the message of the new covenant. Unless she hears and understands that, she will not be able to grasp the gospel because she thinks she KNOWS the words of the gospel. You need to get Sabbath in Christ, Reb, because that is where you will learn to explain the true gospel to her. It is a Bible study, not a commentary. If you read it--with her--you will NOT be "uninformed" or "not smart enough". Dale's book is step-wise and very clear. Reb, you are actually keeping yourself partially "in the dark" by not reading the biblical explanation of the new covenant. Your wife needs the light, and you need to understand how to teach it to her. She needs to learn it from you. She needs to see you as responsible for the spiritual health of the family. I second Steve's advice on a different thread; get the book, and insist on reading it together with your wife. You will learn together, and you can discuss it together. The way it is now, you both are just telling each other what you think. What you each think is not the issue. The issue is what the Bible says. You need to study the new covenant together, Reb. Your waiting will not impress her. It will only give her false hope. As long as she doesn't see you actually grappling with the truth of all this, she will imagine that you are "calming down" and letting it go. Praying for you, Reb. Colleen | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 990 Registered: 10-2002  |
Wow, that was deep. Reb, I think there is truth to what Colleen said about knowing the "words of the Gospel" but not knowing the meaning. As an Adventist (especially one in a libera, southern California area) I knew the words of the Gospel, but I didn't know the power of it or how really and totally FINISHED it was. In short, I didn't know God's Sabbath-rest. As you let God move through you to love and witness to your wife, remember that -- that she & other Adventists have known the "words" of the Gospel, but not the meaning. As you go and remember that, He'll show you what to do, as He is already doing. ***** The other interesting thing Colleen said was about the difference between "peacemaker" and "peacekeeper". If we think of this in the natural (that is, in the world), it is very revealing. If we say "a peacekeeper" we generally think of UN peacekeeping soldiers who are sent to semi-hostile areas to keep factions from attacking each other. However, if you've watched the news or seen the film Hotel Rwanda, you'll realize that the "peacekeeper" is in a very handicapped position. He can't do very much. He often can't even use his gun. And nothing is changed between the warring factions he's trying to keep at peace. They still hate each others' guts. A peacemaker, however, takes a bit more thought to imagine (because we simply don't have so many in the world). Someone such as Ghandi or Martin Luther King Jr. comes to mind. These are people that enter between hostile parties and stand up for love and reconciliation, at their own risk. Often they lose their lives for the people they are trying to help. They love the people and desire their healing and freedom even if they themselves lose their own. In short, they are martyrs ("martyr" and "witness" are the same word in Greek -- to be a witness is to die to oneself because you love the people with God's love more than yourself or the 'peace' that comes from not saying anything). The great martyr (witness) is Jesus Christ, who loved us so much that He sacrificed His own life to save ours. Deep stuff. Blessings to you Reb, in Jesus Christ. And Happy Sabbatismos in Him! Ramone (Message edited by agapetos on August 25, 2007) | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 479 Registered: 7-2005 |
Colleen, You said
Does this not imply that there are two gospels, one for adventists (new covenant) and one for the rest of the christians (finished atonement on the cross)? Is this not a double standard? Reb, as someone who was not born in adventism, has the permission to keep the sabbath, according to Romans 14, but adventists are not allowed to keep the sabbath, and apply Romans 14 to themselves. According to this view, the gospel for christians allows sabbatarianism but the gospel for adventists forbids sabbatarianism. Again, are not these two different gospels? Is not this requirement of abandoning sabbath keeping as a MUST in order to fully trust and follow Jesus the same view that adventists has regarding sabbath keeping? They insist that a christian MUST start keeping the sabbath because this is required from him to be a true follower of Jesus. Why now ask people to CEASE keeping the sabbath in order to follow Jesus and trust Him fully? The two views are almost identical in spirit: they impose requirements which cannot be substantiated by the Bible, and both views are condemned by Romans 14. Beside this, how can we appeal to Romans 14 and ask adventists not to judge us for worshiping on Sunday, but when these adventists appeal to the Romans 14, we judge them for keeping the sabbath. Would not they consider us to be unfair toward them, even manifesting a hypocritical attitude? Colleen, you also said on another thread that adventists need to study the Bible, the theologians are secondary in importance. I wonder why you said
I cannot understand how you can judge Reb as "keeping himself partially "in the dark" by not reading a book written by a theologian, who presents New Covenant Theology? Is not the study of the Bible what adventists and former adventists need above all, according to what you said on another thread? If I would say that you, Colleen, are "keeping yourself partially in the dark" because you don't want to study the book of a particular theologian, would you not protest vigorously, defending your right to read whatever christian book you like to, and when you like to? Would you not say that I have no right to judge you, or infer that you are hiding from the truth, just because you don't want to read a particular book of theology? You would be entitled to do this, and I will deserve your words, since I presumed to know your heart and your spiritual condition. If and adventist will appeal to Romans 14 to defend his sabbath keeping, we cannot assume from start that he cannot be trusted, that he's hedging his bets, as long as he will not judge us for not keeping the sabbath. If he comes afterwards and consider us guilty of sin for not keeping the sabbath, ask him again if he really believes that Romasn 14 applies to us as well as to him. My question: do we believe that Romans 14 apply to them (adventists) as to us? or there are two standards and two gospels? Gabriel | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 4192 Registered: 3-2004  |
Reb, I am praying for you and your wife. I truly believe God has each of us where we are for a purpose. Keep reading the Bible and if your wife will read it with you that would be even better. Gabriel, I really like what you are saying above. I agree with you. Diana | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 991 Registered: 10-2002 |
Hi Gabriel, I'll expand on something Colleen wrote, because it has more to do than with "Sabbath". You'd said, Coming from Adventism, most of us understand that "gospel" to Adventists equals grace plus law (or rather, law plus grace, with a focus on law). Even if the expression "finished work of atonement" finds acceptance in Adventism, it only finds acceptance so much as it means that you have to go on continuing to keep the Ten Commandments, because Adventism teaches that whatever Jesus has done for you is contingent on your keeping the Ten Commandments until He comes. To put it more in Biblical terms, the Adventist "gospel" is: Law (Old Covenant) + Grace (New Covenant) = Gospel (or Truth) Whereas in the Bible, it is: Grace (New Covenant) = Gospel (or Truth) The New Covenant is the Gospel, but in precise legal terms --- in the terms of God's covenantal dealings with mankind. The New Covenant is the title deed of our inheritance. I believe this is why the author of Hebrews talks of "elementary" things and then urges his listeners to go onto maturity. What follows this statement is largely an exposition on the New Covenant and the lessons of truth to be found in it -- that all is fulfilled in Christ, that it is the certainty of His promise that sanctifies us (not our promises), that we enter the Most Holy Place by His blood, etc. Adventists are raised on the Ten Commandments and then some. The Adventist gospel is basically the message of "The Ten Commandments" and "Sabbath". All other churches may have Christ, but they are missing something (or LOST) because they do not keep the Sabbath. Later generations of Adventists have attempted to add "Gospel" and "Grace" on top of the 10C foundation, not realizing that the Gospel is a New Covenant, and that the Ten Commandments are the words of the Old Covenant. Because of this, Adventists are confused about "grace". Instead of "grace" being our whole life, instead of "grace" being the Gospel, to Adventists most often "grace" is a part of the truth. It is considered "out of balance" if it does not have Law. Salvation is not by Grace, but by grace plus the continued observance of the Law. Grace plus works. I can't remember the number of times I've heard Adventists (conservative AND liberal/evangelical) talk of "moving on" after hearing someone speak of Grace. The idea was, "Grace -- yeah, we know that, it's simple. Let's go further." The best way out of this, Colleen and others (and I) believe is to study the Bible and what it means by "Gospel". To look straight at the title deed of our inheritance, the New Covenant. The "elementary" things that Hebrews mentions are confused in Adventism. Ironically, for many of us they are cleared up by moving onto maturity. This of course does not touch on the "Sanctuary" doctrine or the "Investigative Judgment" -- both of which would heavily object to the expression "Christ's finished work of atonement". We could simply sum up all of this with 2nd Corinthians 3, which describes the Adventist problem -- it is blinded by the glory of the Old Covenant and cannot see the New. And so freedom is not completely experienced because it is Law instead of Spirit (where the Spirit is there is freedom). Instead of being awed by Christ, in Adventism "Gospel" and "Christ" are not enough. Moses is needed to "complete" the picture. Anyway, sorry for repeating myself so much. Blessings to you Gabriel, you who bear the same name as my brother and father and my son (translated into Japanese)! In Jesus, Ramone | ||
| Stevendi Registered user Username: Stevendi Post Number: 223 Registered: 10-2006 |
Gabriel, That was a cheap shot at Colleen. You miss the whole point of her counsel, which was for a husband/wife to study and pray together for a common understanding of Sabbath. Let me ask you a question. Would you say that any brand of Sabbath-keeper should be open to any study of the Sabbath, pro or con? If not, what are they hiding behind? If so, then what's the problem? steve | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 480 Registered: 7-2005 |
I have nothing against Reb studying and pray together with his wife for a common understanding of Sabbath, in the case he wants to do. He said
He was not against this study, just considered the moment to be not proper, and this is why he doesn't want to study the book with his wife, and he responded to this advice of Colleen positively
Steve, your said also
Reb clearly said that his refusal of buying "Sabbath in Christ" is based on other reasons than inability to study a different view. I believe him, but if he's hiding from studying the truth, if he's lying regarding the real motivation of his refusal, it's up to God to correct him. As in the case with everybody on this forum, and in everyday life, we cannot assume that people are lying without proofs. Steve, what proofs you have that Reb is lying? I recognize that this is a realistic situation, and he had lied, but it is not my business to assume this to be the case without proofs, and say that he's hiding from truth, just because he refuse to read a book I offer him. The practice of refusing to read adventist literature is recommended on this forum, and I agree with this advice. Adventists lurking on this forum may wrongfully come to the conclusion that formers do this in order to hide from "adventist truth", when in reality not reading adventist literature is a form of protection from harm and confusion. In time, formers may come to the place of reading adventist literature without problem, and minister to adventists by dealing with their ideas, and responding to the materials that they offer formers desiring them to return to the "adventist truth". not reading adventist literature is just a temporary measure, and in the same way, Reb pleaded for a temporary measure "It's not the time for this study, I must wait for the time of the Holy Spirit" Ramone, Renouncing sabbath keeping is the best way for an adventist to deal with legalism associated with sabbath keeping. My objection is that this is not the ONLY way in which an adventist can trust fully in the grace of God, and not always an adventist who remains a sabbath keeper is "hedging his bets". It can be true in many cases, but it also can not be true. It is better to renounce sabbath keeper if you were an adventist, but it is not the only way in which legalism can be eliminated from a life which was involved in the legalism of adventism. My plea was not to jump to the conclusion "they are hedging their bets since they still cling to the sabbath, they keep it just in case it is truth" Gabriel | ||
| Insearchof Registered user Username: Insearchof Post Number: 150 Registered: 8-2005 |
Folks, Reb has made it clear repeatedly on this forum (and on CARM) that he does not see the Sabbath as salvific or required, yet every time he mentions that he continues to worship on the Sabbath, there is always at least one poster that feels obligated to challenge him to worship on Sunday and basically make it clear to his wife that he will in no way be seen as one that is bound by Sabbath-keeping. Whatever his reason for continuing to observe the Sabbath, even if it is to appease his wife's unease (which I think is a perfectly good reason to do so until such time as she can see beyond the OT requirement to it's unlimate fulfillment in Jesus Christ), he knows where his salvation lies - not in a day but in the Person of Jesus Christ. As for Reb and his wife studying together the Sabbath, only the Holy Spirit can cause this to happen. How many of you - when you were Adventists - would have an open, honest, 'no pre-concieved notions' study of the Sabbath with someone that did not believe the Sabbath as you did? When the time is right, then Reb will know. I dealt with Adventists that left my church and was not willing to see at the time, but each one that left created a crack in my theology until such time as I was able to pick up my Bible and read it for what it actually said - before I read any of Dale's books (which, I might add I found very informative and thought-provoking). Had someone presented Dale's books to me before I was ready, however, I would have dismissed them as anti-Adventist and anti-Sabbath without being able to read them with an open mind. I feel it is not right to suggest this: "...Reb, you are actually keeping yourself partially "in the dark" by not reading the biblical explanation of the new covenant..." If Reb has stated this: "I UNDERSTAND that the Sabbath is NOT salvific. I UNDERSTAND that Christ IS our Sabbath. I also stand on what Paul wrote in Rom. 14 about the day one chooses to worship on being moot." then how can we suggest that he is "keeping himself at least partially in the dark"? In some ways, we formers are not so different than we were as Adventists - continually making the discussion be something that it was not inteded to be at the start...when we were Adventists we made everything about the Sabbath and then trotting out the proof-texts. Now that we are formers, it seems we make too much of it being 'not about the Sabbath' and then trotting out the proof-texts. Regarding Gabriel's comments about Adventists and Romans 14, I will agree that they are direct. Are they a 'cheap shot'? I suppose that it all depends on how you look at it. It was direct to be sure. I find that some discussions on this forum are 'hard' and 'direct' but no one seems to object too much because it is directed at Adventist theology or Adventist pastors like Doug Batchelor, so it is OK. I take the main point of Gabriel's post to be this: ------------------------------------- Is not this requirement of abandoning sabbath keeping as a MUST in order to fully trust and follow Jesus the same view that adventists has regarding sabbath keeping? They insist that a christian MUST start keeping the sabbath because this is required from him to be a true follower of Jesus. Why now ask people to CEASE keeping the sabbath in order to follow Jesus and trust Him fully? The two views are almost identical in spirit: they impose requirements which cannot be substantiated by the Bible, and both views are condemned by Romans 14. Beside this, how can we appeal to Romans 14 and ask adventists not to judge us for worshiping on Sunday, but when these adventists appeal to the Romans 14, we judge them for keeping the sabbath. Would not they consider us to be unfair toward them, even manifesting a hypocritical attitude? ------------------------------------- We have to be careful to allow the same freedom of choice to those that choose Sabbatarianism as to those that do not. It is not our job to convince every former Adventist to adopt the same theology or they are to be considered as 'partially in the dark'. I learned (and am still learning) much from Dale's books as well as RC Sproul's and Mike Horton's books. But that does not mean that any single point of view is the last word on the subject of the New Covenant and how it applies to my life. I learn continually every time I open my Bible. This is between Reb, his wife and the Holy Spirit. Reb, I continue to pray for you and your family. May you demonstrate His Grace to your wife and son! ISO | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 4193 Registered: 3-2004 |
Thank you ISO. You and Gabriel have said what I wanted to say so well. It is between Reb, his wife and the Holy Spirit. Come on folks. Lighten up on Reb. He is doing what God has led him to do. Isn't that what each of us have done. When I left the SDA church I went to the Sat evening service at first. Now I go to sevices Sunday morning. Our awesome God has led each of us out of adventism and He does it in a way that is best for each individual. Diana | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 2067 Registered: 10-2004  |
Jackob, Why are you trying to twist things to make it sound like Colleen is teaching two different gospels? Is that really being honest? She said, as you quoted: "For your wife, the true gospel is the message of the new covenant." She said that Reb's wife needs to learn about the New Covenant, which IS the finished atonement on the Cross, by the way--see Luke 22:20, 1 Corinthians 11:25. It is NOT two different gospels! In fact, Paul condemned Peter for COMPROMISING the Gospel, just because he abstained from eating with the Gentiles when the Jews came around! "But it was because of the false brethren secretly brought in, who had sneaked in to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage. 5But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel would remain with you. [...] 11But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision. 13The rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy. 14But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, 'If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews? 15'We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles; 16nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified." (Galatians 2:4-5, 11-16 NASB.) Jeremy | ||
| Luzisbornagain Registered user Username: Luzisbornagain Post Number: 109 Registered: 7-2007 |
Well said, Insearchof. It does go both ways in Rom. 14. And Gabriel, I don't think Colleen was talking about two gospels, she was mentioning that Reb's wife is not familiar with the new covenant. And the comment about Reb being "slightly in the dark" although read that way it does sound bad, but I think we're misunderstanding what she meant, which I think only Colleen knows what she meant when she said it. We're probably reading too much into her comments. Until she replies and clarifies herself, we won't know for sure what she meant about that statement. (Message edited by luzisbornagain on August 25, 2007) |
