Non-Denomination Christian with an opinion. I write my own commentary, not relying on others. I am a Berean at heart.
In a denomination, someone else already decided for you what you are to believe. How do they believe? They search the commentaries daily, to see if the Bible is right (Note my sarcasm, please).
In a non-denomination, as Fox News states, the preacher reports, we decide. How do we decide? We search the scripture daily, to see if what we are being taught from the pulpit is true, or false.
I seek out controversies, on purpose. It all began when I was being proselytized by a Jehovah’s Witness. I wanted to know why they believe what they believe, not to be one, but to see what makes them tick. Later, I began looking into the belief system of the 7th Day Adventists, and like churches that are legalistic. Then it was the Iglesia Ni Cristo, a Filipino church that believes that Jesus is not God. The Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that, so I already had their talking points in mind as I studied them out. There is many more that I have studied out. Studying takes time, so I do not speak “off the cuff” about topics. I am not a novice at this.
My latest kick, which has lasted a little over a year now, is in regards to the Calvinist belief system. A system of what is known as “Reformers”, all because they didn’t like being Catholic. And yet, in the end, they are more Catholic than the Catholics, as both subscribe to the teachings of Augustine. Interesting (Note my sarcasm, please).
You know, when I was a kid, my mom used to threaten me with, “If you don’t straighten up, I am going to send you to REFORM school.”
Little did I know, she was threatening me with Calvinism.
All humor aside, Calvinism’s God is not the God of the Bible, but this Calvinism stuff is spreading like a disease, like a poison, like wild fire, like a cancer, and it must be stopped, it must be quenched, it must be killed. Calvinism is the most dangerous “religion” that I have ever come across, outside of the cults of Jim Jones, and the like. One cliche’ that we have learned from the Jim Jones clan is in regards to the kool-aid. Many Calvinists are drinking it, and preaching that you drink it, too.
Ed
chapmaned24 
I appreciate your passion, Ed. I think we share a lot in common. You came at me pretty hard, without evening know anything about me. You accused me of things you couldn’t possibly know, without even taking the time to really get to know me. I don’t know where your at on your journey, but I’d say, from the way you treated me, you seem pretty angry, pretty upset, maybe even pretty hurt and rejected. I hope you find that the same Jesus who laid the axe at the tree root also came to make the sick well. I’ve done my fair share of railing at the broken church. Maybe we all need to go through that for a time, to get it out of our system. Is the church broken, full of hypocrisy and wrong truth. Yes, of course. It’s full of broken humans; people just like you and me. So, before you go swinging that axe, remember, even when we don’t all line up with all the same truth, and all the same theology, we’re still brothers in Christ, on the same side. I hope, in the end, others can see that we’re on the side of love. I can’t say I found that to be true of you, but I know I can say how God works, enough to know He’ll get you there one way or the other. Peace brother, and I really mean that. Peace.
J Randall Stewart,
Wow…I have to say that you read me extremely well. Not many people can do that. I was never hurt by spiritual abuse, but I have a history that involves rejection. It started out with being adopted at about a year old.
Setting all that aside, I do come about a bit hard on people sometimes, but it is for a reason. I was in the Navy for quite a few years as a payroll clerk. As a very young inexperienced clerk, every time that I had a technical question, I went to my supervisor. The only response that I would get from him was, “What does the book say?” I took that as a hint to get as much knowledge from the book as I possibly could, without relying on my supervisor. Over the years, I became an expert, literally, and I would successfully contend with the outside inspectors, both civilian and military, that would audit my work about once per year. Sometimes, it would impress them, other times, it would tick them off. Based on my expertise, I received several awards, to include two Navy Achievement Medals.
Anyway, once I became a Christian, I made sure that I read the Bible at least 5 times, before I ever began studying things out. I began studying the Bible in much the same way. Whenever I heard of a particular doctrine, I would study it out, from A to Z. These things take a lot of time. Just as with the Navy, I would stay up until sometimes around 4 in the morning, knowing full and well that I had to go to work in just a couple of hours. At the time, I didn’t have a concordance, so I had to remember where I read things before. The only way that I did that was to, begin again at Genesis 1:1 until I found what I was looking for. That helped me tremendously. Once I got a concordance, I began to study the mysteries of the Hebrew lettering and words and definitions. And, let’s not forget the Greek, either. I am not an expert at those languages, nor do I claim to be, but I find it fascinating. Most are interested in the Greek, but I am more interested in the Hebrew.
But, I seek out the controversies, on purpose, and I study them out. I am not patting myself on the back here, but, I am positive that I know more than most people do in regards to things in the Bible. There are a lot of experts that are Dr. such and such. That doesn’t impress me. They are being taught what to believe based on what someone else believes, based on what someone else believes, based on what someone else believes.
Not me. I am independent. But, not without comparing with others.
I love debating with denominations about topics. I have fun with it, and I do come across arrogant. I don’t mind. I’ve debated several denominations.
But, Julie Anne’s background in this spiritual abuse is within the Calvinist movement. Over the last couple of years I have been studying Calvinism, and I find it to be the most dangerous of all, and I find that the belief system in Calvinism is so dangerous that it is the leading cause of spiritual abuse. So, at times, I will come on strong with some, just like a dog protecting it’s owner. I don’t mean any ill will out of it, but I will scripture whip anyone who tries to justify their abusive doctrines as righteous and loving.
Anyway, I apologize to you. Thanks for your kind words to me. I was amazed that you were able to accurately read me. Very amazed.
Ed
Ed, thank you for apologizing. I really appreciate your heart for God, and your hunger for His word. I love your approach, and passion to know the truth and too defend it. I understand your frustration with theology, with it’s doctrines, Doctorates, and PhD’s. I spent some time dealing with that system at a Christian college. Remember, Jesus was also called “unlearned” by the religious authorities of his day.
I also understand your reaction to Calvinism. I had much the same reaction at first. But I have close brothers and sisters who are Calvinists, and I’ve learned that, despite our differences, they still love Jesus as much as I do. Throughout the history of the Church, people have chosen to separate over truth, even in some very violent ways. I don’t see that as a precedent in scripture. Rather, as we bear with one another, and walk with one another, then Christ leads us into His truth by the Spirit of Truth within us, who is also a Spirit of Unity.
The purpose of God’s truth is transformation, not the affirmation of our own view points. When we fight over God’s truth, we show that we don’t fully understand it. In scripture, the sharing of truth is pictured more like planting seeds, than fighting. Seeds take time to grow. They do not pop up instantly, but must be properly cultivated over time. We may plant, and water, but only God causes them to grow, because only God can truly change people’s hearts and minds. In this there is a difference between winning an argument and walking with someone on the journey of truth.
What good is it to win an argument, if we don’t really change someone’s mind? In my experience, when we cram truth down someones throat, they tend to throw it back up again. But when we season it with the salt of grace, it becomes a lot more palatable, and a lot more likely to go down and soak in. I tend to come on strong with truth as well, because I have the passion of God’s conviction. But I’m learning that, if I want to really help people see and accept God’s truth, my approach must be a lot more gentle.
Thanks for sharing some of your journey with me. I would like to hear more. To that end I’ll be following your blog. God bless you brother.
J a s o n
Jason,
It appears that you re-enforced my position of an old earth:
” In scripture, the sharing of truth is pictured more like planting seeds, than fighting. Seeds take time to grow. They do not pop up instantly, but must be properly cultivated over time. We may plant, and water, but only God causes them to grow.”
Your referenced is 1 Cor Chapter 3.
In that same chapter, Paul is feeding the Corinthians milk, because they were not mature enough to eat the meat, because they were in strife, arguing about what “division (or, can I say, denomination, i.e. Calvinism)” that they belong to. I am of Paul, I am of Apollos.
Well, what we have in Calvinism is: I am of Calvin. We could say the same of other denominations, too.
That is where the division is, therefore, I do not believe that there will ever be unity, as some topics are of opposite ends of the spectrum.
Say for example, the topic of old earth/young earth. The teachers of young earth has an agenda against other Christians, not against atheist scientists. Then they make it a salvation issue, when salvation is based on breaking The Law of Moses, the 613 do’s and dont’s, not topical opnions.
I’ll be posting more stories to my blog in the near future.
God Bless,
Ed Chapman
Thanks Ed, I look forward to it.
Ed I read you comments on wonderingeagle all the time. They are so often quite brilliant skewering the liberal shibboleths of cultural Christianity.
Keep up the good work. Sen
Hey, Sen
Thanks man…sarcasm is part of my charming personality, and I bring that sarcasm with me to the blogs. I know it ticks some off, but I’m OK with that.
Have a great day!!
You’re not a Berean. If you were a Berean, you’d have actually learned something about the Bible by now, instead of being woefully ignorant of even the basic facts of Christianity, like what the gospel is. Repent of being a scripture-twisting liar who refuses to submit.
You are falsely accusing. I have fun with you reformers. Always abusive. Control freaks are abusive, and manipulate scripture to beat people down with false teaching.
You can’t show once where I’ve made a false accusation, that’s why you didn’t even try. Anyone can clearly see that everyone of the statements I’ve made about you is demonstrated in the lies you post.
You’ve again broken the second commandment (Ex. 20:4) by bearing false witness. The Word of God says all liars go to hell (Rev. 22:15). If you were really saved, the Holy Spirit in you would be convicting you of your lies and you will repent. If you don’t, it’s yet more evidence of your fraudulence.
After you spewed “idiot” (in violation of the Lord Jesus’ statement that anyone who does that is “liable to the hell of fire”), you must be a total hypocrite to accuse others of being “abusive.” You’re liable to the hell of fire.
You hypocritically abuse others while abusing others. Then you absurdly twist scripture to ignore the discipline it clearly, repeatedly and emphatically teaches, rebelliously refusing to submit to the leaders God’s Word calls you too (Hebrews 13:17, 1 Timothy 5:17), while accusing true teachers of teaching false doctrine. You’re a hypocrite.
Church Discipline began with the Catholics when they teach that ONLY PRIESTS can forgive sins. You reformers took it many steps further. The point about Matthew 18 was FORGIVING, and PETER had no PRIESTLY authority to forgive ANYONE of ANY SIN, UNLESS he was the victim. But Catholics think that just because Peter asked the question, that priests are the authority to forgive. Reformers have twisted Matthew 18 thinking that the whole topic is about Church Discipline. WHERE DOES IT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT DISCIPLINE IN MATTHEW 18:15-17? WHERE? Tell me you control freak who thinks you can LORD OVER people!
Ed,
In NT times there was only one church per location. That’s simply a FACT. You don’t know that because you’re totally ignorant. You refuse to learn because you’re ignorant. You then twist the scriptures to fit your ignorant, arrogantly held position.
1 Corinthians 16:1
Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia,
— Galatia was a large region, encompassing may cities and towns, like a state. Each area had only one church. You don’t know that because you’re totally ignorant.
2 Corinthians 8:1
Moreover, brethren, we do you to wit of the grace of God bestowed on the churches of Macedonia
— As above, Macedonia was a region, like a state. Each area had only one church. You don’t know that because you’re totally ignorant.
Galatians 1:2
And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:
— As above, Galatia is like a state. Each area had only one church. You don’t know that because you’re totally ignorant.
Galatians 1:22
And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ
— Judea (which you misspell) is a region. Each area had only one church. You don’t know that because you’re totally ignorant.
You’re so completely ignorant, your comments are sometimes incomprehensible because you don’t know how to communicate properly.
If 1 Timothy 5:19 “NO DIFFERENT than for anyone else”, then why is it only applied to elders?
Pastors are NOT “ONLY TO FEED”. Hebrews 13:17 says they have authority. If you are not submitted to the pastors of your local church, you are in rebellion against the Word of God and need to examine yourself as to whether you are really saved. How can you be really saved and be living in total rebellion against God’s command. Either submit to your church’s elders or admit that you’re not really a believer.
Matthew 18 plainly states (along with 1 Corinthians 5:2 and Titus 3:9-10) to expel an unrepentant professed believer from the church. You’re denial of that is a total lie. Only a complete liar would so twist scripture as you have done. The Word of God says all liars go to hell (Revelation 22:15). Stop lying about the Word of God to suit your rebellion.
PUT UP or SHUT UP. Where is your proof about only ONE church per LOCAL that both Jews and Gentiles WERE FORCED to attend, especially when there was a FALSE TEACHER present? Put up, or shut up. Congregations were FORCED to remain in that one church where a false teacher taught? PROVE IT, or shut up.
Put up or shut up! Where does it say anything about DISCIPLINE in Matthew 18:15-17? Where is the CORRECTION? Without Correction, there is no discipline. In addition, you have NO AUTHORITY to punish anyone…EVER. So, put up or shut up. Where is your authority to PUNISH Christians? Christiaiins! Christians! The person that you kick out is not a Christian. It’s not a So where can you punish Christians? YOU CAN’T. You have no authority, you control freak. SO, again, put up or shut up! DISCIPLINE MAKES UP TWO THINGS…Punishment to CORRECT a deficiency. What is being CORRECTED in a person being kicked out? Is that person a CHRISTIAN?
You’re a scripture-twisting liar. There were NOT multiple churches in one location.
Church means “congregation”. You’re so totally ignorant of even the basics of the Bible you don’t know that.
No one said that a pastor has the right to kick people out. The church does. You lied when you claim there is no such thing as church discipline.
Here, you’ve shown you do not believe in the Lord Jesus. He said that anyone who uses empty insults, like “idiot” is liable to the hell of fire (Mt. 5:22). But you do that very thing, thus proving that you don’t really believe what the Lord says.
Then you break the second commandment (Ex. 20:4) by bearing false witness. The Word of God says all liars go to hell (Rev. 22:15.) If you’re religion is so fake that it won’t keep you from lying, slandering and spewing empty insults, it won’t keep you out of hell.
If you really believed God’s Word, you’d submit to your leaders (Hebrews 13:17). and stop lying about what it says.
You are and idiot. Have a nice day, thou fool.
and if we have not love… don’t forget… 🙂 J. Randall Stewart’s admonitions are spot-on Ed. Have a great evening!
Oh, I don’t forget. Faith without works is dead. I gotcha!
One of those works is not spewing insults like “idiot” (Mt. 5:22).
One of those works is not lying about the FACT that the New Testament clearly, repeatedly (Mt. 18:15-17, 1 Cor. 5, Titus 3:9-10), and emphatically teaches church discipline.
One of those works is that you submit to the elders of your local church (Hebrew 13:17).
One of those works is that you give respect to the leaders of your local church (1 Timothy 5:17).
One of those works is that you stop twisting scripture to say pastors “only” give information when the Word of God clearly says they “rule” the church (1 Timothy 5:17).
One of those works is that you repent of your lies and arrogance.
If you don’t show these works, then you need to examine yourself as to why you’re faith is so dead (2 Cor. 13:5).
Consider the possibility that you’re not really a Christian at all but just a self-deluded religious hypocrite who will hear the Lord Jesus say, “Away from Me, I never knew you, you worker of lawlessness” on judgement day, after which you will be cast into hell.
Consider that seriously.
See! If you really believed in the Lord Jesus, you wouldn’t dare do what He said would make you “liable to the hell of fire” (Matthew 5:22). But you act as if you think the Lord Jesus was false.
If you don’t repent, you may hear Him tell you, “Away from Me, I never knew you, you worker of lawlessness” (Mt. 7:21f). You’re a hypocritical, scripture-twisting, rebellious liar and the Word of God says all liars go to hell (Rev. 22:15).
Then you are going to hell, cuz you are a false teacher teaching lies. Put your money where your mouth is, regarding your so – called psuedo facts. Let’s just see your sources. Lay it on the table. Don’t just spew your false teachings. Prove it.
Ooh, this blog is interesting. Read some of your wonderful comments over at Julie Anne’s blog. Will have fun reading here.
The third night was the 3 hours of darkness.
Thanks for your comment Patrick. I calculate the third night as 12 hours, however, I calculate the first night as 3 hours. See below.
Night #1: Friday 12:00 PM to Friday 3:00 PM (3 Hours)
Day #1: Friday 3:00 PM to Friday 6:00 PM (3 Hours)
Night #2: Friday 6:00 PM to Saturday 6:00 AM (12 Hours)
Day #2: Saturday 6:00 AM to Saturday 6:00 PM (12 Hours)
**Night #3 Saturday 6:00 PM to Sunday 6:00 AM** (12 Hours)
Day #3 Sunday 6:00 AM to Resurrection
Ed Chapman
I agree, it is the first night . The question is , why is the Lord referring to that 3 hours of darkness as a night? >
Genesis 1:5 first of all. Also, Jesus is the Passover Lamb, and therefore, it has to be dark for the lamb to be slaughtered.
Genesis 1:5 describes the first day when light was divided from darkness. Many lambs were slaughtered at the Temple in Jerusalem at Passover. It had to be during daylight for practical reasons. There is a reason which I believe is the answer, and I am willing to share it. >
You missed the point of Genesis 1:5. I’m not discussing the creation. I am discussing as to what God called what. He states, And the darkness, he called night, and the light, he called day. Bottom line, if it is dark outside, its night. No matter what time of the day that it is, if it’s dark, it’s night. Lastly, Jesus did indeed say that as Jonah was in the belly of the whale for 3 days and 3 nights, so shall he be. That was the whole point of this blog article about 3 days and 3 nights. If you read the actual blog article, you will see why I said everything that we are already discussing.
And in addition, Patrick, Passover Lambs are never slaughtered during the daylight hours. Never. It’s not allowed in the Law of Moses.
The point is, why did he say that he would be in the belly of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights. I think I know the answer. >
Bottom line answer to that is because Jonah was a prophet, and the purpose of prophets are to prophesy about Jesus. So, while most people at church get lectured that Jonah was a bad man because he didn’t want to go to Nineveh, and that the lesson to be learned is to be “obedient” to God, the whole point of Jonah was to prophesy about Jesus. If you read Jonah chapter 2, you should see something about Jesus in that, told by the story given by Jonah about himself. When Jesus rose from the dead, he revealed himself to his disciples from Torah and the Prophets. Many look to Isaiah, and Psalms, and maybe a couple others, but the whole Bible is prophesy of Jesus.
I agree with you again, but there is another reason. >
Well, don’t keep me in suspense! LOL. What have ya got?
The Lord is telling us to add another day to the week. An eighth day.A sign of a new day was given us on Good Friday , when at noon darkness occurred in that locality and after 3 hours daylight resumed until sunset. It will be called the Lord’s Day and it will follow the Sabbath. We will remember with joy God’s great work of redeeming mankind. Sunday will once more become a working day and of course we will remember it as the day that light was separated from darkness. The Seventh Day Adventists say that the Bible instructs us to rest on the seventh day, not the first. They ignore the day of resurrection. In the new way we will rest on the seventh, jump for joy on the Lord’s Day, all this following the six days we have worked, Sunday to Friday. >
I do believe in an 8th Day in regards to God’s Feasts (Not a carnal day, however), but it is totally unrelated to Passover. You see, Jesus ate the Passover already, prior to him going to the cross. The lamb that they ate, was killed when it was dark. That same day, which began the night before, had to be also dark when Jesus was killed, too. So, even tho the Passover Lamb was killed many hours before Jesus was on the cross, Jesus is the Passover Lamb also killed on the first day of the feast of unleavened bread. Both Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread is one in the same feast, both beginning at the same time. Luke 22:1 shows this. The first day of the feast of Unleavened bread is when the Passover begins. Next…
I agree with you in regards to Sunday as the Lords Day…but I want to show you this: John 20:19 shows that Monday is NOW the first day of the week, not the 2nd day anymore. This means that Sunday is the 7th Day of the week, not the 1st day anymore.
Also, getting back to the Sabbath Day…Every Day is the Sabbath Day. We are in the 7th Day already. Hebrews 4. We are resting. We ceased from our “works of righteousness”, and entered into God’s rest, His Sabbath, His 7th Day.
If you see my article about Old Earth vs. Young Earth, you will see this. It’s not a carnal day of 24 hours. Its a spiritual day, which has no limit…until…the 8th Day.
The 8th Day is mentioned in one of the feasts back in Lev 23 I think. Spiritually speaking, this 8th Day, I believe, is eternity, a never ending day, an eternal day. Carnally, it’s a 24 hour day on a calendar of the last day of a feast…but I’m not discussing carnal things.
But, let me say again, I do not believe that the 8th day has any relation to Passover/Feast of Unleavened Bread calculation of 3 days and 3 nights, nor having any reason to do with the 3 hours of darkness. It had to be dark when Jesus was killed, all because that is the law of the Passover lamb, that the lamb can’t be killed until it is after sunset, as well as after dusk. Dusk is after sunset. The Evening of Nisan 14 is Nisan 15. So, the Both the actual lamb, and Jesus was killed when it was dark on Nisan 15.
Ed Chapman
Hi Edward, John 20:19 says ‘ same day’ , refer to 20:1. What has changed is that the evening is now at the end of the day, not at the beginning. Instead of the day beginning at sunset, it now begins at sunrise because of the Resurrection, giving us the new covenant, the new era, the new day. I came upon the eighth day in The Documents Of Vatican 11, Walter M Abbott and Joseph Gallagher, the document Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, section 106, page 169. That was January,1988. Shortly after that I came upon the problem of the 3 days and 3 nights in the Bible. Since then, you are the only person I have come across that sees that darkness as one of the nights. Patrick >
John 20:19 states (when you take John 20:1 into account)
“Monday, being the first day of the week”.
In other words, Sunday, at evening (Monday), being the first day of the week.
Meaning: I disagree with you that the start of a day changed. To a Jew, all days begin at evening, not at daylight.
Next, I must state that I am not a Catholic, so I don’t base my beliefs on Church Fathers beliefs. I do research based on Sola Scriptora, which I know that Catholics are dead set against.
I had to wrap my head around the three days, three nights issue, and I could not do that with outside influence. I am very meticulous, that I had to scour the law of Moses, as well as the gospels, and do a timeline of every activity using an excel spreadsheet. That took a long time to do. I am now satisfied with my conclusion. And I am glad we agree, for the most part. But I do disagree with your conclusion about the start of a Jewish day changing. The first Christians were Jews, not Gentiles. Besides, our day begins at midnight, not daylight.
Ed Chapman
John 20:1, ‘ It was very early on the first day of the week’. John 20:19, ‘ In the evening of that same day, the first day of the week’ , the Jerusalem Bible. >
Pay attention to that word, “same”. Next pay attention to that word “evening”. As soon as it became evening, it was already Monday.
That same day (Sunday) at evening (Monday), being the first day of the week.
Conclusion, Monday is the first day of the week. I do not dispute the Jerusalem Bible, but English words are in “today’s modern English”. I am not a fan of today’s modern English, because it misses the exact meaning. I go back as far as the KJV of English and decipher it that way. It’s much more precise, and not so liberal.
Ed Chapman
In order to decide which interpretation should hold sway, they call a council. >
Ya, well, I’m not about “council’s”. I am about deciding for myself. That is what a Berean does. They search the scriptures daily to see if what they are being told is true, or false. The Acts 15 council was in regards to a clarification of scripture, as it pertained to Gentiles, not about which English translation to use. All councils after that are deciding what you are to believe, not a clarification. For example, some denominations believe that eating pork is a sin, while others think that they can eat all things. They had a council to decide that. But the Bible states to let the person decide themselves. Councils do not allow people to make up their own minds. They decided for you.
Acts 15 tells us to abstain from blood. Well, that was ignored because our meat is not kosher or halal. I do not know which council made a decision on pork. >
The 7th Day Adventists have maintain food laws, as do many other like denominations, which includes not eating pork. And, in regards to blood, that had nothing to do with meat. It had to do with blood only. If you have seen the discovery channel, some tribes make a cut in the blood vein of animals and drink the blood, as a drink. To them, it has religious connotations. In order to eat meat, however, blood must be drained from the animal first, in order to make sure that the animal is dead first, as the life of the flesh is in the blood. Now, in the law of Moses, God allowed the Levites to eat meat that was offered to him. This is what Paul states about eating meat from idols:
1 Cor 8:1
Now as touching things offered unto idols…
1 Cor 8:4
As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one.
1 Cor 8:7-13
for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.
8 But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse.
9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak.
10 For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol’s temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols;
11 And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?
12 But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ.
13 Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.
1 Corinthians 10:27
If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.
28 But if any man say unto you, this is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof:
29 Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another man’s conscience?
I enjoy bacon!! And, I don’t know anyone who offers meat to other gods. I don’t know anyone who kills animals for sacrifices either. But I know a lot of Christians who eat pork chops, and applesauce, bacon and eggs, sausage and cheese McMuffins.
My whole point is that there are denominations that make decisions FOR you, instead of allowing you to make up your own mind. If no one can agree on an issue, then by all means, clarify it. But what is interesting about Acts 15 is that there was no such thing as a Calvinist, or a Baptist, or a Catholic, or a Church of Christ, or a Church of God, or a Lutheran, etc., etc. Acts 15 was the whole of the Body of Christ. In other words, Baptists do not speak FOR me. Calvinists do not speak FOR me. I decide, not they.
Ed
He said to eat his flesh and drink his blood, thereby his flesh is joined to our flesh and our spirit is joined to his spirit and divinity. In the case of an animal, its flesh is joined to our flesh, but not its spirit, and this is symbolized by the pouring out of the blood.. >
Now Patrick, I am not a Catholic, so I don’t buy into that drinking blood/eating flesh thing. Jesus spoke in the spiritual sense, not the carnal sense. And when I interpret the spiritual sense, he was saying that the blood of the lamb of God is what covers our sins, and in order to get to that blood, you must kill the body (Flesh) by killing the lamb of God so that the blood can spill. Jesus was not advocating that we drink blood. He was advocating that we become alcoholics by drinking the PASSOVER WINE, symbolizing his blood, because this is all a PASSOVER ritual. The bread was a Passover unleavened bread, as required by the law of Moses. The wine was a drink at the Passover, as required by the law of Moses. This wasn’t a new thing.
I have no idea what you are talking about in regards to flesh to flesh, spirit to spirit thing. That’s out in left field as far as I am concerned. Out in LALA Land.
Ed Chapman
John 6:63 explains it. If I were able to leave my body ( my soul that is ) and enter into a robot, I could say, this aluminum is my flesh and the hydraulic fluid is my blood. At Mass we say ‘ let your Spirit come down like the dewfall upon these gifts ‘ . When the Jews offered animal sacrifice they were also allowed to eat of it. We cannot eat his body ( not enough to go round for starters ) so he multiplies himself, just like he did the loaves. His spirit enters the bread and wine thereby becoming his flesh and blood. When we consume the bread or wine his spirit enters into us and we become one with him. >
Again, Patrick, I am not a Catholic, so I do not believe what they believe. I know this passage. I debate Catholics. This reference, John 6:33 has nothing to do with Passover at all. It has nothing to do with Communion (which is what we Protestants call it). So, let’s set this aside for a moment, as again, it has nothing to do with Passover. Wine and Bread, in the case of Passover is the topic. Bread is the only thing mentioned in John 6. That bread had nothing to do with Passover…not one bit. That bread had to do with EQUATING HIMSELF to Manna…he that came down from heaven. Again, Jesus speaks in SPIRITUAL terms, and what Catholics do is to confuse THAT bread with the Passover Bread. Two different topics. One does not have anything to do with the other. Wine, if you will notice, was not part of the discussion. Both wine and bread are discussed in Exodus and Leviticus as part of the Passover ritual, and THAT must be spiritually interpreted. Now, we Protestants do not look to the Catholics to see what their so-called church fathers has to say on the subject. I could care less. We look to the Jews to see what they have to say. Why? Because it is ONLY through the Jews that we see Jesus, even tho they do not. The Apostle Paul states that the Jews hold the Oracles of God, and that the Jews are a light to the Gentiles. I know the Catholic history in that the Jews were not liked very much by the so-called Church fathers, as they bad mouth them for killing Jesus. Hello????? They had no choice but to kill Jesus, otherwise, Jesus would not have saved anyone. Besides, Jesus already forgave them at the cross when he said, “Father, Forgive them, for they know not what they do”. Had they known, they would not have killed him, then what about our salvation? But it pleased the Father that they did not know, so that Jesus could save people. So, even tho Jesus already forgave them, a former Pope of yours, exonerated the Jews for killing Jesus in a book he wrote. I just shook my head back and forth, wondering, WHAT???? Didn’t Jesus already do that? So, I know that there is a bit of anger in the church fathers against the Jews, unjustifiably. My point, Passover is a Jewish tradition, and we need to scrutinize every detail of the Jewish Feast rituals in order to understand the wine and the bread. We do not look to the Catholics, because Passover is not a Catholic, or even a Christian tradition. We see Jesus in the Passover, in MANY ways. I will give an example. That bread that they use, they break it in half. Why? 1/2 of the bread is wrapped in a white cloth. Why? That half is HIDDEN. Why? Then it is turned into a GAME for the children to find. Why? The other half is eaten. Why? I’ve attended a Passover meal that was put on by Christian Jews (Jews for Jesus), and we go thru each and every ritual, that not only talks about Moses going thru the Red Sea, but how we see Jesus in ALL OF IT. Each and every step we see Jesus. So, to end this comment…John 6 bread is a different unrelated story, having nothing to do with communion. Catholics are on the wrong interpretation, and yes, I know the Catholics think that Peter told me that I don’t have authority to interpret scripture. That’s not true at all, either.
Ed Chapman
Hi Edward.The answer to your response is in John 6:52 and 6:66. The other thing on my mind is the calendar year, we say it is 2016, but it is incorrect. I have come to believe that the Lord was with us during the years 4 BC to 31 AD. So I thought maybe we should use the Jewish year, 5776, instead. Now I think that’s wrong too. I counted the years from Adam till now using the Bible and other historical data and I came up with 6130. Go figure. Patrick. >
OK, Patrick, I am gonna say this one more time….John Chapter 6 has nothing to do with communion or the Passover feast. He is discussing himself as the Manna that the Children of Israel ate that NOURISHED them. This is not about communion, or as you call it, the Eucharist. It has nothing to do with the Eucharist, or Mass, or Communion.
Can we agree on that?
In regards to the calendar and years, I don’t worry about it. I was stationed in Japan in the US Navy back in the early 80’s, and their calendar year is much different than ours is.
It can be fun to see the Hebrew Calendar, tho, as it relates to the Jewish way of doing things, which is also used to interpret prophesy stuff. But, right now, all we can do is speculate on future prophesy, because as we all know, many prophesy experts have gotten it wrong over the years.
Ed Chapman
Well, I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree. I think John Chapter 6 has everything to do with COMMUNION. By the way, what does the 24 in chapman24 stand for? >
Did you happen to see the word “Manna” in John 6 at all???? It’s there.
However, in John 6:33, Jesus said:
Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
NOW he’s talking about his DEATH. He was being spiritually cryptic, He is saying:
Unless you kill me, you can’t get eternal life. He certainly was not saying, If you eat bread and drink wine, you have eternal life.
This has nothing to do with drinking wine, or eating bread, or communion. He was speaking cryptically, otherwise known as spiritually. But Catholics take it literally.
We all killed Jesus on that cross. You killed Jesus on that cross. I killed Jesus on that cross. That is what John 6:33 is discussing.
The Jews did kill him, in the CARNAL sense. But you and I killed Jesus in the spiritual sense, and we have life, as the end of that verse states.
Simply put, Jesus died on the cross, and he was telling people that unless you accept his sacrificial death, you have no life.
My name is in my nick, Ed Chapman. The 24 was chosen at random.
Ed Chapman
Patrick,
Here is another way to see this:
1. John 6
Type of Bread: Manna, very good taste, as it’s angel’s food.
2. Passover
Type of Bread: matzah (No Yeast), very yucky taste (I know, I’ve had it).
There were 12 tribes and 12 apostles. The number 24 shows up in 1 Chronicles chapters 24 and 25, and Revelation 4:5, 4:8 and 19:4. Why the double of 12? In John, chapter 6, shortly before Passover and after the multiplication of loaves, he says that he is the living bread come down from heaven, that you may eat of it, and this bread is his flesh. To which they retort, ‘ how can he give us his flesh to eat? He then tells them that the words he has spoken are spirit. Still, many of them turn away. >
Patrick,
You had said:
“In John, chapter 6, shortly before Passover and after the multiplication of loaves, he says that he is the living bread come down from heaven, that you may eat of it, and this bread is his flesh. To which they retort, ‘ how can he give us his flesh to eat? He then tells them that the words he has spoken are spirit. Still, many of them turn away. ”
Again, one more time…did you happen to see the word Manna in Chapter 6? It seems that you are staying as far away from that word as possible.
My IMMEDIATE short answer is…We killed Jesus which came down from heaven, and THAT is what that is discussing. Nothing more. It’s not telling you to eat bread at all. Bread is carnal, what he spoke is spiritual, hence the word “spirit”. There is NO indication of eating bread in any of that.
Again, that was my IMMEDIATE response. My longer version is coming shortly.
My longer response:
FIRST, John Chapter 6 covers a GREAT PERIOD OF TIME. Let’s for example show something in the VERY NEXT CHAPTER, chapter 7.
John 7:2
Now the Jew’s feast of tabernacles was at hand.
When is Tabernacles as it relates to Passover?
Leviticus 23:34
Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, The fifteenth day of this seventh month shall be the feast of tabernacles for seven days unto the Lord.
Leviticus 23:5
In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the Lord’s passover
There is a 7 month period of time between the first part of chapter 6 the first part of chapter 7.
Therefore, we need to get a proper timeline in Chapter 6. There are 4 witnesses, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. This helps to get a timeline.
So, you keep wanting to mention the Passover, right? That is verse 4.
John 6:4
And the passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh.
John 7:2
Now the Jew’s feast of tabernacles was at hand.
What feasts were in between those two?
1. Firstfruits (Pentecost)
Fifty Days after Passover
2. Feast of Trumpets
First Day of 7th Month
3. Day of Atonement
Tenth Day of 7th Month
So, Passover is not the subject matter of chapter 6. All that is doing is to give you an idea for a timeline that there is 7 months time frame in chapter 6.
So, verse 4 shows Passover.
Verses 16-21 is about Jesus walking on water.
And this is where we use Matthew and Mark to find out where in time we are.
Matthew 14:22-23
22 And straightway Jesus constrained his disciples to get into a ship, and to go before him unto the other side, while he sent the multitudes away.
23 And when he had sent the multitudes away, he went up into a mountain apart to pray: and when the evening was come, he was there alone.
Mark 6:45-52
45 And straightway he constrained his disciples to get into the ship, and to go to the other side before unto Bethsaida, while he sent away the people.******What people?
46 And when he had sent them away, he departed into a mountain to pray.
47 And when even was come, the ship was in the midst of the sea, and he alone on the land.
48 And he saw them toiling in rowing; for the wind was contrary unto them: and about the fourth watch of the night he cometh unto them, walking upon the sea, and would have passed by them.
49 But when they saw him walking upon the sea, they supposed it had been a spirit, and cried out:
50 For they all saw him, and were troubled. And immediately he talked with them, and saith unto them, Be of good cheer: it is I; be not afraid.
51 And he went up unto them into the ship; and the wind ceased: and they were sore amazed in themselves beyond measure, and wondered.
52 For they considered not the miracle of the loaves: for their heart was hardened.
Now, back to John 6:
15 When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed again into a mountain himself alone.
16 And when even was now come, his disciples went down unto the sea,
17 And entered into a ship, and went over the sea toward Capernaum. And it was now dark, and Jesus was not come to them.
18 And the sea arose by reason of a great wind that blew.
19 So when they had rowed about five and twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Jesus walking on the sea, and drawing nigh unto the ship: and they were afraid.
20 But he saith unto them, It is I; be not afraid.
21 Then they willingly received him into the ship: and immediately the ship was at the land whither they went.
So, we have Matthew, Mark, and John discussing Jesus walking on the water. But look, Luke does NOT discuss it?
However, what was the MAJOR topic prior to that? Feeding 5,000. Keep in mind that this is not discussing feeding 4,000, but 5,000.
All 4 gospels mention this (Feeding the 5,000):
Matthew 14:13-21
Mark 6:30-44
Luke 9:10-17
John 6:1-14
More to follow…(taking a break), but I just want you to see a timeline for the purpose of telling you to stop thinking that chapter 6 is discussing Passover.
You have yet to acknowledge the word Manna at all in any of our conversation. Well…
Verse 30 begins that conversation. But we need to figure out verses 15-29 first.
This is how I figure out the bible. I put a timeline on the conversation.
This is why I am opposed to anything Catholic. They seem to think that Jesus was telling you to eat bread and drink wine, in some sort of ceremony to bring down the spirit of Jesus in that somehow that bread and wine magically becomes the body and blood of Jesus. To me, that has got to be the most nutty thing I have ever heard, and I study scripture a lot. Jesus died once, and he doesn’t ever die again.
Romans 10:6-7
6 But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:)
7 Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.)
Passover is in the 1st month and Tabernacles is in the 7th month and there is a 6 month period of time between them, not 7. Manna is another name for bread. He turned bread and wine into his flesh and blood before he died and told us to do the same after he died in remembrance of him. He died only once. >
Inclusive is 7.
I counted the 7th Month, and I counted the 1st Month.
Manna is NOT another name for bread. Manna is a bread that is NOT MADE on earth. It is a type of bread, not another word for bread. That bread had a significant meaning and that meaning was that it came down from heaven, and that is what Jesus was saying, is that he came down from heaven…JUST LIKE the manna did.
He did not turn manna into wine.
He did not tell us to eat manna for Passover, as there was no such thing as manna for passover.
Passover bread is unleavened bread, and that is the bread that is eaten at communion, not manna.
Get your bread straight.
Ed Chapman
That’s right, Patrick, it’s a remembrance. Nothing more. When we eat the bread, we are not killing Jesus. When we drink the wine, we are not making Jesus bleed. All we are doing is REMEMBERING what Jesus already did.
However, your Eucharist is not about remembering. It’s about killing Jesus all over again. Bringing his spirit down from heaven, transforming bread and wine to be his body and blood.
That is the kookiest thing I have ever heard.
When we have Memorial Day, visiting graves, we don’t dig them up and rebury them. We remember them. Why do Catholics think that the spirit of Jesus comes back so that they can transform bread into a body? and transform wine into blood?
When you put that bread in your mouth, and your teeth bites into it…you are remembering what it was like for those whips to tear into the body, and when you drink that wine, you are remembering what it was like for Jesus to bleed. All it is, is remembering, putting it into your mind of the suffering that Jesus went thru.
But Catholics have a much different take on it, and I do not agree with it. They actually think that they are doing something, by putting together spirit and body and blood. They think that they really are doing that. And I can’t figure that out for the life of me.
Manna, all that meant was that Jesus came down from heaven.
Unleavened Bread means that Jesus is sinless.
Eating the bread, drinking the wine, all that means is that we are to KILL JESUS, as he is the sacrificial lamb.
We already did that ONCE (SPIRITUALLY), AS SOON AS WE FIRST BELIEVED. At that moment, that is when we ate the bread, and drank the wine. And, I might add, that there was no bread, and no wine when we first believed. Therefore, it’s a metaphor, nothing more. It’s only a Remembrance.
Ed Chapman
Yes, we should remember, he allowed himself to be killed for our benefit. He said ‘ this bread and wine has become my body and blood, eat and drink it, and when you do you will live in me and I will live in you. Those are his words. How to understand it? It must be a spiritual action, we become one with him. And if the person who says the words doubts, and the person who receives doubts, no matter. It is independent of our thinking, what we think has no effect on it. Some understanding can be gained about this by reflecting on what led up to it, Moses and the Passover lambs. >
Patrick,
Here is something else to think about. Ponder it.
When Jesus was at the last supper, he broke bread, as the tradition of Passover was, and he said:
THIS is my body…
So, we need to ask ourselves, if you are a Catholic, that is, was there 2 bodies present at the last supper?
1. The Body of Jesus himself was already present at the last supper
2. Now he’s telling you that the bread that he just broke is ALSO his body?
So, there was 2 bodies of Jesus?
Then the wine, when he said that This is his blood.
1. Blood tastes like wine? Or, Wine is blood? I’m not a wine drinker, but if wine is blood, then I’m glad I don’t drink wine. I’m not a fan of a metalic taste in my mouth.
2. Jesus still had his own blood in his veins. So, did he turn the wine into blood, just as Moses turned the Nile into blood, just as Jesus turned water into wine?
Again, this is all supposed to be metaphorical, a representation, a memorial, an illustration. Not to be taken literally.
Ed Chapman
Yes, just like the multiplication of the loaves and fish. And his spirit extends into the bread and wine. >
What are you talking about? That was a miracle that he performed to feed 5,000 people while he preached. That had nothing to do with our topic at hand. People really did eat bread. They didn’t eat Jesus. They were not offered wine, either. Not even water. Just fish and bread. Besides, why isn’t fish mentioned as part of the Eucharist then? He fed them fish, right?
When you use the word “spirit” what are you talking about?
I’m not getting you when you say “his spirit extends into the bread and wine”.
Where do you come up with that? His spirit is the Holy Spirit and that spirit resides in Christians. Jesus, the body, is in heaven, and he isn’t coming back until a second time. Not a 3rd, or a 4th, or a 5th, or a 6th. What’s the total number of Eucharists that your church has performed stating that the spirit of Jesus keeps coming back to suffer in the flesh of bread?
Come on Patrick, I’m not a Catholic and I don’t buy into Catholic teachings on a Jesus that is cannibalized. It’s all symbolic as a representation, and illustration…nothing more. I refuse to be a Catholic. We remember the death of Christ…we don’t perform it.
Ed Chapman
I mean that many loafs were made from 1 loaf, so his spirit enters many bodies. You could say the means of connection or transfer is the bread and wine. Spirit is the invisible part of us, the soul, and when it leaves our bodies, our bodies die and are called our remains.. The spirit is invisible to our physical eyes. Fish was not served at the Passover meal before the destruction of the Temple. Just as a bridegroom becomes one with his bride, so Jesus becomes one with us, spiritually. Luke 22:19 “ This is my body which will be given up for you “, becomes after the crucifixion, his body that has been given up for you. The lambs that were eaten at the time of Moses are not the same lambs that were eaten in subsequent years. The Lamb of God is always the same lamb that we eat of. Time is no barrier. >
That’s all fine and dandy, but there was fish there, too. I reject your findings. Why? Because Passover is the subject matter in regards to the bread and wine. It’s all about the Passover.
It was PASSOVER Bread, aka bread with NO YEAST. I’m quite sure that the bread that was served to the 5,000 was bread that had yeast in it. NO YEAST BREAD is important because NO YEAST represents NO SIN, and Jesus is that NO SIN person.
Next, there was NO WINE given to the 5,000.
Fish has nothing to do with Passover.
The WINE is a PASSOVER WINE as outlined in Leviticus 23:13. Jesus is the Passover LAMB. He is the Passover Bread. He is the Passover Wine. He is the Passover Beginning of the Harvest (First Fruits), aka REISHIT KATZIR.
Everything is about the Passover, not the feeding of the 5,000.
Leviticus 23:5-14 (RULES FOR PASSOVER/FEAST OF UNLEAVENED BREAD)
5 In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the Lord’s passover.
6 And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the Lord: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread.
7 In the first day ye shall have an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein.
8 But ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord seven days: in the seventh day is an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein.
9 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,
10 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye be come into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest unto the priest:
11 And he shall wave the sheaf before the Lord, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it.
12 And ye shall offer that day when ye wave the sheaf an he lamb without blemish of the first year for a burnt offering unto the Lord.
13 And the meat offering thereof shall be two tenth deals of fine flour mingled with oil, an offering made by fire unto the Lord for a sweet savour: and the drink offering thereof shall be of wine, the fourth part of an hin.
14 And ye shall eat neither bread, nor parched corn, nor green ears, until the selfsame day that ye have brought an offering unto your God: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations in all your dwellings.
Getting back to the Passover lamb, Exodus 12:7 says that it is to be slaughtered between the two evenings. This has been interpreted by the Samaritans as being between sunset and darkness , and by the Pharisees as being between afternoon and sunset. Now you and I, because we recognize that darkness as an evening, see that this was a prophecy about Good Friday, and based on that , the time for the slaughter of the lambs was 3pm to 6pm. So, the only reason for that darkness was to tell us to add a new day to the week, and not that the lambs had to be slaughtered during darkness, which would have been impractical anyway, because the only place on the planet that this could take place was at the Temple in Jerusalem. In order for the lambs to be sacrificed it had to be daylight, and even when Abraham was about to sacrifice Isaac it had to be daylight, otherwise he would not have seen the ram caught in the bush by the horns. Let us promote the 8th day together. >
UTOPIAN MATH QUIZ OF THE DAY.
QUESTION: If a criminal has 12 guns and you outlaw 9 of them, how many guns will the criminal have left?
THE ANSWER: Twelve
[ Remember, he’s a criminal ]
I love that math quiz!
Have you given the 8 days any more thought?
Hey Patrick,
You are gonna have to refresh my memory about 8 days. All I can think of at the moment is that 7 Jewish Days spans 8 of our days, all due to the Jewish days beginning at sunset, where ours begin at midnight. Otherwise, I need a refresher as to what you are reminding me about.
Liberal America, 2017 –
The simultaneous beliefs that the President is a racist fascist, the police are brutal racists, and we should encourage them to disarm everyone else…
Go to your comments, January 19, 2016, and you will come upon the exchange we had. 7 Jewish days spans 8 of our days?
I’ll do that a little later today, but yes, 7 Jewish days span 8 of our days. Jewish day begins TONIGHT at sunset. Their Sabbath, aka the 7th Day, begins at sunset on Friday, and ends at sunset on Saturday. That is ONE day to them, but spans two of our days.
Your interpretation of John 20:19 that it means that Monday is made the first day of the week is in fact what actually happened. With the Jews Sunday was the first day of the week and Saturday the seventh. We Christians made Monday the first day of the week and Sunday the seventh, for the last two thousand years now. Still, I think what John 20:19 is telling us is that night is moved to the second part of the day. In Genesis night was the first part of the day, ‘ Evening and Morning ‘.
Hey, Patrick, long time no hear from. Good to hear from ya. There was a Jewish comedian on TV a long while back, and he stated that we can thank Abrahahamic religions for giving us the weekend. The Muslims gave us Friday, the Jews gave us Saturday, and the Christians gave us Sunday! Seems that many of us take advantage of all three days!! Anyway, you will hear the 7th Day Adventists tell you that Rome changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday…and when the 7th Day Adventists speak, I gotta disagree. They are the main reason that I had to look at John 20:19 a little closer.
From Nancy Sinatra:
“The murderous members of the N.R.A. should face a firing squad.”
Commenter observation –
Left: We need a total gun ban due to the threat of violence.
Right: The threat of violence from whom?
Left: Us…..
The 7th Day Adventists are right, scripture does not tell us to move the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. It happened by default, because the day he came out of the tomb was the most important day for Christians.
NO, they are not right. John 20:19 proves it. It CLEARLY states that Monday is the FIRST DAY of the week, meaning that Sunday is the 7TH DAY, not Saturday anymore.
The seventh day ( Saturday ) is the day of rest. What he done on Sunday by coming out of the tomb is far from resting. Yes, in practice you are correct, Monday became the 1st day and Sunday the 7th, but it had nothing to with John 20:19. We still had to work 6 days and when it came to the rest day, naturally we choose Sunday.
Not according to BOTH John 20:19 AND Hebrews 4.
Hebrew 4 ‘ God rested from his works on Saturday ‘, not Sunday.
You are NOT getting it. Hebrews 4 states that God is STILL RESTING, that we CEASED from our WORKS of Righteousness, and have ENTERED INTO his Sabbath, and that WE TOO are RESTING, just like God is STILL resting. There is NO SUCH THING as a Saturday Sabbath anymore, or even a SUNDAY Sabbath for that matter, because ALL DAYS ARE THE 7TH DAY. We meet at church on Sunday, based on John 20:19, the RESURRECTION Day, not the Jewish Saturday, as you state. Saturday has NEVER been the Sabbath Day for any Christians. God rested from his works on the 7th Day…NOT SATURDAY, OR SUNDAY OR MONDAY OR TUESDAY OR WEDNESDAY OR THURSDAY OR FRIDAY. Just the 7th Day. The 7th Day has NOT ENDED. It’s not a Saturday. It’s EVERYDAY. That’s why I say that you just don’t seem to get it.
God told Moses to work for 6 days and rest on the 7th in remembrance of his act of creation. The Jews have been keeping that 7th day ever since, and it happens to be Saturday.
Yes, he told Moses that. He didn’t tell Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob that. He didn’t tell Adam or Eve that. He didn’t tell Noah that. As a matter of fact, he told Noah that everything that moves (animals) is now food. Prior to that, it is believe that mankind only ate fruit and vegetables. So Noah can eat anything, then God tells Moses that he can’t eat shellfish, or bacon. On Pentecost, that day of Pentecost was not a Saturday, but it was a Sunday. We are not followers of Moses. We are sons of Abraham, a free people. And if God didn’t tell Abraham to take Saturday off, that shows me that I don’t have to either. We can worship God anywhere at any time, not needing a certain place, day, or time. Read John chapter 4. Spirit and truth. Not place or day. We can eat lobster and a ham sandwich, which is an abomination.
He only told Moses. It is one of the 10 Commandments. Moses’s time was a thousand years after Abraham.
So, are you under the law of Moses? I’m not.
Abraham didn’t have the ten commandments. Neither did Isaac, or Jacob.
We were under the law of Moses until Jesus liberated us.
Well there ya go. Abraham didn’t need liberated. All he did was to believe the promises. The only reason for the law, was to prove that we can’t work to get eternal life. It’s called being self righteous. And no Gentiles was ever in a covenant with God regarding the ten commandments. Abraham was a Gentile when God called Abraham.
What day did Abraham go to church?
Salvation has a history, beginning with 2 people in a garden, and completed by the Lord. Since then, believers are making that fact known everywhere they go.We can agree to disagree on the meaning of John 20:19.It is not that important. Our goal is to arrive at Paradise.
Yes, we can disagree. But I disagree that Rome is responsible for changing the day. I disagree with the 7th day Adventists that state that if you are a Sunday worshipper, instead of Saturday that you are going to hell for disobeying the 4th commandment. That would mean that only the 7th Day Adventists are going to, how you say? Paradise?
The Beatles agree with me also.
Oh, sure…a bunch of hippies who thinks Jesus is nothing more than a philosopher, like Ghandi.
You must have heard ‘ 8 days a week ‘