And one other thing, everyone should know that the mark of the beast is simply putting your faith in other than the Triune God.
Mark of the beast is sunday laws.
- Thread starter Christforme
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Rev 13 16 It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, 17 so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.18 This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666.
1 Kings 10 14 The weight of the gold that Solomon received yearly was 666 talents, 15 not including the revenues from merchants and traders and from all the Arabian kings and the governors of the territories.
Matthew 6:24
“No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.
Matthew 22:21“Caesar’s,” they replied. Then he said to them, “So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”
1 Kings 10 14 The weight of the gold that Solomon received yearly was 666 talents, 15 not including the revenues from merchants and traders and from all the Arabian kings and the governors of the territories.
Matthew 6:24
“No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.
Matthew 22:21“Caesar’s,” they replied. Then he said to them, “So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”
Uh, thanks for the commentary but I prefer scripture...
Isa 66:15 For, behold, the LORD will come with fire, and with his chariots like a whirlwind, to render his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire.
Isa 66:16 For by fire and by his sword will the LORD plead with all flesh: and the slain of the LORD shall be many.
Isa 66:17 They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves in the gardens behind one tree in the midst, eating swine's flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the LORD.
Isa 66:18 For I know their works and their thoughts: it shall come, that I will gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come, and see my glory.
D
danschance
Guest
9On the next day, as they were on their way and approaching the city, Peter went up on the housetop about the sixth hour to pray.10But he became hungry and was desiring to eat; but while they were making preparations, he fell into a trance; 11and he saw the sky opened up, and an object like a great sheet coming down, lowered by four corners to the ground, 12and there were in it all kinds offour-footed animals and crawling creatures of the earth and birds of the air. 13A voice came to him, “Get up, Peter, kill and eat!” 14But Peter said, “By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything unholy and unclean.” 15Again a voice came to him a second time, “What God has cleansed, no longer consider unholy.” 16This happened three times, and immediately the object was taken up into the sky.
Acts 10
16Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day— Col. 2:16
11“It is not what enters into the mouth that defiles the man, but what proceeds out of the mouth, this defiles the man.” Matt 15
A
AgeofKnowledge
Guest
You're maligning God's Word to "prove" your cult's false theology again just as you malign my words.
The speaker in Luke 16:17 is Jesus Christ who "is the end of the law, so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes" (Rom 10:4). Jesus maintained that the proper way to keep any commandment was to fulfill the purpose for which it was given. The law for Jesus was the expression of God’s will which is eternal and unchangeable. Jesus did not come to modify the will of God; Jesus fulfilled it.
As Jesus said in Matthew 5:17, ""Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." Not one jot or tittle would pass from the law until all was fulfilled. With Jesus’ death and resurrection, his exaltation and the sending of the Holy Spirit upon the church, that time of fulfillment came. That which the law foreshadowed was now fulfilled. The law had come through Moses, grace and truth now came through Jesus Christ.
In the past the marks of membership of the people of God were being born a Jew (or becoming a proselyte), circumcision (if a male) and obedience to the Mosaic law. But now the marks of membership were faith in Jesus Christ and participation in His Holy Spirit.
Circumcision and observance of the Mosaic Law were no longer required. However, the love of God and love of neighbor, which summed up what the law required, were to be produced in those who had been reborn, have God's morality "written on their heart," and walk in the Spirit. The Mosaic law was no longer their law any more than the Mosaic covenant was still their covenant; however, their scripture (including the law) was still useful for ‘teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness’ (2 Tim. 3:16), as long as it was read paradigmatically. The Apostles John and Paul got the message, you obviously never did.
Paul makes it clear that with Christ's death and resurrection sinners are now declared righteous, not on the basis of their merits in keeping the old covenant Mosaic Sabbath law, but rather on the basis of their standing "in Christ": "There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus" (Rom 8:1 RSV; cf. Rom 3:21–31; Gal 3:11; Eph 2:8–9). Jesus doesn't then toss them all into hell anyway for failing to adhere to the external observance of the old covenant Mosaic Sabbath law (which the cult of SDA false theology designed by SDA false prophets teach).
Simply, Jesus never doubted the authority of the Mosaic Law for the time preceding the entrance of the kingdom, and his instructions to followers living in that time will naturally include admonitions to obey those Laws. But Jesus clearly reveal that He transcends it and also that a new era of salvation history is indeed breaking in. This is an era in which Jesus’ own teaching will be the central authority for the people of God and that only in Christ can grace now be found with the Mosaic Law no lnoger having the same position and significance that it had before.
Now Paul wrote the Book of Romans and saw Jesus as “abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations” (Eph 2:15). Through him “we have been released from the law” which once “bound us” (Rom 7:6). Serving “in the old way of the written code” (Rom 7:6) and seeking to establish his own righteousness (Rom 10:3) had only brought Paul into opposition to the very purpose of God rather than into peace with God.
In Romans 7 he shows that the law as expression of God’s will remains; that it reveals, as ever, human sin and rebellion against God. But he also shows that the law is powerless to bring about obedience. It is an external norm; it does not provide the power with which to achieve the norm. Therefore the attempt to achieve righteousness based on the law (Rom 10:5) invariably ends in the experience of failure. Paul’s summation of this experience is caught up in the words “What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me?” (Rom 7:24). His answer to that question is “Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom 7:25). Why? Because “Christ is the end of the law.” The word “end” (telos) can designate eitherthe “goal,” “outcome,” “purpose” toward which something is directed, or the “end,” “cessation.” Many Biblical interpreters believe that both meanings are caught up in this text. For Paul, the law “was our custodian until Christ came” (Gal 3:24 RSV). Its temporary function has now been accomplished; and Christ is therefore also the terminus, the cessation of the law.
But Paul is saying much more here than simply repeating the conviction of one aspect of his tradition and the witness of the early church that there is a cessation of the law in the messianic period. He qualifies the conviction that the Mosaic law has been completed and abrogated in Christ with the phrase “unto righteousness.” English translations have not served us well here, for they have generally blunted the connection between the statement “Christ is the end of the law” and the qualifying phrase “unto righteousness.”
The preposition unto expresses purpose or goal. Christ is not the end of the law in an absolute sense. He does not abolish the will of God as expressed in the law. Rather his coming signals its end with regard to the attainment of righteousness (that is, right relationship with God). He is the revelation ofGod’s righteousness (Rom 1:17). His life is an incarnation of God’s relation-restoring action, God’s way of setting us right (Rom 10:3). Therefore, the lawas a means of approach to God, as that which determines relationship with God, as that which was perceived in Paul’s Jewish tradition to lead to life on the basis of conformity, has been abolished.
A third phrase in this text adds a further qualifier to the assertion that Christ is the end of the law. Namely, he is the end of the law “for everyone who believes.” For it is only in the response of faith to Christ, in the humble submission to God’s righteousness (Rom 10:3) that the bondage of the law—consisting of its revelation of sin and its inability to help us beyond it—can come to its end.
Paul provides no grounds for imposing the Hebrew sabbath on the Christian. The Christian is free from the burden because the Spirit of Christ enables him to fulfill God's will apart from external observance. The author of Hebrews likewise speaks of the Hebrew sabbath only as a type of "God's rest," which is theinheritance of all the people of God (Heb 4:1-10). He does not tell his readers to keep the sabbath, but rather urges them to "strive to enter that rest" (4:11).
Such a travel motif becomes all the more related to an eschatological mindset when we recall that Jesus is described in Hebrews 12:2 as the “Pioneer and Perfector” of faith, the one who not only begins but brings to completion the journey of faith. It is difficult not to see the future Parousia of Jesus Christ as the time when his role as “Perfector” is played out, a suggestion which also helps to make sense of the curious declaration made in Hebrews 4:9 about Joshua not giving “rest” to the people of God. It seems certain that the author is playing with the name “Joshua” (Iēsous), seeing the OT character as a prefigurement of the Lord Jesus Christ.
And it was all good for centuries until someone made the mistake of asking a certain William Miller to speak in their church in 1831 which resulted in him making a false prophecy and a small group of people in denial who couldn't accept the fact that the false prophecy failed weaving ridiculous heresys together to try and "prove" that it actually had happened. Rachel Oakes Preston's arrival only got them more lost and in bondage and here we are today with SDA "evangelists" maligning God's Word on CC to "save" everyone by pulling them into their gross hermeneutical error.
The speaker in Luke 16:17 is Jesus Christ who "is the end of the law, so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes" (Rom 10:4). Jesus maintained that the proper way to keep any commandment was to fulfill the purpose for which it was given. The law for Jesus was the expression of God’s will which is eternal and unchangeable. Jesus did not come to modify the will of God; Jesus fulfilled it.
As Jesus said in Matthew 5:17, ""Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." Not one jot or tittle would pass from the law until all was fulfilled. With Jesus’ death and resurrection, his exaltation and the sending of the Holy Spirit upon the church, that time of fulfillment came. That which the law foreshadowed was now fulfilled. The law had come through Moses, grace and truth now came through Jesus Christ.
In the past the marks of membership of the people of God were being born a Jew (or becoming a proselyte), circumcision (if a male) and obedience to the Mosaic law. But now the marks of membership were faith in Jesus Christ and participation in His Holy Spirit.
Circumcision and observance of the Mosaic Law were no longer required. However, the love of God and love of neighbor, which summed up what the law required, were to be produced in those who had been reborn, have God's morality "written on their heart," and walk in the Spirit. The Mosaic law was no longer their law any more than the Mosaic covenant was still their covenant; however, their scripture (including the law) was still useful for ‘teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness’ (2 Tim. 3:16), as long as it was read paradigmatically. The Apostles John and Paul got the message, you obviously never did.
Paul makes it clear that with Christ's death and resurrection sinners are now declared righteous, not on the basis of their merits in keeping the old covenant Mosaic Sabbath law, but rather on the basis of their standing "in Christ": "There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus" (Rom 8:1 RSV; cf. Rom 3:21–31; Gal 3:11; Eph 2:8–9). Jesus doesn't then toss them all into hell anyway for failing to adhere to the external observance of the old covenant Mosaic Sabbath law (which the cult of SDA false theology designed by SDA false prophets teach).
Simply, Jesus never doubted the authority of the Mosaic Law for the time preceding the entrance of the kingdom, and his instructions to followers living in that time will naturally include admonitions to obey those Laws. But Jesus clearly reveal that He transcends it and also that a new era of salvation history is indeed breaking in. This is an era in which Jesus’ own teaching will be the central authority for the people of God and that only in Christ can grace now be found with the Mosaic Law no lnoger having the same position and significance that it had before.
Now Paul wrote the Book of Romans and saw Jesus as “abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations” (Eph 2:15). Through him “we have been released from the law” which once “bound us” (Rom 7:6). Serving “in the old way of the written code” (Rom 7:6) and seeking to establish his own righteousness (Rom 10:3) had only brought Paul into opposition to the very purpose of God rather than into peace with God.
In Romans 7 he shows that the law as expression of God’s will remains; that it reveals, as ever, human sin and rebellion against God. But he also shows that the law is powerless to bring about obedience. It is an external norm; it does not provide the power with which to achieve the norm. Therefore the attempt to achieve righteousness based on the law (Rom 10:5) invariably ends in the experience of failure. Paul’s summation of this experience is caught up in the words “What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me?” (Rom 7:24). His answer to that question is “Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom 7:25). Why? Because “Christ is the end of the law.” The word “end” (telos) can designate eitherthe “goal,” “outcome,” “purpose” toward which something is directed, or the “end,” “cessation.” Many Biblical interpreters believe that both meanings are caught up in this text. For Paul, the law “was our custodian until Christ came” (Gal 3:24 RSV). Its temporary function has now been accomplished; and Christ is therefore also the terminus, the cessation of the law.
But Paul is saying much more here than simply repeating the conviction of one aspect of his tradition and the witness of the early church that there is a cessation of the law in the messianic period. He qualifies the conviction that the Mosaic law has been completed and abrogated in Christ with the phrase “unto righteousness.” English translations have not served us well here, for they have generally blunted the connection between the statement “Christ is the end of the law” and the qualifying phrase “unto righteousness.”
The preposition unto expresses purpose or goal. Christ is not the end of the law in an absolute sense. He does not abolish the will of God as expressed in the law. Rather his coming signals its end with regard to the attainment of righteousness (that is, right relationship with God). He is the revelation ofGod’s righteousness (Rom 1:17). His life is an incarnation of God’s relation-restoring action, God’s way of setting us right (Rom 10:3). Therefore, the lawas a means of approach to God, as that which determines relationship with God, as that which was perceived in Paul’s Jewish tradition to lead to life on the basis of conformity, has been abolished.
A third phrase in this text adds a further qualifier to the assertion that Christ is the end of the law. Namely, he is the end of the law “for everyone who believes.” For it is only in the response of faith to Christ, in the humble submission to God’s righteousness (Rom 10:3) that the bondage of the law—consisting of its revelation of sin and its inability to help us beyond it—can come to its end.
Paul provides no grounds for imposing the Hebrew sabbath on the Christian. The Christian is free from the burden because the Spirit of Christ enables him to fulfill God's will apart from external observance. The author of Hebrews likewise speaks of the Hebrew sabbath only as a type of "God's rest," which is theinheritance of all the people of God (Heb 4:1-10). He does not tell his readers to keep the sabbath, but rather urges them to "strive to enter that rest" (4:11).
Such a travel motif becomes all the more related to an eschatological mindset when we recall that Jesus is described in Hebrews 12:2 as the “Pioneer and Perfector” of faith, the one who not only begins but brings to completion the journey of faith. It is difficult not to see the future Parousia of Jesus Christ as the time when his role as “Perfector” is played out, a suggestion which also helps to make sense of the curious declaration made in Hebrews 4:9 about Joshua not giving “rest” to the people of God. It seems certain that the author is playing with the name “Joshua” (Iēsous), seeing the OT character as a prefigurement of the Lord Jesus Christ.
And it was all good for centuries until someone made the mistake of asking a certain William Miller to speak in their church in 1831 which resulted in him making a false prophecy and a small group of people in denial who couldn't accept the fact that the false prophecy failed weaving ridiculous heresys together to try and "prove" that it actually had happened. Rachel Oakes Preston's arrival only got them more lost and in bondage and here we are today with SDA "evangelists" maligning God's Word on CC to "save" everyone by pulling them into their gross hermeneutical error.
Acts 10?
Act 10:10 And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,
Act 10:11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
Act 10:12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
Act 10:13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
Act 10:14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
Act 10:15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
Act 10:16 This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.
Act 10:17 Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate,
Hmmm, seems you are far more spiritually in tune than the APOSTLE PETER! One thing he did not do is run right down and order up a surf and turf with a shrimp cocktail appetizer, he doubted in himself what it should mean. And what was the revealed meaning? Stick anything you can catch in your mouth? NOPE!
Act 10:17 Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate,
Act 10:18 And called, and asked whether Simon, which was surnamed Peter, were lodged there.
Act 10:19 While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.
It was NOT apparent to Peter this was the cleansing of unclean meats...
Act 10:20 Arise therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them.
Act 10:21 Then Peter went down to the men which were sent unto him from Cornelius; and said, Behold, I am he whom ye seek: what is the cause wherefore ye are come?
And what was the revealed meaning?
Act 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
And here is the true understanding...
Act 11:1 And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God.
Act 11:2 And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him,
Act 11:3 Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.
Act 11:4 But Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto them, saying,
Act 11:5 I was in the city of Joppa praying: and in a trance I saw a vision, A certain vessel descend, as it had been a great sheet, let down from heaven by four corners; and it came even to me:
Act 11:6 Upon the which when I had fastened mine eyes, I considered, and saw fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
Act 11:7 And I heard a voice saying unto me, Arise, Peter; slay and eat.
Act 11:8 But I said, Not so, Lord: for nothing common or unclean hath at any time entered into my mouth.
Act 11:9 But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
Act 11:10 And this was done three times: and all were drawn up again into heaven.
Act 11:11 And, behold, immediately there were three men already come unto the house where I was, sent from Caesarea unto me.
Act 11:12 And the Spirit bade me go with them, nothing doubting. Moreover these six brethren accompanied me, and we entered into the man's house:
Act 11:13 And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter;
Act 11:14 Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.
Act 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.
Act 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
Act 11:17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?
Act 11:18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.
Last edited:
Let no man judge you in meat or drink? Hmmm, how about the Word of God?
1Ti 4:4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
1Ti 4:5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.
And where in the Word of God do we find meat sanctified?
Lev 11 and Deut 14!
And Mat 15:11 is pulled completely out of context. Here is what it really says...
Mat 15:1 Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,
Mat 15:2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.
Mat 15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
Mat 15:4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
Mat 15:5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;
Mat 15:6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
Mat 15:7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
Mat 15:8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
Mat 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Mat 15:10 And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand:
Mat 15:11 Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
The subject is ceremonial washings that were not commanded by God, but were the traditions of the elders...
Mar 7:1 Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem.
Mar 7:2 And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.
Mar 7:3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.
Mar 7:4 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables.
Mar 7:5 Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands?
Mar 7:6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
Mar 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Mar 7:8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
Mar 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
Mar 7:10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
Mar 7:11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
Mar 7:12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
Mar 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.
Now when we read the complete passage, we see that the Pharisees considered BREAD (not meat) defiled if it is touched by hands that were not ceremonial washed. This is not a command but a tradition of the elders. So now with this understanding, let's continue...
Mar 7:14 And when he had called all the people unto him, he said unto them, Hearken unto me every one of you, and understand:
Mar 7:15 There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man.
A piece of bread that is touched by hands that were not ceremonial washed according to tradition, could not defile a man. The subject here is ceremonial wahsing. Meat is not even in the conversation, bread is.
What can defile a man is pulling a verse out of context to twist the Word of God into saying something it does not say.
D
danschance
Guest
And how can you explain away the other two verses posted above?
But to respond to you like of insight into the scriptures above:
1) Peter is hungry and desiring food.
2) Sixth hour is lunch time.
3) The women are preparing food to eat.
4) Visions of all sorts of unclean animals, with God's command to Kill and eat.
5) Vision is repeated.
6) Vision is repeated a third time.
Now here is my question: If as you claim, this is about the gentiles, why did God pick a time when Peter was hungry, and give him a vision of unclean food with the command to kill and eat? If eating unclean meat is still forbidden, why would God till him to kill and eat it? Just so the Holy SPirit might fall on the gentiles?
That is pure horse malarkey and you know it. Especially when Col. 2:16 clearly states no one is to judge you on food.
But to respond to you like of insight into the scriptures above:
1) Peter is hungry and desiring food.
2) Sixth hour is lunch time.
3) The women are preparing food to eat.
4) Visions of all sorts of unclean animals, with God's command to Kill and eat.
5) Vision is repeated.
6) Vision is repeated a third time.
Now here is my question: If as you claim, this is about the gentiles, why did God pick a time when Peter was hungry, and give him a vision of unclean food with the command to kill and eat? If eating unclean meat is still forbidden, why would God till him to kill and eat it? Just so the Holy SPirit might fall on the gentiles?
That is pure horse malarkey and you know it. Especially when Col. 2:16 clearly states no one is to judge you on food.
D
danschance
Guest
The connection between unclean food and gentiles is???
Please state what that is. Food is not gentiles. You claim the visions of unclean foods to a hungry man while food is being prepared is about gentiles receiving the the Holy Spirit. So how are the two connected except they are adjacent scriptures?
Please state what that is. Food is not gentiles. You claim the visions of unclean foods to a hungry man while food is being prepared is about gentiles receiving the the Holy Spirit. So how are the two connected except they are adjacent scriptures?
D
danschance
Guest
You are doing it again. Pointing at a zebra and then the elephant to prove they are apes.
You posted this: 1Ti 4:4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving..
You failed to read what it says. It says every creature on the planet is made by God and they are all good, do not refuse to eat it with thanksgiving. We can eat any animal we please.
Your logic is all over the map. It is like you are playing pin the tail on the donkey with bible verses.
J
josh123
Guest
hehe, i guess reading without understand doesn't work too good, it's like reading " a zebra has white stripes " but what they understand from that is that " an ape is big as an elephant" hehe
D
danschance
Guest
His logic is called guilt by association. All he does is associate one verse with another to prove his point. It proves nothing and is nothing but very poor exegesis. Standard SDA triple double speak with a gainer and two back flips. It's like saying "Judas hung himself and this verse says do like wise, so I must go hang myself."
How is the blatant command of God to kill unclean animals and eat them and gentiles related in Acts chapter 10? I know the answer, but SDA remain clueless.
J
josh123
Guest
Dan, Acts chapter 10 has nothing to do with diet.
Dan,, The subject of peter's vision is not animals,, it is about people!!!!
God gave peter this vision to show him that the Gentiles were not unclean as the Jews believed. (perhaps you didn't know that).
God had intructed Cornelius, a Gentile , to send men to meet Peter. But Peter would have refused to see them if God had not given him this vision, because Jewish law forbade entertaining Gentiles (verse28).
But when the men finally arrived, Peter welcomed them, explaining that ordinarily he would not have done so, But, 'God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean." (Verse 28).
In the next chapter (Acts 11), the church members criticized Peter for speaking with these Gentiles. So peter told them the whole story of his VISION AND IT'S MEANING. And Acts 11:18 says:
"When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also granted the Gentile repentance unto life."
Because you like pig so much,, you justify your appetite, even though you can give no reason why God would relax His Dietary laws.
A
AgeofKnowledge
Guest
I've caught them running scripts together like that from flow charts their deceived leaders had complied for them. After I refuted them with a clear exegesis of scripture in context with all of scripture and history, they simply kept running the script to the end (being refuted all of the way) as if we weren't even having a discussion and then ACTUALLY RESTARTED THE EXACT SAME SCRIPT as if they were a computer robot when they got to the end as we had never even had a discussion! They troll for lesser minds to ensnare.
A religious cult is an organization that has departed from mainstream Christianity to follow doctrines, almost always arising from false prophets and teachers, that are not Biblical though they try to use the Bible to "prove" them. The Seventh-day Adventist Church is clear example of one. They definitely distort scripture to conform with their false prophets and false teachers ending up with many non-Biblical doctrines and a false gospel.
In fact, they actually rewrote the Bible to conform with their heresy and called it 'The Clear Word Bible' which would be a joke if people weren't being misled by such gross error. No surprise it's been reworked many times.
Honestly, cults are really boring once you gain a genuine scriptural exegesis. I get tired of arguing with them after awhile. They are like rebellious children. I find false world religions more interesting to study than Christian cults simply because their error is, at least, original. They aren't distorting the genuine article.
A religious cult is an organization that has departed from mainstream Christianity to follow doctrines, almost always arising from false prophets and teachers, that are not Biblical though they try to use the Bible to "prove" them. The Seventh-day Adventist Church is clear example of one. They definitely distort scripture to conform with their false prophets and false teachers ending up with many non-Biblical doctrines and a false gospel.
In fact, they actually rewrote the Bible to conform with their heresy and called it 'The Clear Word Bible' which would be a joke if people weren't being misled by such gross error. No surprise it's been reworked many times.
Honestly, cults are really boring once you gain a genuine scriptural exegesis. I get tired of arguing with them after awhile. They are like rebellious children. I find false world religions more interesting to study than Christian cults simply because their error is, at least, original. They aren't distorting the genuine article.
J
josh123
Guest
L
Laodicea
Guest
You use your own opinion to get the answer and not the Bible when if you were to read all Acts 10 would find out the vision is not about being alowed to eat unclean food but about Gentiles. BTW John832 is not a SDA
L