barboza21 Posted June 22, 2009 Posted June 22, 2009 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-- 17things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ. doesnt this mean you are not to follow the sabbath day?? Quote
Dr. Rich Posted June 22, 2009 Posted June 22, 2009 Well now barboza21, I would not go so far to say that this means 'you' (or me or us) are not to follow (keep) the Sabbath day. What 'it' says is what Paul wrote and he was not God, nor was he Jesus Christ even though he also said that Jesus Christ's suffering was not enough (lacking) so that Paul had to suffer because of this lacking. (See Col. 1:24) To me, what Paul wrote here borders on the line of blasphemy. Of course it is your life (soul) that you are 'betting on', isn't it? As in the insurance commercial, as for me, I just can't take that bet. If understanding the truth in regards to salvation can't be found in the words of Jesus given to us by His eyewitnesses, then why would anyone even attempt to have blind faith in the words of someone else? Quote
barboza21 Posted June 22, 2009 Author Posted June 22, 2009 blasphemy eh? why would one of jesus's own apostle say something that would go against jesus and his teachings?? and why , if it really is blasphemy, would they put it in the bible? besides how can any of us judge what he said or for that matter, what any of the bible says, by our own knowledge? how can we understand the bible by ourselves??? shouldnt we let those whohave actually studied the bible and follow jesus's example and his Church determine what the bible says?? *Acts 8:29-31 29Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot. 30And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest? 31And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him. it even shows in the scripture that we need guidance to understand... its sad that because ppl dont understand and dont want to open their eyes to the truth they will omit or just ignore what is RIGHT in front of them, in the sacred scripture... Quote
Moderators John317 Posted June 22, 2009 Moderators Posted June 22, 2009 What it boils down to, it appears to me, is that you teach the Bible is full of lies. Lies, of course, are of the Devil. You are therefore teaching that much of the Bible is of Satan and that the Scriptures are a mixture of Satan's teachings and God's teachings. Am I right in understanding you? Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Dr. Rich Posted June 22, 2009 Posted June 22, 2009 barboza, you asked a question, but do you really want to have the answer? Most don't because their minds are already made up from believing others who SAY they are [OF] Christ. The answer can be found in Matthew 7:15 and 22-23 and 24:4,5 and 1 John 2:18-19. Have you read Matthew 24:45? Can you answer the question presented here? Most people don't even know this verse is in the bible. Quote
barboza21 Posted June 22, 2009 Author Posted June 22, 2009 WOW! OK.. im sorry! did i say something insulting like that to you??? did i?? if i did im sorry. that is not my intention.. im just only trying to see others point of view so that i could understand their religion... but thank you for offending me for no reason John317. how does it make you feel to talk of another human being like that? and what exactly is your reason? and your proof for saying that the bible i teach is full of lies?? what have i said? please let me know. please hold back from saying absurd comments like these.. there is no reason for them. grow up. Quote
Dr. Rich Posted June 23, 2009 Posted June 23, 2009 Well John, after all didn't Jesus warn about such things? I take these warning seriously! Matthew 7's warning, Matthew 24's warning 1st John 2's warning. Not only were these warnings, but they were prophesies. The prophecy about the wheat and the weeds is serious. I have asked before how did this happen? How come no one didn't know the difference before now? Now you say that this is impossible--even though Jesus said it would happen? You need to tell me the names of the apostles that called themselves apostles who were tested and found to be false as found in Rev. 2:2. Then tell me what the test they used to do this. (Actually, you don't 'need' to do anything if you don't want to. It's your life. Quote
barboza21 Posted June 23, 2009 Author Posted June 23, 2009 which question are you answering me? im sorry. i got a bit out of focus with what that guy said.. but your talking about false profets right?? i understand there ARE to be false profets. but who says that in Colossians 2:16 the person speaking IS a false profet.? i really doubt they would put 'false advertising' or false teaching in the Sacred Bible. and about matthew 24:45.. who are you refering to? please be specific?? thx =] Quote
Members phkrause Posted June 23, 2009 Members Posted June 23, 2009 barboza21 John was replying to DrRich not you. pk Quote phkrause When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice; But when a wicked man rules, the people groan. Proverbs 29;2
Dr. Rich Posted June 23, 2009 Posted June 23, 2009 If the bible does not contain lies from Satan as in the Wheat and the Weeds, then did Jesus lie? Who are the wheat today and who are the weeds today? Why do they look alike? Quote
barboza21 Posted June 23, 2009 Author Posted June 23, 2009 Yes, I realize this now. My sincere apologies... yet i still do not think it right the way he responded to him... Quote
Moderators John317 Posted June 23, 2009 Moderators Posted June 23, 2009 WOW! OK.. im sorry! did i say something insulting like that to you??? did i?? if i did im sorry. that is not my intention.. im just only trying to see others point of view so that i could understand their religion... but thank you for offending me for no reason John317. I didn't say anything to you, barboza21. I posted to "Dr. Rich." ADDED LATER: I see now-- after posting-- that pkrause already informed you of this. For which I owe thanks to pk. :-) :-) Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted June 23, 2009 Moderators Posted June 23, 2009 Well John, after all didn't Jesus warn about such things? Jesus' warning is not that we won't be able to trust the Scriptures. There is plenty of evidence that we can trust the Bible as we have it. Quote: I take these warning seriously! Matthew 7's warning, Matthew 24's warning 1st John 2's warning. Yes, we all should. But how are you applying them? You are saying that we should not trust the Bible and that it contains false teachings. Jesus warned us that there would be people who would teach falsely, but He didn't warn us not to trust the Scriptures. Quite the contrary. Quote: Not only were these warnings, but they were prophesies. Yes, Jesus predicted that as we draw closer to the time of His return, there will be many more false teachers who will deny the doctrines that God has given us in His word. Ellen White said the same thing, and I believe I see evidence that this is happening now. She said that fallen angels will come among us and suggest heresies and say thing to try and cause confusion among the people of God. This is most definitely happening these days, and I see it more out in the open now than before. Quote: The prophecy about the wheat and the weeds is serious. I have asked before how did this happen? How come no one didn't know the difference before now? Now you say that this is impossible--even though Jesus said it would happen? Jesus didn't predict that Satan would be allowed to guide his servants into introducing false doctrines into the Bible. Jesus was saying that there would be false teachers in the church and people falsely claiming to be Christ's followers. This has happened and it continues to happen more and more. It is now working its way right into the middle of the SDA church, and people are even teaching in a few of our congregations that much of the NT cannot be trusted and that Ellen White is a false prophet. Quote: You need to tell me the names of the apostles that called themselves apostles who were tested and found to be false as found in Rev. 2:2. Then tell me what the test they used to do this. (Actually, you don't 'need' to do anything if you don't want to. It's your life. There were many false teachers and people claiming to be "apostles" who we know now were not true apostles. The Gnostics were certainly among that group. Many false doctrines were introduced into the church during the first few centuries, including quite a few that deal with the nature of Christ. The test to be used to determine whether someone is a true apostle is whether they agree with previous, genuine prophets and revelations from God. God does not contradict Himself. "To the law and to the testimony-- if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light [or dawn] in them." See how the Berean believers applied the test: Acts 17: 11. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted June 23, 2009 Moderators Posted June 23, 2009 what that guy said.. I'm "that guy," barboza21. Here's a belated welcome to the forum. I haven't been on very much the last few months. I apologize if I said something you felt was offensive. Let me know what it was. Feel free to say it here or to send a PM any time. :-) Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted June 23, 2009 Moderators Posted June 23, 2009 If the bible does not contain lies from Satan as in the Wheat and the Weeds, then did Jesus lie? The Wheat are true, loyal believers in Christ; the Weeds are those who look or claim to be Wheat but are not. The parable is not telling us that the Word of God is full of Satan's lies. Quote: Who are the wheat today and who are the weeds today? Jesus said that we will know them by their fruits. The Holy Spirit gave us further details when He inspired Paul to write Gal. 5: 16-26 in which he contrasts the fruit of the spirit with the works of the flesh. There are certainly indications of whether people are wheat or fruit, but people change from being in one category to being in the other. This occurs when people experience the new birth, or the birth from above. Yet it is not always easy to know whether people are a Weed or a Wheat. That is why we need to let God do the separating. One way God does this is by allowing false doctrine to enter into the church in order to cause a "shaking." False teachings and persecution or hardship have the effect of shaking the Weeds out of the church. We know some of the characteristics of Weeds and we know how the Bible says we can tell who the Wheat is. We will know the Wheat by their love, for one thing. Not only their love for other Christians but also by their love of the truth. Any time a person attacks the pillars of our faith or attacks the Bible or one of God's prophets, we can be sure that person-- despite his/her claims-- is not inspired by God. Quote: Why do they look alike? The Wheat and the Weeds don't always look alike. Sometimes there is a clear distinction, but we have to realize that we can't judge whether a wheat will change to a weed or whether a weed will change to a wheat. We can't judge hearts and minds but the church certainly has the right and the duty to judge behavior and words. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
jasd Posted June 28, 2009 Posted June 28, 2009 Quote: Quote:barboza21 >>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-- 17things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.<< doesnt this mean you are not to follow the sabbath day?? [ed.jasd] I believe the above addresses more the act of judging another, rather than commenting upon one’s conviction re “the” Sabbath Day. It seems that the good Saint Paul leaves the exegete who insists that a Saturday to Saturday model vis-à-vis an OT Seventh-day Sabbath is still in view – with a “puzzle inside a riddle wrapped in an enigma”. Simply to attach one’s belief system re calendrical doctrines to either the Gregorian or to the current Jewish calendar allows for a keeping of a seven-day cycle – but is not consonant with Gd’s OT calendar. The same may be said of the observance of cycles of sevens re Sunday; the difference being – that those who observe Sunday make no pretension that they derive their doctrine from Holy Writ. Then again, the KJV translates thusly: Col 2:17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body [is] of Christ. or, more literally... Col2:17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body of Christ. That is, let no one judge you except the “body of Christ”, which would have been the then community of believers... (per the raison d’etre of one D Conklin) Quote
jasd Posted June 28, 2009 Posted June 28, 2009 >>We can't judge hearts and minds but the church certainly has the right and the duty to judge behavior and words.<< Regardless one’s definition of “church”, it is expected that any “church” wishing to impose “rights and duties” – ought to have (excessively) more than a modicum of veracity vis-à-vis its doctrines... The above is a general statement. Quote
Ron Amnsn Posted June 28, 2009 Posted June 28, 2009 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-- 17things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ. doesnt this mean you are not to follow the sabbath day?? Barboza, Not letting someone judge you on a matter can work two ways. Most who read this verse assume the first option-- that Paul had taught the Colossians to disregard the festivals, new moons, and Sabbaths and was here telling them that no one had a right to condemn them for disregarding God's Old Testament instructions in those matters. The second option, which is supported by the context of the chapter, is that Paul had taught the Colossians to observe the festivals, new moons, and Sabbaths and was here telling them that no one had the right to condemn them for following Paul's example and continuing to observe God's Old Testament instructions in those matters. If the first option was true, then the context would show that those who were causing trouble in Colossians 2 were teaching from Old Testament Scripture and judging because the Colossians were not living up to Scripture. However, the context shows the opposite. Those who were causing trouble in Colossians 2 were teaching "philosophy and empty deception", "the tradition of men", "elementary principles of the world", rather than according to Christ (verse 8). Their teachings were "in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men" and had only "the appearance of wisdom" based on "self-made religion and self-abasement" and were "of no value against fleshly indulgence." (verses 22-23). Are those phrases in purple above, which Paul used to describe the false teachings in Colossians 2, the same phrases that Paul uses to describe the teachings of Old Testament Scripture? Not at all! Speaking of the Old Testament Scriptures (the New Testament wasn't available yet) Paul wrote, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." (2 Tim 3:16-17 NASB) Do you see the stark contrast between the way Paul describes what the false teachers were teaching in Colossians 2 and the way Paul describes the Old Testament Scriptures? The false teachers in Colossians 2 were not teaching the Law of God from the Old Testament Scriptures. Paul said that the Old Testament was profitable for teaching, reproof, correction and training to equip a man of God. By contrast, Paul said that what what the false teachers were teaching was of "no value". Christ told his followers, "When they bring you before the synagogues and the rulers and the authorities, do not worry about how or what you are to speak in your defense, or what you are to say; for the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say." (Luke 12:11-12 NASB) Paul found himself in that situation in Acts 24:14, where under the influence of the Holy Spirit Paul testified, "I believe everything that agrees with the Law and that is written in the Prophets." (NIV) The "Law and the Prophets" is what the Jews called the Old Testament. The Law and the Prophets teach that God's people will actually observe God's festivals and Sabbaths. Paul agreed with that. The contextual evidence in Colossians 2 indicates that the false teachers in Colossians 2 were probably teaching gnostic asceticism which held that all things physical were "evil" so in order to become spiritual a person had to deprive the body of pleasure and sustenance. The ascetics would have regarded God's festivals and Sabbaths as sensual occasions of gluttony and "evil", and would have judged those who followed the example of Christ in participating in God's appointed feasts. Taken as a whole, Colossians 2 is a powerful discourse against gnostic asceticism. Paul uses words pertaining to the physical (body, food, flesh, substance, etc.) and words pertaining to the spiritual (mystery, spirit, shadow, etc.) to show that Christ was truly physical (yet not "evil") and truly spiritual (while living according to God's Old Testament Law). (Note: What I've said above does not agree completely with the traditional Seventh-day Adventist interpretation of Colossians 2.) Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.