Reasoning from the Scriptures with Seventh-day Adventists

30

Visit The NEW Loud Cry Christian Ministry Website:

www.theloudcry.com

 

Updated March 24, 2014,

The Loud Cry Ministry began January 31, 2000 as a 5 day a week radio broadcast which lasted several years. The Loud Cry website was started in the spring of 2001. Between 2004-2008 The Loud Cry ministry was one of the largest Seventh-day Adventist media websites in the world. We had 2 million monthly visitors from 109+ countries. In May of 2010 I made some discoveries that led me to months of intensive study that ultimately led to my renouncing Seventh-day Adventism, a decision I might add has resulted in my happiest, and most peaceful years as a Christian. Spiritually I truly feel at rest in Christ, and satisfied and grateful for the things I learned.

Below is a picture of what this website looked like from 2004-2008

In January  2011, this ministry was officially renamed The Loud Cry Christian Ministry, and I wrote over 300 articles all of which are available here are thesundaylaw.com and on theloudcry.com. I contacted over 100 Seventh-day Adventist ministers, Professors, media Evangelists and Adventist thought leaders, of which I had the greatest respect and admiration for, for many years. I contacted Doug Bachelor directly using his personal email. I contacted Amazing Facts, 3ABN, and dozens of Adventists top ministries in the United States. I had DOZENS of written dialogs, some of which lasted several weeks.

The result was 90% of my questions went totally unanswered, and instead were redirected to other questions which I in turn gave detailed answers to. I answered all these ministers questions, most of my questions never received replies of any kind, not so much as one line. This astonished me, since Adventists love to prove their point, and answer difficult texts etc. The bottom line is all the men that responded to me, had NO answers for the points I brought up. They totally ignored my points and instead tried using redirection techniques to stifle my points and questions by asking questions on other topics. All of which I replied to. Then even those replies, went unchallenged and unanswered. Soon as these men ran out of redirection questions, and saw that they had nothing from which to answer my points with, they one by one went off into silence, never to be heard form again.

To this day I welcome questions and criticisms regarding my discoveries that I share freely with you here at thesundaylaw.com. I have only one love in regards to these matters, and that is THE TRUTH as it is in Christ Jesus. I love the truth. I have always said that, “my opinion is not worth a hill of beans,” when it comes to spiritual matters. The only thing that matters is what is written in the Bible itself.

Today I can honestly say that I do not feel I have anything to prove. I am at peace with the changes that I made in my beliefs, and I love God, I am a happy person. I do NOT have a chip on my shoulder about the Seventh-day Adventist church in any way what so ever. Adventists live their lives I live mine. I do NOT feel like I am “on a mission” to prove anything to Seventh-day Adventists, that is not why I made this site. I made this website, and wrote these articles for myself. To help myself through my transition out of Adventism.

What is on this website is the result of months of pain staking research in the Bible and history that I made for myself, to find answers to satisfy my own interest. I am simply leaving a record of my work online, for others that may stumble across it and be blessed by it. Beyond that Adventism is in my rear view mirror and I have moved on and am living a happy healthy Adventist free Christian life. Did I mention that I LOVE the Bible, I still cant get enough of it, even though EGW threatened that I would stop reading the Bible entirely and become an infidel if I stopped believing in her writings lol. What a load of non sense. I love the Bible now more than ever, Anyways…

One of my heroes is Martin Luther, in fact he has been for many years. Since renouncing the teachings of the Seventh-day Adventist church in 2010 I have a deeper appreciation and understanding of what it must have been like for Martin Luther when he renounced Roman Catholicism during the 16th century. His former church did not understand him, and condemned his writings.

 

Martin Luther’s reply was:

“Unless therefore I am convinced by the testimony of Scripture, or by the clearest reasoning, unless I am persuaded by means of the passages I have quoted, and unless they thus render my conscience bound by the Word of God, I cannot and will not retract, for it is unsafe for a Christian to speak against his conscience. Here I stand, I can do no other; may God help me! Amen!”

The Loud Cry Ministry offers a defense of
Martin Luther’s doctrine of
“Righteousness by Faith ALONE!”

Thank You, and have a Blessed Day!

David M. Curtis
Director / Speaker of
The Loud Cry Christian Ministry

http://theloudcry.com

http://thesundaylaw.com

Articles You Should Read!!!!

  1. Martin Luther goes “toe to toe” with Ellen White in The Loud Cry Ministries article: Martin Luther -v- Ellen G. White,
  2. Must Read Article: The Ten Commandments in the Old and New Covenants
  3. Must Read Article: Why Sabbath-keeping Is No Longer Necessary Today - If you only read three articles on this website, the PLEASE read these first three!
  4. Must Read Article: The Sabbath in the Book of Acts
  5. Must Read Article: Myths about the Origin of Sunday Worship
  6. Must Read Article: Ellen White’s Sunday “Mark of the Beast” Theory
  7. Must Read Article: Jesus Christ’s High Priestly Work
  8. Must Read Article: October 22, 1844 – Adventists Weakest Link
  9. David M. Curtis explains the 70th week during a live phone call (a must listen) (Located near the bottom of the article!) The 70 Week Prophecy of Daniel 9
  10. Must Read Article: Why I am No Longer a Seventh-Day Adventist - My Journey Out of Adventism By: David M. Curtis Director/Speaker of The Loud Cry Christian Ministry, updated with new pictures and background stories. Find out more about the author of this website.

MARTIN LUTHER’S COMMENTARY ON GALATIANS is a very powerful document. Mainstream Christianity views it as a cornerstone to their faith, whereas Roman Catholics, Mormons, and Seventh-day Adventists will initially view it as heretical. You owe it to yourself, to become acquainted with this commentary for yourself, and see with your own eyes the teachings that were the cornerstone of the Protestant Reformation.

Download > > > MARTIN LUTHER’S COMMENTARY ON GALATIANS

30 Comments

  • mrloudcry says:

    The Ten Commandments were given 430 years after Abraham

    And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. Galatians 3:17

    Exodus 12:40-41 Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years. 41 And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.

    In the giving of the New Covenant, both Jeremiah and Paul stated that the Old Covenant was made “when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt.” Hebrews 8:9; Jeremiah 31:31.

    • letstalk says:

      Hello :-)

      I am puzzled as to what the objections to Adventism actually are. Is my understanding of Adventism incorrect? Here is my understanding:

      Jesus says your faith has saved you, go, and sin no more.

      So we are accounted righteousness and get The Holy Spirit for free without any works, when, just as we are, we come to God in faith believing the gospel, wanting to me saved.

      Now that we have freely received The Holy Spirit by faith, totally independent of any works, Christ then goes about turning us from our sins.

      Is something wrong with this?

      Concerning the Sabbath, I am confuses as to what the problem is…Jesus said the Sabbath was made for man? When was this? The obvious answer is at creation. This makes the Sabbath Gods special family day. Hence when God mixed up the languages at Babel, you have all of these languages still referring to day 7 as the Sabbath rest day. Israel collectively got adopted into Gods family, so, unsurprisingly, God gave them a family talk saying don’t forget about my special family day that I made for man back at creation!

      Is something wrong here?

      • mrloudcry says:

        Hello letstalk,

        Virtually all churches among Christianity speak of grace, faith and salvation and use such universal phrases. When the Mormon missionaries visit your home they will speak in glowing terms about God’s grace, forgiveness of sins and call Jesus as the Son of God. It is not until much later that you discover that these terms have entirely different meaning to them, than it does for most Christians.

        If you were to put a Catholic, a Mormon, a Seventh-day Adventist, and a Baptist into a room together they would all say that they are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ who is the Son of God. However they all believe differently about the fundamentals of what the gospel really is.

        If Adventism was as non-denominational in its doctrine as you portrait it then there would be no controversy. However as we both know, there is much more behind Adventism and its belief system than what you shared.

        Fundamentally Adventists have an entirely different view of Justification by Faith than the Protestant reformers had, which means that the core of the gospel is at stake here.

        When Justification By Faith was first introduced to Adventists in 1888 the concept was so foreign to them that the General Conference of Seventh Day Adventists rejected it. Did you get that? We are talking about the most essential part of salvation here. They were threatened by it, Justification By Faith stood in direct opposition to everything Adventists believed about the Investigative Judgment. That is why the General Conference fiercely stood against it.

        What Evangelicals and Adventists believe about Justification by Faith is diametrically opposite. They are NOT the same gospel, not even close. Evangelicals hold to the same understanding of Justification by Faith as the Protestant Reformers taught.

        You would think that my favorite topic to discuss with Adventists is the Law or the Sabbath or Ellen White. My favorite topic to discuss with Adventists is actually justification by faith. Today I have the best news in the world to share with you.

        The gospel taught by Adventism blinded me against understanding Biblical Justification for many years and held me in bondage to false ideas about the plan of salvation.

        You asked for a reply to what you wrote, so I am sharing with you in as clear as terms as possible, that the issues are much deeper than what you shared, Adventisms gospel first appeared historically in the 1840′s. The protestant reformers such as Martin Luther for example wrote in extremely strong terms against things, that centuries later Adventists would embrace.

        Fortunately hundreds of thousands of Adventists don’t fully understand or fully embrace the brazen alterations to Justification that the Investigative Judgment compelled the Adventist church to adopt.

        This is a very serious matter ‘letstalk’ I hope you will use this site to study more about justification, and the investigative judgment. If all you do is skim through the articles on this site, then YES you will miss a lot. These matters deserve much more attention and effort than mere superficial surface reading.

        As the Bible says, seek with all your heart and you will find! If you want the Pearl of Great Price it takes an all in effort to obtain it!

        If you approach topics as heavy as these with your mind already made up, and with only a superficial effort to check it out, then you won’t get anything out of it!

        I put everything I had for 18 months to search out and find these things in the Bible; Literally studying 40 hours a week or more during all that time. It may take a half hour to read some of the articles on this site, but frankly it is handed to you on a silver platter, compared to what it took to discover these things and prepare them for you in an article form.

        So my advice is look deeper, take this very seriously!

        I am not asking you to agree or take sides, all I am asking is to look at the facts and look at them honestly and make sure whatever you walk away believing, KNOW that you put all of yourself into studying this out for yourself. If all you do is study the matter out from materials prepared by Adventists then it is a no brainer what you will walk away believing. They will NOT share with you the things you will find on this site!

        Good luck with your search for truth, and God Bless!

        Thanks for your comment!

  • mrloudcry says:

    The 10 commandments were NOT given BEFORE Mt. Sinai.

    Deuteronomy 5:2-3 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. 3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.

    Moses just confirmed two things.

    1. The Ten Commandments are the covenant God made with Israel. Immediately following Deuteronomy 5:2-3 the Ten Commandments are repeated.
    2. The covenant of Ten Commandments were not made with Israels forefathers; not the least of which is Abraham, rather it was given 430 years later (Galatians 3:17)

    The Law was ADDED, at Mt. Sinai, and had a definite END when “the seed” Christ came.

    And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise. Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. Galatians 3:17-19

    The Covenant of Mercy given us in Christ (Galatians 3:17; Luke 1:72) replaced the covenant of Law given at Sinai.

    Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar… Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. Galatians 4:24,30-31

  • mrloudcry says:

    The timing of when the Covenant was Ratified Confirms the Ten Commandments are the Old Covenant.

    Hebrews 9:17-20 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. 18 Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. 19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, 20 Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.

    Exodus 24:7-8 And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient. 8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.

    Sabbatarians teach that the covenant was the promise of the Hebrews, “All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient.” 1. The Bible never calls the promise of the Hebrews the Covenant, rather it repeatedly calls the Ten Commandments the Covenant. 2. Moses did NOT write the promise of the Hebrews down and put it in the Ark of the Covenant. The Covenant is based on God’s words, “which MY covenant they brake” Jeremiah 31:32 (v.31-34 is the promise of the New Covenant).

    The Covenant was ratified with blood in Exodus 24:7,8. This was before the rest of Exodus and the books of Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy was added to the “book of the Covenant.” Sabbatarian Christians teach that the only laws that were done away with in the New Testament were those which they call “ceremonial laws.”That argument is refuted when we consider the fact that the covenant that was abolished under the New Testament was ratified with blood before Leviticus was written.

    The only things written in the “Book of the Law,” at the time it was Ratified:

    The captivity and deliverance of the Hebrews Exodus 1-20
    The Ten Commandments Exodus 20:1-17
    Laws for slavery Exodus 21:1-11
    Manslaughter Exodus 21:12-21
    For one hurt by chance Exodus 21:22-36
    Theft Exodus 22:1-15
    Fornication Exodus 22:16-24
    Usury Exodus 22:25-31
    Slander Exodus 23:1-9
    Sabbatical Years Exodus 23:10-19
    Dealing with other nations Exodus 23:20-33

    The Ceremonial Laws connected with the animal sacrifices, the sanctuary and the annual feast days written in Leviticus were not given until after the Old Covenant was ratified in Exodus 24:7,8.

    Which means the ceremonial laws are not the primary thing that was done away with at the Cross. We are no longer under the ceremonial laws, In fact we are no longer under any of the 613 commandments in the Book of the Law, with the exception to those laws which were amended into the new covenant such as loving our neighbor, etc.

    Additional ceremonial laws surrounding animal sacrifices and circumcision were added AFTER the covenant was ratified at Mt. Sinai however:

    1. The Sacrificial System of burnt offerings were introduced in the time of Adam, not Mt. Sinai!

    2. Circumcision was introduced in the time of Abraham, not Mt. Sinai!

    Therefore neither animal sacrifices, nor circumcision were introduced as a newer covenant made at Mt. Sinai! Both were connected to earlier covenants given to Adam and Abraham. The covenant given at Sinai was NOT made with their fathers (Deuteronomy 5:2,3).

    Deuteronomy 5:2-3 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. 3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.

    The first covenant in Paul’s allegory was specifically introduced at Mt. Sinai. (Galatians 4:24-31), 430 years AFTER Abraham (Galatians 3:17), and was added until “the seed came” (Galatians 3:19). This covenant is specifically called “the Law,” and conflicts with “the promises” of the new covenant. (Galatians 3:17, Romans 4:13-16 please look up these verses in your Bible, and compare to Hebrews 8:6, which says the New Covenant is based on “Better Promises;” clearly the Law conflicts with those “Better Promises.”)

  • mrloudcry says:

    The Old Covenant was ratified before God wrote it on Tables of Stone

    The Covenant is Ratified in Exodus 24:7-8

    Moses is invited to go up into the mountain after the covenant is ratified!

    Exodus 24:12 (And the LORD said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will (future tense; fulfilled Exodus 31:18) give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written; that thou mayest teach them.

    Exodus 24:7,8 confirms Moses wrote the Ten Commandments with his own hand with ink before it was written in stone. Paul refers to BOTH the hand written and the stone versions of the Ten Commandments.

    Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart. Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. 2 Corinthians 3:3,6

    The Ten Commandments were written by both the hand of Moses in Exodus 20, Deuteronomy 5 and by the finger of God on tables of stone. (Exodus 24:7,8; Hebrews 9:17-20; Exodus 31:18)

  • mrloudcry says:

    The Ten Commandments were written by both the hand of Moses in Exodus 20, Deuteronomy 5 and by the finger of God on tables of stone.

    Romans 7:2-4
    2 “she is loosed from the law “
    3 “she is free from that law;
    4 “ ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ;”

    Which Law?

    Romans 7:6-7
    6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
    7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

    The law we are “delivered from” contains the commandment, “Thous Shalt Not Covet” i.e. the Ten Commandments. The core of the old covenant is the Ten Commandments. At the time the covenant was ratified the only account of the Ten Commandments in existence was written by the hand of Moses in the “Book of the Covenant.” He took the book of the covenant” and He ” sprinkled both the book, and all the people” Exodus 24:7; Hebrews 9:19.

    The tables of Stone were not written with the finger of God until after the covenant was ratified. The reason this is important to understand is because Sabbatarians dismiss the Ten Commandments and especially the Sabbath from applying to Colossians 2:14-17.

    Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us
    , which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; Colossians 2:14

    The Ten Commandments were first written by the hand of Moses in the “book of the covenant.” The very fact that the Ten commandments are written in Exodus 20 and Dueteronomy 5 is all the evidence we need that Moses did in fact write them with his very own hand. In reference to the handwritten account, Colossians 2:14 says this law was “against us and contrary to us.” In 2 Corinthians 3 Paul explains why. The Ten Commandments was “the ministration of death,” and contained letters which condemn and make us worthy of death. We are no longer under the old covenant ministration of death, rather we are now ministers of the new covenant.

    Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; Not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, 2 Corinthians 3:6,7.

  • mrloudcry says:

    The Ark of the Covenant Confirms the Ten Commandments are the Old Covenant

    Deuteronomy 10:1-5 At that time the LORD said unto me, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first, and come up unto me into the mount, and make thee an ark of wood. 2 And I will write on the tables the words that were in the first tables which thou brakest, and thou shalt put them in the ark. 3 And I made an ark of shittim wood, and hewed two tables of stone like unto the first, and went up into the mount, having the two tables in mine hand. 4 And he wrote on the tables, according to the first writing, the ten commandments, which the LORD spake unto you in the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly: and the LORD gave them unto me. 5 And I turned myself and came down from the mount, and put the tables in the ark which I had made; and there they be, as the LORD commanded me.

    Hebrews 9:4 Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;

    A simple term for the Ark of the Covenant is, “a box to carry the covenant.” That was its entire purpose. Jesus asked, “which is greater the gold or the temple which sanctifies the gold?” A long these same lines, which is more important the box itself or the covenant inside it? Remove the Ten Commandments and all that is left is a fancy box covered in fine gold. The Ark of the Covenant was created to bring emphasize the significance to the covenant which was inside it i.e. The Ten Commandments.

    Moses, after forty days in the mount, comes down And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments. Exodus 34:28

    And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone. Deuteronomy 4:13

  • mrloudcry says:

    We are no longer under the Old Covenant of Ten Commandments

    Hebrews 8:8,9,13
    8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I WILL MAKE A NEW COVENANT with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
    9 NOT ACCORDING TO THE COVENANT THAT I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; BECAUSE THEY CONTINUED NOT IN MY COVENANT, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
    13 IN THAT HE SAITH, A NEW COVENANT, HE HATH MADE THE FIRST OLD. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

    2 Corinthians 3
    v.7 But if THE MINISTRATION OF DEATH, WRITTEN AND ENGRAVEN IN STONES, was glorious,” “WHICH GLORY WAS TO BE DONE AWAY”
    v.9  For IF THE MINISTRATION OF CONDEMNATION.”
    v.11 For IF THAT WHICH IS DONE AWAY WAS GLORIOUS, much more that which remaineth is glorious.
    v.14 “But their minds were blinded “ “the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; WHICH VAIL IS DONE AWAY IN CHRIST.”

    Hebrews 8
    “first covenant replaced with second” v7.
    “a new covenant” v8.
    “not like the Sinai Covenant” v9.
    new covenant, first obsolete, v13.
    “first covenant … had two tables of stone 9:1-4.

    Galatians 4:24-31
    v.24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
    v.25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
    v.30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
    v.31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

  • mrloudcry says:

    THE TEN COMMANDMENTS ARE THE COVENANT GIVEN AT MT. SINAI

    And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon Mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God. Exodus 31:18

    Moses, after forty days in the mount, comes down And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments. Exodus 34:28

    1 Kings 8:9,21:
    v.9 There was nothing in the ark except the two tablets of stone which Moses put there at Horeb, where the Lord made a covenant with the sons of Israel, when they came out of the land of Egypt.”
    v.21 “And there I have set a place for the ark, in which is the covenant of the Lord, which He made with our fathers when He brought them from the land of Egypt.”

    Deuteronomy 9:9: “When I went up to the mountain to receive the tablets of stone, the tablets of the covenant which the Lord had made with you, then I remained on the mountain forty days and nights; I neither ate bread nor drank water.

    Deuteronomy 5:2-3: “The Lord our God made a covenant with us at Horeb. The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, with all those of us alive here today.” (Ten Commandments are given in Deuteronomy 5)

    The tables are part of the abolished first covenant
    : Heb 8:13 When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. “Now even the first covenant had … the TABLES OF THE COVENANT.” Heb 9:1-4

    Deuteronomy 4:13: “So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, that is, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone.

  • mrloudcry says:

    Romans 7:2-7 says we are “LOOSED from the law“ “FREE FROM THAT LAW” “BECOME DEAD TO THE LAW” “DELIVERED FROM THE LAW” and identifies the law THOU SHALT NOT COVET.

    The direct context to the law we are loosed from freed from, become dead to, and delivered from is the law thou shalt not covet.

    Sabbatarians, ignore the context and jump to v.23 which mentions the law of sin that was in Paul’s members.

    Overview of Romans 7:

    Romans 7:2-4
    2 “she is loosed from the law “
    3 “she is free from that law;
    4 “ ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ;”

    Which Law?

    Romans 7:6-7
    6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
    7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

    The law we are “delivered from” contains the commandment, “Thous Shalt Not Covet” i.e. the Ten Commandments. (Clearly the law in question by Paul is the Ten Commandments.)

    v.9 “when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.”

    v.10 “the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.” (“THE MINISTRATION OF DEATH, WRITTEN AND ENGRAVEN IN STONES” 2 Cor 3:7)

    v.12 Paul Confesses “the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.” and that he is a v.24. “wretched man”

    Paul wanted to obey the law in his mind, but because he was a sinful “wretched man” he could not. v.25 “So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.”

    v.14 “the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.”

    v.15 “for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.”

    Paul had repented of his sins, in that he did not want to do them, but he confessed that he still wrestled with the sin of lust he mentioned earlier.

    v.16 “If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.” (Paul lived an single life of a bachelor, and condemned fornication as a sin which would bar us from heaven (1 Cor 6:9,10), therefore what he is referring to wrestling with in Romans 7 is not the actual act, but “the law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.” v.23.

    v. 17 “Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.”

    v.18 “for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.”

    v.19 “the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.”

    v.20 “if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.”

    v.21 “when I would do good, evil is present with me.”

    Like the psalmist Paul said, “I delight in the law of God after the inward man.” v.22 but just like the psalmist he wrestled with sinful desires his entire life.

    v.23 “I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.”

    v.24 “O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?” Paul taught that we would not be delivered from the body and made incorruptible until “the last trump!” 1 Corinthians 15:51-57.

    v.25 “I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.” In his mind he had totally repented of his sins, but Paul was still a “wretched man” and “corruptible” and would not put on “incorruption until the last trump.”

    Paul did not “mind the things of the flesh” because in his mind he delighted in the law, he delighted in that which was spiritual, but recognized that in him was no good thing, and that is why we needed the gospel. There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus Romans 8:1

  • mrloudcry says:

    Since only perfect obedience to the Law would stand up against the Judgment, Jesus fulfilled the law on our behalf, “that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us” Romans 8:4 We are made righteous by faith alone, in the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ and faith in his death on behalf of our sins. Therefore we are no longer JUDICIALLY under the law, but are under grace. We are made righteous before God by faith alone, not by the works of the law.

    1. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them. (Compare to Galatians 3:12) Romans 10:4-5

    2. 2 “she is loosed from the law

    3. 3 “she is free from that law;

    4. 4 “ ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ;”

    5. 6 “But now we are delivered from the law” and “serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.” see #7

    6 “I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.” Romans 7:2-7 Clearly the law in question by Paul is the Ten Commandments.

    7 2 Corinthians 3:3,6

    Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart. Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

    8. Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. Romans 3:20

    9. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. Romans 3:27-28

    10. For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression. Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all, Romans 4:13-16

    11. For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. (Compare to Galatians 3:23, 5:18) Romans 6:14

    12. But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone; Romans 9:31-32

    13. Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. Galatians 2:16

    14. For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. Galatians 2:19

    15. I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain. Galatians 2:21

    16. This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Galatians 3:2

    17. He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Galatians 3:5

    18. For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. Galatians 3:10

    19. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. Galatians 3:11

    20. And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. Galatians 3:12

    21. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: Galatians 3:13

    22. And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise. Galatians 3:17-18

    23. THE LAW WAS “ADDED” UNTIL CHRIST CAME

    Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. Galatians 3:19

    24. Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. Galatians 3:21

    25. But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. Galatians 3:23-24

    26. Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; Ephesians 2:15

    CHRIST WAS CIRCUMCISED, AND KEPT THE SABBATH AND OTHER FEAST DAYS BECAUSE HE WAS BORN UNDER THE LAW PAUL MAINTAINS THAT JESUS FULFILLED THE LAW SO THAT HE COULD FREE US FROM THE LAW

    27. But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. Galatians 4:4-5

    DESPITE PAUL’S PLAIN TEACHING ABOUT THE LAW, THERE REMAINS THOSE WHO STILL DESIRE TO OBEY IT. To these Paul asks,

    28. Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? Galatians 4:21

    29. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Galatians 5:3

    THOSE WHO TEACH OBEDIENCE TO THE LAW DO NOT OBEY IT THEMSELVES

    30. For neither they themselves who are circumcised keep the law; but desire to have you circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh. Galatians 6:13

    31. But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. Galatians 5:18

    OBEYING THE CONDITIONS OF THE OLD COVENANT NULLIFIES THE NEW

    32. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. Galatians 5:4

  • mrloudcry says:

    In the book of James, we find the apostle describing the “Royal Law” and the “Law of Liberty” these are the SAME law. James 2:8 specifically tells us the “Royal Law” is, “Love thy neighbor as thyself.”

    If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: James 2:8

    1 Corinthians 3 speaks of the two laws, and describes the tables of stone as a “ministration of death” with letters that kill. v. 6,7. The law written in the heart (not stone) brings “Liberty!” v.3, 17. Galatians 4:21-31 says the covenant made at Sinai is brings bondage, not liberty! Love is the “Law of Liberty”

    James message was if we love our neighbor we will not merely say so, but will do something to show our love. If we love our neighbor we will not show partiality, we will give food to the hungry, clothes to the desolate, and visit the fatherless and the widow. If we love our neighbor we will not hold grudges or resentfulness, but will forgive and be tenderhearted. The Royal Law according to James was to love our neighbor.

    This is exactly what the Good Samaritan did.

    The Ten Commandments do not teach us to be Good Samaritans or to love our enemies. The Jews despised the Samaritans, so the Good Samaritan did in fact love his enemy when he cared for the Jew who was attacked on the road by robbers. The Good Samaritan is more than a story about doing charitable deeds, it represents the two covenants!

    The Good Samaritan: Represents those who do not have the law, but have the law of love in their hearts.

    The Levite and the Pharisee: Represents those who lived under the law, but did not love one another.

    Which of the Ten Commandments motivated the heart of the Good Samaritan? The Ten Commandments were a law of DO NOT’s! Love not only teaches us to refrain from the DO NOTS! Love gives us the Do’s that the Ten Commandments “do not!” Love teaches us to be kind, gentle, long-suffering, patient, merciful, and forgiving. The Good Samaritan demonstrates love is greater than keeping the law the Levites and Pharisees observed. They kept the law, but did not love their neighbor.

    Love is truly the GREAT COMMANDMENT. Not only did it teach us not to lie, or steal, Love teaches us what the Ten Commandments did not. Love teaches us to be forgiving, merciful, long-suffering, patient, and compassionate; and to have empathy, to give food to the hungry, clothing to the desolate, and shelter to the fatherless and widow. Love teaches us to do no harm to our neighbor.

    The New Covenant law to Love, is superior when compared to the Old Covenant Ten Commandment law. Not only does love teach us to refrain from adultery, it teaches us not to lust. Not only does love teach us not to murder, Love teaches us not to be angry with another without a cause, or to hate. Love not only teaches us not to covet, Love teaches us to esteem the needs of others as greater than our own Philippians 2:2-4.

  • mrloudcry says:

    Q. Why then has the Papacy changed the 10 Commandments totally?

    A. Christians were assembling on Sundays CENTURIES before either the church or the Bishop of Rome rose to power or influence. Prominent Adventist Historian Samuele Bacchiochi acknowedges that Sunday observance was universal by 140 AD. Christian in Rome where in Catacombs and had no influence elsewhere at this time.

    Catholics claim a great many things which are not true. This is a prime example! The Catholic’s boast changing the sabbath at the Council of Laodicea in 336 AD. When in fact the Pope was not at this council. History gives undeniable proofs that he was not even represented at this council. What actually occurred, was a council of churches from the EASTERN Roman empire gathered, and recognized something that was already universally pracitced for 200 years! Rome had nothing to do with this whatsoever! Rome simply took the credit centuries later.

    “The Holy Catholic Church began with the apostles. St. Peter was the first Pope. Hence, when they say that the Church changed the Sabbath, they mean that it was done by the Church in the days of the apostles. NEITHER THE CHURCH NOR THE POPE, TWO OR THREE HUNDRED YEARS AFTER THE APOSTLES, HAD ANYTHING WHATEVER TO DO WITH CHANGING THE SABBATH, FOR THE CHANGE HAD BEEN MADE AGES BEFORE. Catholics do not call the first day of the week the Sabbath, for that was Saturday; but they call it Sunday, or the Lord’s Day.” Rev. James C. Pulcher, Pastor of St. James’ Church, Grand Rapids, Mich.

    There was not a pope until 200 years later (533 A.D.) A decree was made in 440 A.D. concerning the Bishop in Rome as a universal father of the church but this was not recognized universally until given backing by Justinian in 533 A.D.

    THAT MEANS SUNDAY ASSEMBLIES AMONGST CHRISTIANS WAS IN PRACTICE FOR CENTURIES BEFORE THERE WAS A POPE!

  • mrloudcry says:

    Q. What Law is Isaiah talking about? Isaiah 8:20

    A. The same thing Jesus was talking about in Matthew 5:17-19. “THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS!” This was a reference to the Writings of the Prophets, especially Moses also known as the TORAH. The TORAH contained 613 commandments. Every jot and tittle of those 613 commandments were binding up until Christ fulfilled them. That is why Christ could command a leper to perform an animal sacrifice, and then later after the cross, we find that this commandment is no longer binding.

    During the Old Covenant God’s people were obligated to the LAW of MOSES and the TESTIMONY of the PROPHETS. Under the NEW COVENANT Christians are obligated to the LAW of CHRIST and the TESTIMONY of the APOSTLES. Christians are no longer obligated to the covenant given at Mt. Sinai (SEE Galatians 4:21-31).

    Q. What commandments is Jesus talking about in the New Testament?

    A. The Great Commission gives us our answer, which is HIS commandments. We are to both go into all the world teaching men to obey his teachings, as well as seek to follow them ourselves.

    Christ defines HIS commandments for us.

    This is MY commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. John 15:12

    Q. 1 John 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

    A. And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment. 1 John 3:23

    Q. Without Jesus, there would be no “Old Testament” – as He refers to the OT numerous times in the NT.

    A. Galatians 4:4-5 But when the fulness of the time was come, GOD SENT FORTH HIS SON, MADE OF A WOMAN, MADE UNDER THE LAW, 5 TO REDEEM THEM THAT WERE UNDER THE LAW, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

    Christians are no longer under the law given under the Old Covenant.

    Q. Does God require a “perfect people” before Jesus returns to take them to His Kingdom? Matthew 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

    A. Everything leading up this this statement has to do with LOVE! Love does not hate, Love does not lust. Love goes the extra mile and of course LOVES HIS ENEMY! This is kind of love is the context to our call to be perfect. Perfect love casts out all fear.

    Matthew 5 uses the law of contrast to help differentiate between what the OLD COVENANT required and the Law of Christ given under the NEW COVENANT.

    The Old Covenant was eye for an eye, and a list of do nots, the NEW COVENANT on the other hand is self denying, and caring towards others. Christians DO go the extra mile, and DO love their neighbors, and DO turn the other cheek. The law of Christ is not merely a list of do nots!

  • mrloudcry says:

    “I differ from Ellen White, for example, on the origin of Sunday. She teaches that in the first centuries all Christians observed the Sabbath and it was largely through the efforts of Constantine that Sundaykeeping was adopted by many Christians in the fourth century. My research shows otherwise. If you read my essay HOW DID SUNDAYKEEPING BEGIN? which summarizes my dissertation, you will notice that I place the origin of Sundaykeeping by the time of the Emperor Hadrian, in A. D. 135.” – Dr. Samuele Bacchiochi

    The Catholic church had nothing to do with Christians assembling on Sunday during the first through third centuries. Christians assembled on the first day of the week long before there was universally recognized Pope in Rome. History records Christians assembling together on Sunday during the first and second centuries, so how could the Bishop of Rome orchestrate a change to Sunday since there was no Bishop in Rome until late in the third century?

    A council of pastors from all over the Eastern Roman empire assembled in Laodicea in 336 A.D. At this meeting the Christian church officially recognized what was already in practice for centuries. The Catholic catechism makes reference to this in its boast of the change. History gives undeniable proofs that THE BISHOP OF ROME WAS NOT AT THIS COUNCIL, IN FACT HE WAS NOT REPRESENTED AT THIS COUNCIL BY ANYONE. There was not a pope until 200 years later (533 A.D.)

    How did the Roman Christians influence the world to assemble on Sunday from the first centuries? During the first centuries of Christianity the Christians in Rome were hiding in catacombs, they had no universal influence whatsoever. Catholics claim to have roots directly to Peter, therefore it is based on that assumption ALONE, that Catholics claim the responsibility for Christians assembling on Sundays at such an early date, when they had no political nor universal influence.

    The Roman Catholic Church makes all the following boastful claims:

    1. The Roman Catholic Church is the only true Church.
    2. St. Peter was the first Pope of the Holy Catholic Church.
    3. The present Pope of Rome is the lineal divinely appointed successor of St. Peter.
    4. The Pope of Rome is the Vicar of Jesus Christ upon earth.
    5. The Pope is infallible.
    6. The Pope holds the keys to heaven.
    7. All, including Adventists, outside of the Catholic Church are heretics.
    8. Protestants are indebted to Catholics for the Holy Scriptures as it is given to them.
    9. Catholic priests have authority to forgive sins.
    10. The Roman Catholic Church changed the Sabbath from the seventh day to Sunday, the first day.

    The Catholic Church strongly claims all these ten items. What do Seventh-Day Adventists say to these assertions? They quickly deny all the first nine, say they are all lies, without any foundation in fact. But when you come to the tenth one, the change of the Sabbath, then Adventists fall over each other to accept every word of this as the infallible truth. It settles the question beyond dispute. “The Catholic Church just owns it right up” that it did really do the job!!

    To illustrate: Adventists bring their chief witness into court. But when he is sworn they acknowledge that nine-tenths of his testimony is a lie, is perjury, but one-tenth of what he swears to is true. On this they claim they have won their case! Selah!

    Any judge would quickly throw out of court such testimony as worthless, yet this is the witness, and the only witness, Adventists can produce saying that the Roman Church changed the Sabbath. See any of their publications on this point.

    When in fact Sunday was in practice before the church in Rome had left the Catacombs!

  • mrloudcry says:

    A fact not well known among Adventists is that Constantine’s infamous Sunday law was in fact Rome’s ATTEMPT TO INTRODUCE THE 7 DAY WEEKLY CYCLE AMONG THE ROMANS.

    Weekly observance among the Greeks and Roman pagan’s was impossible because they did not observe a 7 day week until 40 years after Constantine’s death.

    The “Standard Dictionary,” Article “Week,” says: “It was not, introduced into the Roman calendar till after the reign of Theodosius in the fourth century.”

    The “Universal Dictionary of the English Language,” Article “Week,” says: “During the early centuries of their history the Greeks and Romans had not the institution of the week.”

    Webster’s Dictionary, Article “Week,” says:
    “The week did not enter into the calendar of the Greeks, and was not introduced at Rome till after the reign of Theodosius.” Constantine had been dead over forty years before Theodosius began to reign. So at the time when Constantine issued his Sunday law, A.D. 321, his pagan subjects did not use the week of seven days, hence, could not have, kept the first day of our week till taught it by Christians and required by Constantine’s law.”

    Schaff, in his “Church History,” says: “The pagan Romans paid no more regard to the Christian Sunday than to the Jewish Sabbath.”

    The “Encyclopedia Americana,” Article “Week,” says: “The Romans and Greeks each divided the months into periods, and were not acquainted with the week till a late period. The Romans had, however, for civil uses, as the arrangement of market days, a cycle of eight days, the ninth being the recurring one, instead of the eighth as with us.” ” Ibid.

    According to the following sources PAGANS DID NOT WORSHIP EVERY SUNDAY! That is a total myth!

    • Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities, British Museum, London, England
    • Smithsonian Institute, Washington, D.C.
    • Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.,
    • University of Wisconsin
    • University of Chicago
    • Michigan State University
    • Rochester Theological Seminary

    Letter from Smithsonian Institute, Washington, D.C.

    Dear Sir:

    I have referred your letter of September 14th to Dr. I. M. Casonawicz, Assistant Curator of Old World Archeology, who furnishes the following replies to your several inquiries:

    1. Did the pagan Romans and Greeks ever have any regular weekly day of rest from secular work? Answer No.
    2. Did they ever have any weekly festival day? Answer No.
    3. Did they have any regular weekly day when they assembled for pagan worship? Answer No.
    4. When was our calendar of the week first introduced among the Romans and Greeks? Answer The division of the month into weeks was introduced into Rome from Egypt. The date is uncertain, but it was not earlier than the second century, A.D.
    5. When was our calendar of the week first recognized in Roman law? Answer The earliest Sunday legislation was enacted under Constantine I, 321 A.D. No legislation of earlier date on the division of the month is known.
    6. As each day of the week was dedicated to some god, as Sunday to the Sun, Monday to the Moon, Saturday to Saturn, etc., Was each of these supposed deities worshipped on one particular day more than any other day? Answer No.
    7. Did the pagan Romans have any one special day in the week when individuals, if they chose, went to make prayers or offerings to their gods? Answer No.
    8. Did Apollo have any special day in the week or month more than any other day when he was worshiped with prayers or offerings? Answer No.

    Very truly yours,

  • mrloudcry says:

    Why do Christians keep 9 out of 10?

    That is the same as asking WHY DON’T CANADIANS FOLLOW THEIR OLD 1867 CONSTITUTION?

    On 17 April 1982, Canada abolished its founding 1867 AD constitution and replaced it with a new code of law. Story: A man got fired from his job because his skin was black. He took his employer to court and quoted the 1867 constitution in the trial. The judge said, “The laws you are quoting are abolished. You will win your case, but you are using a an old constitutional law that has been abolished. Go home and base your arguments on the new 1981 constitution otherwise you will lose the case, because the old law is no longer in force. In fact the wording and meaning of the law is virtually identical from the Old and New Constitution. But you must argue your case under the law that is currently in force, not the law that that is abolished.

    Both the old 1867 and New 1982 Constitutions of Canada prohibited stealing and murder etc. This man in our story could have won his case under either Constitution. However only the new Constitution was legally binding.

    Let me give you another example.

    When a Canadian crosses into the USA he is still prohibited from stealing and murder. Not because of the laws of Canada, but because of the laws of the United States. If he murdered someone in the USA he would be tried by the laws of the United States.

    ALL TEN COMMANDMENTS ARE ABOLISHED, not just the fourth! However many of their principals have been AMMENDED into the New Covenant. Lying, Stealing, Adultery etc are still wrong, not because of the law given at Sinai, but because of the Law of Christ!

    Just because the USA and Canada have similar laws, in fact identical laws in some respects does not make them the same law. In the same way, just because the Old and New Covenant have similar laws does not mean we are still under the Old Covenant law.

  • mrloudcry says:

    It is a wrong assumption to think that God only commanded 10 things in all the Bible! And to further assume that every time the word commandment is used it applies to the 10 commandments! There are countless examples of the word “commandments” in the Old Testament applying to what Adventist consider the “ceremonial law.” Almost as many examples as the words Statutes and Ordinances applying to the Ten Commandments.

    God gave more commandments through Paul than He did through Moses! Twice as many in fact!

    1 Corinthians 14:37
    If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that THE THINGS THAT I WRITE UNTO YOU ARE THE COMMANDMENTS OF THE LORD.

    Would you acknowledge that when a Christian obeys the teachings of Paul, that he is in fact obeying the commandments of the Lord?

  • mrloudcry says:

    The Book of James

    The ROYAL LAW is Love they neighbor See James 2:8.

    If I love my neighbor according to James I will not respect a rich man more than a poor person. I will visit the fatherless and the widow, I will give clothes to the desolate and food to the hungry. The entire point of James Book is if I truly love others, I will take action and not merely use words.

    Jesus taught this same thing in one of his parables. A certain tree had not produced fruit. Christ said let it alone another year and if it still does not produce fruit cut it down. A person can say, “I am a good tree” all he wants to, but if he does not produce fruit, his words mean nothing!

    The Ten Commandments were a list of DO NOT’s!

    The Law of Christ not only prohibits a person from lying and stealing and murder it is much more than that!

    The Law of Christ teaches us how to be Good Samaritans! To love our enemies, just like the Good Samaritan did.

    The Ten Commandments taught nothing about mercy, longsuffering, and compassion. They never commanded forgiveness!

    The Law of Christ not only prohibits lying and stealing and murder, it does what the Ten Commandments never could! The Law of Christ written in our hearts teaches us to forgive. Love has that power. Love is forgiving, and compassionate, and longsuffering. Love is what moved the good Samaritan. Which of the Ten Commandments do you think moved him. All they said was DO NOT! Love taught the Good Samaritan to DO SOMETHING, that the Ten Commandments DO NOT!

    You referred to James 2:10. This is the same thing Paul said else where. IN both Romans and Galatians we are told that anything less than perfect obedience to the law results in being under its curse. Paul concludes, THEREFORE NO FLESH SHALL BE JUSTIFIED BY THE WORKS OF THE LAW!

    James statement is immersed with examples of what true love does when faced with a decision. Love takes action! The Covenant at Mt Sinai produces BONDAGE (see Galatians 4:21-31) Whereas the Law of Christ produces LIBERTY! See 2 Corinthians 3:17. Just a few verses earlier in 2 Corinthians 3:7 we are told the law ” written and engraven in stone” was a “ministration of death!” It was “glorious” but its “glory has passed away.” We are no longer under the ministration of death written and engraven in stone. We are under the law of liberty.

    James 2:8 SPECIFICALLY tells us the ROYAL LAW is LOVE THY NEIGHBOR!

    James is admonishing us to LOVE OUR NEIGHBOR IN ALL THINGS, and contrasts that by stating that if we fail in one point we really do not love others the way we think we do. That is the point in James 2:10. It is important to see the BIG PICTURE of James in order to understand the smaller details.

  • mrloudcry says:

    Sabbatarians teach that the Sabbath is eternal because God “hallowed” or “blessed” it.

    But the Levitical priesthood: 2 Chron 35:3; Tabernacle: Ex 29:30-31; Ark of Covenant: 2 Chro 35:3; Passover: Ex 12:14-17; Day of atonement: Lev 23:27-32 were also “hallowed”, yet Adventists agree they are abolished.

    Actual Sabbatarian argument: “God blessed, hallowed and made holy the Sabbath day therefore we must still keep it!” and “Once God blesses something, it will be blessed forever”
    Sabbatarian argument refuted:

    A. If the Sabbath day must be kept because God blessed, hallowed and made it holy then we must keep these things too:

    vessels: Ex 40:9; Num 31:6; 1 Ki 8:4
    Water: Num 5:17
    Solomon’s temple: Ps 65:4; 1 Ki 9:3
    The Aaronic high priestly order: Ex 29:21
    The Levitical priesthood: 2 Chron 35:3
    The firstborn: Num 3:13
    The most holy place of the tabernacle: Ex 29:30-31
    the ark: 2 Chro 35:3
    mountain: Isa 11:9
    ground: Ex 3:5
    garments: Ex 28:2
    crown: Ex 29:6
    flesh of the ram: Ex 29:31-33
    ointment: Ex 30:25
    Fruit: Lev 19:23
    tithes: Lev 27:30
    Jerusalem: Neh 11:1
    Sabbath day: Ex 20:11

    B. The sabbath is not the only holy day in the Old Covenant:

    1st day of the 7th month: Lev 23:23-25; Neh 8:1,9,11
    14th & 21st day of the 1st month: Ex 12:1,6,16
    Passover: Ex 12:14-17; Lev 23:16,23
    Sabbath day: Ex 20:11
    Day of atonement: Lev 23:27-32
    15th day of the 7th month: Lev 23:34-38

    C. The holiest things were not the Sabbath!

    The most holy place: Ex 26:33
    Most holy Altar: Ex 29:37
    most holy atonement: Ex 30:10
    most holy articles: Ex 30:26-29
    most holy mixture: Ex 30:34-36
    most holy remnant of meat offering: Lev 2:3
    most holy offerings: Lev 7:17
    most holy house: 2 Chron 3:8,10

  • mrloudcry says:

    Seventh-day Adventists argue that since the Sabbath day is called “Holy” therefore Christians must keep it.

    Sabbatarian proof text: For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. Ex 20:11

    Yet all of the Jewish Holy Days were called “holy”!!! Like Passover: Ex 12:14-17 According to Adventist logic, they should be practicing all the Jewish holy days. (Gal 4:10 condemns the keeping of Jewish holy days!)

    “Ye Observe Days, Months, and Times, and Years”
    “I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.” Galatians 4:10-11

    Days = Weekly Sabbath
    Months = Monthly New Moons
    Times = Annual Feast Days
    Years = 7th year Sabbatical Rest of the Land, and Jubilee years

    A. The Sabbath day differed in no way from other Jewish holy days. The Sabbath is not the only “holy day” in the Old Covenant. All of these days are described as HOLY:

    Passover: Ex 12:14-17; Lev 23:16,23
    1st day of the 7th month: Lev 23:23-25; Neh 8:1,9,11
    14th & 21st day of the 1st month: Ex 12:1,6,16
    15th day of the 7th month: Lev 23:34-38
    Sabbath day: Ex 20:11

    NOTE: Lev 23 The Weekly Sabbath is lumped in with all the yearly Sabbaths without distinction and they are all called “The Lord’s appointed times” and “holy convocations”.

    B. The same arguments used for the continuance of the Sabbath can be made of the Passover feast. Do Seventh-day Adventists keep the Jewish Passover?

    NOTE: Incredibly, when some Sabbatarians, like the Herbert W. Armstrong splinter groups, are presented with this chart, they chose to slide deeper down the pit into Judaizing! Rather than giving up the weekly Sabbath, they started keeping all the Jewish holy day which were abolished in Col 2:14-16 and condemned in Gal 4:10! This is precisely what Adventist Professor of Andrews University, Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi advocates in his book from Sabbath to Sunday. As a scholar of both history and scripture with a doctorate degree Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi could not dismiss the weekly Sabbath from Colossians 2:16, and as a result he concluded that Christians were to observe all the things listed in that verse, in order to keep the Sabbath, including Feast Days, and New Moons etc.

    Both the Sabbath and the Passover share these qualities:

    Both Spoken by the Lord: Ex 12:1,3
    Both were “It was the Lord’s” : Ex 12:11
    Both a memorial: Ex 12:14
    Both to be kept forever, eternally : Ex 12:14
    Death penalty/cut off for violation of both : Ex 12:12-13,15
    Both a “Holy” day: Ex 12:16
    Both “holy convocations” Lev 23:1-7:
    Both “rest days”: Ex 12:16
    Both “connected with deliverance from Egypt” : Ex 12:17
    Strangers must keep it with both : Ex 12:19

  • mrloudcry says:

    The 7th Day Sabbath is one of the Feast Days the Hebrews were commanded to observe under the Old Covenant.

    Leviticus 23:2-4 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, CONCERNING THE FEASTS OF THE LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, even these are my feasts. 3 Six days shall work be done: but the seventh day is the sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work therein: it is the sabbath of the LORD in all your dwellings. 4 THESE ARE THE FEASTS OF THE LORD, even holy convocations, which ye shall proclaim in their seasons.

    Colossians 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

    Colossians 2:16 (New Century Version)
    So do not let anyone make rules for you about eating and drinking or about a religious feast, a New Moon Festival, or a Sabbath day.

    Leviticus 23 is the chapter that defines each item listed in Colossians 2:16 including them all as “THE FEASTS OF THE LORD”

    *** COLOSSIANS 2:14-21 SEEING THE BIG PICTURE ***

    v.14 Ordinances Abolished
    v.16 The Sabbath is Included in the List
    v.18 Don’t let anyone rob you of your reward
    v.20 Why are you keeping these ordinances?

    Everything surrounding v.16 is immersed in the negative. That is its contextual setting. Those who advocate that v.16 is a positive endorsement to keep all the feast days ignore this fact. Adventist in general do NOT endorse keeping the feast days, and do in fact recognize that v.16 is a negative statement against keeping the Feast Days. However Adventist deny that “the Sabbath” v.16 is the weekly Sabbath; dismissing it by interpreting this reference as belonging to the annual feast days.

    NOTE: The Annual Feast Days Were Already Referenced! Adventist believe v.16 references the ANNUAL, the MONTHLY, and then the ANNUAL feast days again. Please do not miss this important point. In nearly two dozen other occurrences whenever the New Moons and the Sabbath are grouped together the Bible ALWAYS references the ANNUAL, the MONTHLY and the WEEKLY together. There is no example among all the dozens one could cite that follows the pattern Adventist use to interpret v.16.

  • mrloudcry says:

    Sabbatarians reference Isaiah 66:22,23 as a proof text the Sabbath is to be kept now and forever!

    An oversight to this argument is that these verses not only mention the Sabbath, but also the NEW MOONS! Adventists use this verse to advocate Sabbath keeping, and at the very same time contradict their own testimony by ignoring the NEW MOONS. Adventists believe the New Moons have been abolished and will in fact reference Colossians 2:16 as a proof to that fact, while at the same time they will use Isaiah 66:22,23 to defend the Sabbath while they completely ignore that this verse also says from “ONE NEW MOON TO ANOTHER!”

    Revelation 21:23
    And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

    This is also one of the traditions of the ancient Jews, that “in the world to come the Israelites shall have no need of the sun by day, nor the moon by night.”—Yalcut Rubeni, fol. 7, 3. A Commentary and Critical Notes.

    Isaiah 60:19-20
    19 The sun shall be no more thy light by day; neither for brightness shall the moon give light unto thee: but the LORD shall be unto thee an everlasting light, and thy God thy glory.
    20 Thy sun shall no more go down; neither shall thy moon withdraw itself: for the LORD shall be thine everlasting light, and the days of thy mourning shall be ended.

    JOHN WESLEY COMMENTARY. And, etc. – Christians are not bound to keep the Jewish sabbaths or new- moons. But New Testament worship is expressed by Old Testament phrases. The Jews were only obliged to appear three times in a year at Jerusalem, but (saith the prophet) the gospel church shall worship God from one sabbath to another.

    The idea conveyed is that in heaven we will worship God every week and every month, and not merely three times a year!

    Isaiah66:21 speaks of the Levitical Priesthood which was abolished at the Cross. According to the Book of Hebrews The Priesthood changed, and Christ was made after the order of Melchizedek, not Levi!

    If someone attempts to use Isaiah 66:21-23 to prove that we are still under the Levitical Priesthood, and obligated the keep New Moons and Sabbaths, contradict plan statements made in the New Testament!

    The book of Isaiah is immersed with Hebrew phrases in its prophecies. All of which require a thorough understanding of their local culture and background to understand their New Testament Application.

    The New Testament tells us explicitly that there will be NO MOONS in the New Heavens and the New Earth, making a literal “from one new moon to another” experience impossible. The Writings of Paul plainly state that Christians are no longer to keep the New Moons. The point being, is that we need to look at these Old Testament Prophecies through NEW TESTAMENT eyes, and not the reverse.

  • mrloudcry says:

    Ezekiel 20

    The whole chapter charges Israel with breaking the 2nd and 4th Commandments: Idol worship and breaking the Sabbath, and calls them “My statutes and My ordinances” 7 different times! The chapter contains no “ceremonial laws”, and never uses the terms “feasts, festivals, holy days”. Neither the word, “law” or “commandment” are found in the section. The 2nd and 4th commandment (the weekly Sabbath) are the only sins discussed!

    Ezek 20 calls the second and fourth commandment, My statutes and My ordinances:
    • 100% of the context deals with the Second and fourth commandments. There are only two sins discussed, Idol worship and breaking the weekly Sabbath!
    • There are no “ceremonial laws” in the section even hinted at.
    • Neither the word, “law” or “commandment” are found in the section.
    • The words, “feast, festivals, holy days” etc are not found in the section.
    • The 2nd and 4th commandment (the weekly Sabbath) are called “My statutes and My ordinances”.

    Ezek 20 calls the 10 commandments, “My statutes and My ordinances”
    • do not defile yourselves with the idols of Egypt; I am the Lord your God.’ V7
    But they rebelled against Me … nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt. V8
    • I gave them My statutes and informed them of My ordinances, by which, if a man observes them, he will live. V11
    I gave them My sabbaths to be a sign between Me and them v12
    Israel rebelled … they did not walk in My statutes and they rejected My ordinances, by which, if a man observes them, he will live; and My sabbaths they greatly profaned. V13
    • because they rejected My ordinances, and as for My statutes, they did not walk in them; they even profaned My sabbaths, for their heart continually went after their idols. V16
    I am the Lord your God; walk in My statutes and keep My ordinances and observe them. V19
    Sanctify My sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between Me and you, that you may know that I am the Lord your God.’ V20
    did not walk in My statutes, nor were they careful to observe My ordinances, by which, if a man observes them, he will live; they profaned My sabbaths. V21

    because they had not observed My ordinances, but had rejected My statutes and had profaned My sabbaths, and their eyes were on the idols of their fathers. V24
    I also gave them statutes and ordinances v25
    As for you, O house of Israel,” thus says the Lord God, “Go, serve everyone his idols; but later you will surely listen to Me, and My holy name you will profane no longer with your gifts and with your idols. V39

    *** COLOSSIANS 2:14-21 SEEING THE BIG PICTURE A SECOND TIME ***

    v.14 Ordinances Abolished
    v.16 The Sabbath is Included in the List
    v.18 Don’t let anyone rob you of your reward
    v.20 Why are you keeping these ordinances?

    • Every time a Sabbatarian sees the expression “Statutes, Ordinances and Decrees”, they automatically exclude the 10 commandments and apply it only to what they falsely call, “the ceremonial law” Yet here are many passages where these common expressions refer to the 10 commandments exclusively: (or at least in part include)

    Deut 5:1 The Ten commandments are called “My statures and all My ordinances”
    Ezekiel 20:19-21 The weekly Sabbath is called “My statures and all My ordinances”
    Mal 4:4 Book closes with a call to keep “statutes and ordinances” which obviously include the 10 commandments because it would be unthinkable for such a doxology to leave them out completely!
    Neh 9:13-14 the weekly Sabbath is included without distinction: “right judgments, true laws, good statutes, commandments”
    Lev 19:1-37 The Ten commandments and the ceremonial law are mixed together without distinction and called “My statures and all My ordinances”
    Deut 5:1-6:25: Two whole chapters that deal exclusively with the 10 commandments and the following 5 terms are used interchangeably without distinction: “statutes”, “ordinances”, “commandments”, “judgments”, “testimonies”.
    Lev 23 The Weekly Sabbath is lumped in with all the yearly Sabbaths without distinction and they are all called “The Lord’s appointed times” and “holy convocations”.
    Ezek 20 calls the first and fourth commandment, “My statutes and My ordinances”
    Neh 8 uses interchangeably without distinction, the following terms: “the book of the law of Moses”, “the law”, “the book of the law”, “the law of God”, “book of the law of God” and includes
    Col 2:14 & Eph 2:15 refer to the whole of the Old Covenant law including the ten commandments

    Moses prophesied of the Savior that he would be a “PROPHET LIKE UNTO ME,” Deuteronomy 18.

    What set Moses apart from all other prophets?

    1. He led God’s people out of their captivity and bondage.
    2. He was the LAW GIVER.
    3. He shepherd the children of Israel during their wanderings in the wilderness.

    WHAT MADE JESUS LIKE UNTO MOSES!
    1. He came “to set the captive free”
    2. He is the LAW GIVER – “A new commandment I give unto you, love one another”
    3. He is the Good Shepherd (John 10)

    We are no longer under the Levitical Priesthood! Christ is made our High Priest after the order of Melchezedec. We are no longer under the shadows given under the Levitical Priesthood, there has been a change in the priesthood and it is time to come out from under the shadow of the Old Testament and step into the new. “For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.” Hebrews 7:12.

  • mrloudcry says:

    During the time of the Patriarchs mankind had a conscience, not a written law which told them that lying, murder and adultery were wrong.

    Romans 2:14-15 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

    Every child born into the human race knows he has done wrong when he steals, or lies. However there came a time when God felt it was necessary to add a written account defining sin because men had conditioned themselves to ignore their conscience.

    Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. Galatians 3:19

    The Law was added until Christ came. Once Christ came, it was God’s purpose to return to the former way of having men be ruled and judged by their conscience, deciding for themselves whether they would serve Christ or not. God is not pleased with an outward conforming to the letter of the law, but rather God desires an inward obedience motivated by love for Him and others from a good conscience.

    Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: 1 Timothy 1:5

    1 John 3:20-21 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things. Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God.

    Examples of God working through the conscience in the New Testament.

    Herod, for beheading John the Baptist
    Matthew 14:2; Luke 9:7

    Peter, after denying the Lord
    Matthew 26:75; Mark 14:72; Luke 22:62

    Judas, after betraying the Lord
    Matthew 27:3-5

    The accusers of the woman taken in adultery
    John 8:9

    The Holy Spirit works through the conscience.
    John 16:8

    3000 added to the church on the Day of Pentecost because their conscience was convicted.
    Acts 2:37

    Peter could not go against His conscience
    Acts 5:29

    Additional references
    1Timothy 4:2; Titus 1:15; Hebrews 9:14; Hebrews 10:26-27

  • mrloudcry says:

    Good Afternoon XXXXX,

    I know what I have shared so far on some level makes sense to you, and yet at the same time there is a barrier so immense, that it seems that what I have shared could not possibly be right. Let’s look closely at that wall that is separating you and I. That which is preventing you from being able to accept the things I have shared.

    Adventism is a lot like a house. It has a foundation; it has a framework, and walls and a roof. Inside there are furnishings, and decorations. Everything appears to be solid, so solid in fact that to the Adventist living inside it, it seems impossible that this building could ever come down. In fact he does not want it to because to him it has become more than a house, it is his home. He has a sense of home ownership and security and the very thought of leaving this house gives him the sense that he will be homeless and have nowhere left to go. More than this, most of his brothers and sisters in Christ, i.e. his fellow Adventists are likewise all living in this home.

    Here I come along and I play the role of a home inspector, and point out some cracks in the paint, and tell you that the house may have termites, and like any good home owner, metaphorically of course your first thoughts are to give it a new coat of paint and get a Insect Exterminator (A Talented Evangelist such as Doug Bachelor i.e. xxxxxxxxxxxx.com) to take care of the termites. Walla! Presto! Problem Solved!

    Before I continue with this metaphor to help explain why I moved out of the house entirely, allow me to give a real life example of what I am trying to say.

    A couple weeks ago I woke up to find my truck completely empty of power steering fluid. Immediately I added some power steering fluid only to find it ran out almost as quickly as I added it. We are not talking about a slow drip. it was POURING OUT! Two days ago I took it to a mechanic and found that the power steering gear box had gone out. A $435 fix! Ouch! I went ahead and had the gear box replaced. A couple hours later the work was all finished. Up until that moment I felt that my truck was a solid vehicle with absolutely nothing wrong with it. I was devastated when the mechanic told me the ball barrings in the front wheels were going out, that my gasket for the transmission needed to be replaced, my muffler had to be replaced, my brakes in the front were down to 15% and that the gasket for the differential also had to be replaced. It almost seemed as if the mechanics list of problems for me was never going to end! All this amounted to another $1200 worth of work I need to do to fix everything! That is practically the value of the truck! In other words for $1200 I could buy another truck of equal value! Not exactly news an unemployed person wants to hear! Leaving the Adventist church meant leaving my home, my job, and being disowned by my family, and most of my friends. Not to mention the loss of over 90% of all my possessions. A side note without digressing from our metaphor to much further… I was working for a Adventist ministry at the time I learned the things I am sharing with you now. They owned the home I was living in.

    Back to our metaphor: What I am trying to share with you is much like my experience with the mechanic the other day. We are not merely talking about some cracked paint. The whole house is bad. We are talking about the foundation, the framework, the walls the roof, the furnishings and all the decorations. The reason I moved out of the Adventist “house” was because the whole thing was beyond repair.

    The Foundation = October 22, 1844 – The Investigative Judgment
    The Framework = The Writings of Ellen White
    The Walls = The Ten Commandments
    The Roof = The Sabbath
    The furnishings = Interpretations of Daniel and Revelation, The Mark of the Beast etc.
    The Decorations = Views about Sanctification, the Seal of God, and the Gospel itself.

    This is an over simplified metaphor, however it depicts the realty of this situation perfectly.

    1. I am not merely trying to tell you there are a few leaks in the roof. THERE IS NO ROOF AT ALL!
    2. I am not merely trying to say there are some cracks in the foundation. THERE IS NO FOUNDATION AT ALL!

    The entire Adventist House is an allusion from top to bottom and everything in between.XXXXX there is no easy way to say this, other than to just come out and lay it all out on the table. Ellen White’s Seventh-day Adventist world view is a strong delusion of a lie. Brother I mean absolutely no offense in stating that. It is simply the truth!

    Ellen White was wrong about October 22, 1844! Beyond all argument , that was NOT the Day of Atonement in 1844.
    http://loudcry.org/sda/archives/550

    The Investigative Judgment teaches “Another Gospel” than the Bible.
    http://loudcry.org/sda/archives/845

    The Gospel of Ellen White fundamentally quite different than the Bible.
    http://loudcry.org/sda/another-gospel

    Books like the Great Controversy, Desire of Ages, her visions etc are stolen works. The Health Message… all of it came from others and she took the credit for them and passed them off as direct revelations from God.
    http://loudcry.org/sda/archives/category/ellen_white

    The Ten Commandments are the Old Covenant itself! Read the 25 comments posted to this page.
    http://loudcry.org/sda/

    The Sunday Mark of the Beast is Smoke and Mirrors! E. G. White CHANGED the definition of the Mark of the Beast during her 70 years of writing so completely that she totally contradicted her self leaving no possible way to say exactly how Sunday is the Mark of the Beast anymore. Going by everything E. G. White wrote on the topic, it is IMPOSSIBLE to show how Sunday offends God after a Sunday Law. What she said offended God, she later said was perfectly acceptable.
    http://loudcry.org/sda/archives/393

    What Ellen White taught about the Seal of God goes against what the Bible actually says about it.
    http://loudcry.org/sda/archives/1284

    In order to maintain that Daniel 8:14 points to 1844 Adventists have had to attribute the work of the Little Horn to Jesus Himself!
    http://loudcry.org/sda/archives/460

    Brother XXXXX, I know how all this must feel like to read. You don’t know whether you should be offended or just dismiss everything I just said as totally ridiculous. Go back to the first link and see the evidence for yourself.

    The bottom line is the Gospel of Ellen White is not the Gospel of the Bible. Her teachings are out of harmony not only with Scripture itself, but also the views of the Fathers of the Reformation. Honestly right now I feel like weeping for the Adventists who are caught in this web of lies that Ellen White wove. She has one of the stickiest traps ever put together. My apologies for speaking so plainly, especially if I caused you any hurt by doing so. That was not my intention. The mechanic caused me some pain the other day when he told me about the things that are wrong with my truck, but it is better to know the truth than to break down on the side of the road later in the future. Please read the links I sent you.

    BLESSINGS IN THE LORD!!!
    David M. Curtis

  • ghdl says:

    The Millerites were deep students of the scriptures. The Seventh-day Adventist church owes much to their diligent, deep study of the Bible. They discovered that within Judaism, there were two distinct ways of computing the calendar. The rabbinical, which starts its new year, Nisan 1, on the new moon closest to the vernal equinox, and the Karaite which, following Mosaic calendation principles, placed its Nisan 1 on the first new moon after the vernal equinox if the barley harvest was ready. If not, they would intercalate an extra month.

    The Millerites rejected the rabbinical first day of Nisan on March 21 in 1844, and chose the April new moon for the beginning of the true type of the ancient first month. April 19 was the day.2 They argued that the modern Jewish calendar is based upon decisions that were unknown in the time of Christ.

    • mrloudcry says:

      I have read some lengthy documents prepared by Adventists with some very creative explanations for using the April new moon in 1844, So I know where you are coming from.

      There has NEVER been a Yom Kippur as late as October 22 in the history of the world, either before the Jewish People started going by the spring equinox or afterwards. Period. That is just the fact of the matter, and the only people on the planet that have ever tried to say otherwise are the Adventists.

      I would love to see ANY documentation that shows a Yom Kippur as late as October 22, at ANY point in history, for ANY year, that was not written by an Adventist. It only exists within Adventist books, and no where else!

      I have had lengthy 4 week long debates on the topic of Karaite Calendars and leap years and all of that, with scholarly Adventists, that required some of the most extensive brain hurting research I have ever done. There are a lot of factors that can be weighed and discussed here. Lets cut through all of that.

      Find ANY year that Yom Kippur occurred as late as October 22, before Christ birth or after, it really does not matter what year because it does not exist. It is pure fiction!

      Bud I mean no disrespect, and appreciate and respect your convictions, I held to them myself for most of my life. The October 22 Yom Kippur date can not be documented or defended for any year in history. So I am opening this up for ANY year, not just 1844. Find ANY year that Yom Kippur occurred on October 22, and show the documentation for it with out quoting from an Adventist source. As far as I am concerned the whole thing is only pure fiction made up by the Millerites and maintained by the Adventists. There are a ton of Jewish calendar websites, you can go to, you can write Jewish Professors, Scholars and Rabbi’s. I have done that myself. Do your own research bud! Good luck in your search for truth! Thanks for your comment!

    • mrloudcry says:

      The last couple years I have learned a great deal about how Adventists have their own portrait of history that is unique to them. Much of what I believed for decades turned out to be flat out lies Adventist told me about history that contradicts what the history books themselves actually say, and further paints a picture ideal for molding Adventist thinking. One such example is how the Millerites have been glamorized by Adventist literature.

      Today I have a much different view of these pioneers. Frankly they were uneducated fanatics that later became the founding fathers of several cult movements. It is a well-known fact that the newspapers of the time portrait a much different picture than Adventist literature has written about these people.

      You will know them by their fruits. Look at all the cult movements and false prophets that sprung out of the Millerite movement! That tells volumes. These people were not historians, they were not scholars, they were certainly not educated, most did not even have 4 or 5 grades of education! They formed beliefs that proved wrong and later formed churches that were based on those beliefs. They rose up prophets to validate those beliefs and those new churches. Bud I used to have a glamorized view of these people too, today all I see is a bunch of uneducated fanatics that ultimately hurt Christianity and deceived millions of people!

Leave a Reply

Copyright © 2011-2014 The Loud Cry All rights reserved.