Is the ACCA/ACCN like a cult?

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

Author	Comment
giant slayer	Re: We Need To Examine This More Carefully	#201	[-]
Posts: 821 (01/16/08 10:23:29) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Interested Sister: You are very very confusing to me. You said, "There is nothing wrong with elders requiring their flocks to keep traditions that FULFILL THE WRITTEN WORD OF GOD. The only valid reason to discontinue a tradition is if it clearly works against the word of God, not because it annoys or alienates Christians of other persuasions." (caps mine obviously) Interested Sister, what you said here is exactly 100%, my identical point! Traditions are good. I said it before. There is nothing wrong with traditions or elders teaching their flocks traditions, AS LONG AS THEY DO NOT ALTAR, CONFUSE, OR CHANGE IN ANY WAY THE WORD OF GOD IN ITS SUBSTANCE OR ITS INTENT! My soul objection to the baptism practice in question as I understand it from you, never having visited an ACC or having experienced firsh hand the practice, I fear that it places restrictions on converts that the Word of God does not place on converts. I have also stated that it is only my opinion and you are free to disagree with me. That is your choice, however, I believe it is wrong and I am going to say so.
giant slayer	Re: The Scriptures Are Clear On This	#202	[-]
Posts: 821 (01/16/08 10:37:17) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Interested Sister: There is no contradiction here. Involved in our Torah violations, which the Apostle John identifies as "sin", are the false ordinances and teachings of man which lead us away from Torah. All sin is Torah violation. If I follow Talmud, rather than Torah and teach Talmud as the Word of God, when it is only the tradition or ordinances of man, then it is sin. If I follow the traditions of the Elders of the ACC and those traditions are opposed to the Word of God or taught as the Word of God when they are in fact not the Word of God, then it is sin. Whatever sin is committed, it is nailed to His cross. I don't see why that is so difficult to understand. Because I worded something differently more than a year ago, in a totally different conversation, doesn't mean that if I don't word it exactly the same today that the things I am saying is contradictory. If we follow manmade ordinances that oppose the Word of God, it is sin and is part of the record of our Torah violations. SIN IS SIN! Regarding the Rachabites, We disagree. Simple as that, so let's move on.
giant slayer	Re: Waiting Period	#203	[-]
Posts: 821 (01/16/08 11:07:18) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Greetings CO: Thank you for your input. I think it is a mistake to confuse the baptism of John with the baptism into Jesus Christ. We find the Apostles, re-baptising those who were baptised into John's baptism so there is a difference. But assuming that you are correct and that it is the fruit we are looking for in this waiting period, I would have to ask, What fruit did Cornelius show? He was immediately Spirit filled and baptised. What fruit did the Ethiopian Eunuch show? He stated that he believed and was baptised immediately. What fruit did Paul show. He was prayed for and the scales fell from his eyes and he immediately was baptised. What fruit did the Philippian jailer and his family show? They were baptised immediately. Acts 2:38-41, "Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. THEN THEY THAT GLADLY RECEIVED HIS WORD WERE BAPTIZED; AND THE SAME DAY THERE WERE ADDED UNTO THEM ABOUT THREE THOUSAND SOULS." (Caps mine) Now CO, what was the waiting period and who observed these 3000 souls to examine their fruit? Seems to me to be a pretty big task. Give me one example from scripture where anyone was told to wait a while so we can observe your fruit before we baptise you into Jesus Christ, and I will concede that the practice is scriptural. Shalom CO David
giant slayer	Re: roots	#204	[-]
Posts: 821 (01/16/08 12:43:37) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	In regard to Covenanted Sister's concern about my theology being dangerous and frustrating, I want to assure all, that there is nothing to fear in my beliefs. I will give my testamony before God for all to hear: I David R. Nowlin believe that the Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God. That he died for my sins and the sins of the whole world. He was crucified on the cross, died, laid in the tomb for three days and nights and then was raised to life by the Father through the Holy Spirit. That He ascended into heaven where He sits at the right hand of God Almighty making intercession for us to the Father. His blood cleanses me from all sin an unrighteousness. I have been baptised in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I am a born again Christian. I have the witness of His Spirit with my spirit that I am indeed a child of God. This salvation that I enjoy was a result of His wonderful grace which I don't deserve but was imparted to me through my faith in His atoning work. I only desire to live for Him and do His will. This is my theology. I sincerely pray that no one finds it dangerous or frustrating. I realize that because I have accepted the Hebrew roots of my faith and believe that we are to be Torah observant, Sabbath keeping disciples of the Lord Jesus, that this flies in the face of the majority of Christian doctrines of our day. For this I offer no apology. I believe that our fathers were lied to and led astray by Greek gnosticism and Roman catholic apostacy and idolatry. I believe that the majority of protestant churches have intermingled within their doctrine the errors which are a result of these things. God said we are not to mingle Him with other gods. When Constantine did away with the Sabbath and made Sunday the christian day of worship, he mingled the worship of the One true God, with sun god worship, and this was only one of many things he did to mingle Christanity with pagan religions. If these things trouble the administrators of this forum I will gladly quit posting here. No one to date has ask me to and when I have stopped it has been of my own free will. But if I continue to post to this forum it is to be understood that I will post what I believe to be truth. I will not live a lie. Those who think I am dangerous are invited to ignore my posts. David
giant slayer	Re: The Scriptures Are Clear On This	#205	[-]
Posts: 821 (01/16/08 18:17:18) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Now Interested Sister, on the Ephesians quote; Here is the portion you have taken out of context and used as a proof text. I will try and answer you within that constraint if possible. "...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." Please allow me to present a slight paraphrase to suggest a clearer reading. "By destroying in His own body the enmity, occasioned by the Torah, with its commands set forth in the form of ordinances." (Complete Jewish Bible) Jesus clearly tells us in Matthew 5:17-19, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." Questions: If His fulfilling the law meant that it would be done away with, why would He say that whosoever shall break one or teach others to break them would be punished? When did heaven and earth pass away making these commandments void? The Ephesians verse is clear that what He has abolished in His flesh is the enmity. Not the law itself. Within Torah there are blessings and curses. There are penalties for breaking Torah and Torah makes that clear. What He destroyed in His flesh was the penalty for breaking the Torah that the Torah says we will suffer if we break it. He came and took that penalty upon Himself and nailed it to His cross as indicated in Colossians. Paul declares the Law to be good. Jesus says we should obey it and teach it. Why would Paul then come back and say that Jesus had destroyed the whole Torah with all its commandments and ordinances? The problem is in the translations, our interpretations and past teaching that has indoctrinated us into belief that the law is bad and Jesus fulfilled it all and now we can just ignore it. Paul in many places teaches that we are saved by grace through faith, not by keeping the law, but he no where teaches that that gives us the liberty to disobey the law. We are not saved by works of the law, but we please the Lord when we walk in obedience to it.
Covenanted Sister	more questions	#206	[-]
Posts: 156 (01/16/08 19:35:53) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	David, I hope you understand that I did not intend my remarks to be a condemnation of your soul, but only an assessment of your conclusions and principles. I stand by the fact that your doctrine is seriously misguided, and you stand by the fact that they are not. We have to agree to disagree on this point, but in the meantime, I will continue to demonstrate areas of confusion and weaknesses in your explanations. Please allow me to point out another one borne from our recent inquiry into your phrase rooted in. You say: Let's say we are reading Matthew Henry's Commentary on Genesis 1. He has several pages of commentary on Genesis 1. Suddenly he specifically quotes verse 3. He quotes it exactly as it is written in the translation he is using. The verse he specifically quotes is what I would mean by being "rooted in Torah." Ok. You are clarifying that unless something is in the Torah word for word, then it is not a God-ordained mandate of Torah and must be seen only as a tradition. I deduce this from your criteria: (1) specifically quotes and (2) quotes it exactly as it is written... Heres the problem. In your successive post (#749), you publish your personal "statement of faith." You make a number of dogmatic claims, but none of them are found in the Torah pursuant to your own qualifying conditions: namely, (1) specifically quotes and (2) quotes it exactly as it is written Indeed, none of your statement of faith is "rooted in" the Torah, and this is contrary to your own interpretive demands. Do you see how a Jew who subscribes to your un-Torah-like view of the Torah could never accept Christianity to begin with? I am not talking about the Pharisees, here. Their view of the Torah actually allows for an interpretive system capable of accepting Christianity in the first place, and this is majestically ironic given your persistent castigations of their brand of judaism. Rather, I am talking about a Jew who would have your view of the Torah in mind--one that says, If it is not in the Torah exactly as it is written, then it is at best a tradition of man, and at worst a tradition of man that nullifies the Word of God. In post #747 you say, If I follow Talmud, rather than Torah and teach Talmud as the Word of God, when it is only the tradition or ordinances of man, then it is sin. What is your view of the Gospel of John? The Letter to the Galatians? The Epistles of Peter? I dont see these books appearing in the Torah, but we Christians teach them as the Word of God. How is this not a sin under your scheme? Thanks for the time you put in to responding to my questions, by the way.
Curious Onlooker	Re: Waiting Period	#207	[-]
Posts: 121 (01/16/08 21:42:25) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	David, I was not a "fruit inspector" during the New Testament time period, so I cannot say what fruit they showed, other than that I trust it was deemed appropriate by the church leadership who baptized them. I cannot give you an "example from scripture where anyone was told to wait a while so we can observe your fruit before we baptise you into Jesus Christ." Now I will go out on a limb and provide a quote from a website that talks about early church practices. I don't know much about the historical figures or practices mentioned, but maybe you can consider it and see if there is any merit. (The full article can be found at www.blufftonyg.com/Litera...ovings.asp *Quote:* In early churches of the first few centuries A. D. they were cautious regarding taking in new members. In Shepherding The Floak by S. L. Greenslade, an early church leader Origen is quoted as saying, "Some are appointed to inquire into the lives and conduct of those who want to join the community in order to prevent secret sinners from coming into their common gathering. Those who do not commit secret sin they wholeheartedly receive".13 Hippolytus writes in the same book, "When the time for final instruction arrived their lives were examined. Have they lived honorably, have they honored widows, have they visited the sick, and done good works while they were catechumens (converts)?" According to Walter Oetting's The Church of the Cataaombs, in the early church the period of instruction for converts was usually three years.14 Tertullian, another early church leader felt a waiting period was very necessary. He thought that if one waited longer more caution would be exercised in worldly matters. Also, if any fully understood the weighty importance of baptism, they would fear its reception more than its delay. Over the years, careless reception into earlier denominations led to lukewarm assemblies and a departure from true and obedient faith. Gottfried Arnold, in Baptism Among the Early Christians, writes, "By far the greatest evil (in the church) was that some did not give up their sinning or turn from their passions to accept God with their whole hearts. It was also a serious error when the teachers without proper consideration and forethought very often baptized men without prior preparation or instruction. In this way, they only added to the mob of crude, selfish Christians. John Chrysostem (an early leader) lamented that many thousands were baptized in this way. In this way, Satan was able to scatter many weeds among the early Christians.15 CO
giant slayer	Re: more questions	#208	[-]
Posts: 821 (01/17/08 11:05:41) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Hello Covenanted Sister: I did not take your comments in a personal way. I did not feel attacked. I believe your comments were made in a very gracious manner and a proper Christian spirit. So, thanks for your comments. It is beneficial to me to know how I am perceved by others. Sometimes I find communication with you and Interested Sister very tedious. This is also meant in a loving manner. You said, "You are clarifying that unless something is in the Torah word for word, then it is not a God-ordained mandate of Torah and must be seen only as a tradition. I deduce this from your criteria: (1) "specifically quotes..." (2) "quotes it exactly as it is written." I am smiply trying to say that if I am reading the Talmud, or any other scriptural commentary, and the BIBLE is quoted, I would consider the Bible quote to have authority, being a quote of God Inspired scripture, but where the author of the commentary offers his explaination of the meaning of the quoted passage, I would consider to be the authors opinion and have no authority. Whether it be called tradition, minhog, commentary, dialog or wishful thinjing, it is still the opinion of the author and not the Inspired Word of God. I don't know how much clearer I can say it. With the exception of Karaite Jews, the Talmud is accepted among observant Jews as authorative Word of God. I disagree. Karaites disagree, and Jesus disagreed. As to my personal "statement of faith" and its dogmatic claims Covenanted Sister, I was not offering that as the Word of God, or Talmud, or Christian Commentary. I claimed no authority in what I was saying, I was not trying to make it acceptable to a Jew, other than Jesus. It was my personal testamony of faith, intended to clarify to the readers that I am a Christian. If I were making these statements to try and establish guidelines for the behavior of others or to make dogmatic statements about what your theology or that of others should be, then I should have been precise in my quotes. I really believe that you are taking this thing just a little too far in your attempt to trap me in my words or discredit my faith. As for Jews accepting Christanity, in the majority of cases they never will. They see our Religion as idolatry. Your statement that Pharisaic Judaism allows for an interpretive system capable of accepting Christianity is untrue. I communicate daily with Jews who practice Pharisaic Judaism in Israel. I am in personal contact with them in my attempts to introduce them to their Messiah. Some of the remarks they make about Christanity would not be allowed in this forum. I know you have family or friends involved in Judaism or who are Jews, you have told me that previously, but the opinion of a few Jews in America doesn't establish a true overall picture of what "jews thing about Christanity." Are they Orthodox, Reformed, Conservative, secular, Karaite or what? Sephardic or Ashkenizi? There is probably as much differences in Judaism as there are Christian denominations. Opinions vary widely, so to bring Judaism into this discussion is not profitable. I did not start this to try and explain Judaism, As I have already told you, I was simply trying to show Interested Sister the difference in Jesus' response in the two passages in Mark that she ask me about. I gave my opinion and that's it. Take it or leave it. I do not intend to carry this discussion any further. Make of what you will.
giant slayer	Re: Waiting Period	#209	[-]
Posts: 821 (01/17/08 11:28:15) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Thank you CO. I was not a fruit inspector either. All we have to rely on is the Word of God as recorded in Holy Scriptures. That is where I find my authority. I understand that my opinions offen differ from that of the Christian Theologians. Sometimes the recent ones and sometimes those of old. Because Origin or Tertullian, or Interested Sister says something doesn't mean that I am to take it as authority. Origin, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Justin Martyr and most others of the Anti-Nicean Theologians had their roots in Gnosticism and Roman Catholic doctrine. Just as many today in the Christian Churches speak out against Gnosticism while they themselves hold doctrine of the same origins, the early so-called Church Fathers did the same. Gnosticism had its beginnings before the death of many of the Apostles and some of the Epistles warn of it. Because certain literature is passed down from of old, doesn't give it any special standing regarding being truth. The Church split in approximately 135 ce, which ironically was about the time that we have our first recorded instance of Sunday worship, as documented by Justin Martyr. The leaders of the Churches of Asia, branching our from Antioch maintained their Hebraic roots which were firmly established by the Apostles. This can be seen clearly in the book of Acts, Hebrews, James, and throughout the Apostlolic Scriptures. The Church in Rome, however, went the way of Idolatry, gnosticism, and the heresy of Simon Magus. Eventually with the help of Constantine, sun god worship was made the law of the church by mixing Christanity with pagan practices like Sunday worship, Easter, rather than Passover and celebrating December 25th as the Lords birthday when it is well documented that it was the birthday of the sun god Tammuz. So as you can see CO, I put no stock in the words of these early theologians. But, I thank you for your efforts in sharing it with me. Blessings David
Covenanted Sister	mixed bag	#210	[-]
Posts: 156 (01/17/08 13:18:51) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Hi David, Thanks again for the responses. Although you said you will not carry the "rooted-in" vein of the discussion any further, I intend to give some more comment to the matter and undermine your theories. In the meantime, there are a couple tangential remarks I'd like to make. First, I was reading through your exchange with IS regarding ordinances and commandments, and it is clear that you are missing your own contradiction which IS cogently points out. I suggest you reread those posts more carefully and then you should see where you went wrong. Second, I notice that you have abandoned the traditional "B.C." and "A.D." designations in demarcating time. You opt for the "CE," approach, which is universally the standard practice among those who reject Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, i.e., atheists, Jews, etc. You are free to do this, of course, and I am sure you have your stock Christian-pagan syncretism argument justifying your reasons. That's fine. It's just odd, I think, and I wanted to point out to you that your doing so is not unnoticed. Third, your posts once again bring us back to your obsessive paranoia of the RCC. Whether consciously so or not, you often suggest to me and the rest of us that if we don't accept your line of thinking then it is because we've been indoctrinated by the "Whore of Babylon." But the truth is, your suggestions don't make your theology any more convincing. In fact, in my eyes, it further underscores its dysfunction. Your "syncretism arguments" don't work for me on several levels. One day, I will probably address them more specifically. As a preview, let me suggest that, in fact, you really don't know anything about the Catholic Church and you really don't understand why Christmas is celebrated in December. Apparently you think it's because pagans celebrated a god on that date, so the early Church wanted to do the same, under the influence of demonic forces, no doubt. My assessment here is grounded in the comments of your last post. In fact, there were Christian theological and evangelical reasons for choosing this time, David, not pagan ones. As you know, the Catholic Church celebrates the birth of Jesus on December 25, around the time of the winter solstice, the shortest day of the year. But did you know that the Catholic Church also celebrates the Feast of John the Baptist on June 24, during the time of the summer solstice, the longest day of the year? The theological reason for this is based on John 3.30: He must increase, but I must decrease. John the Baptist is speaking of his ministry and the ministry of Jesus. John must decrease, and Christ (the Light) must increase, says John. To underscore this theological notion, the Catholic Church placed the celebration of Jesus' birth during the time of year when the light of days begins increasing in our world, and it places its celebration of John the Baptist during the time of year when the light of days begins decreasing. Why? He must increase, and I must decrease. Frankly, I think it's a beautiful way to remember and make present this spiritual reality in our calendar, in our lives, and in our world. But this escapes you, David, much in the same way that the truth of the Sabbath escapes you. Allow me once more to plead with you to read the Torah in light of the reality of Jesus Christ!!! Allow me to plead with you to find the grace that Jesus Christ brings in His Church that was purchased NOT on Mt. Sinai, but on the CROSS!!! Allow me to plead with you to place NOT the law of Moses at the center of your life, but the GRACE and TRUTH of Jesus Christ!!!
Unregistered(d)	Speaking of Context . . .	#211	[-]
Posts: 0 (01/17/08 15:14:28) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	You are the one taking these verses out of context, GS. If that isn't bad enough, you are claiming the individual verses say something they obviously do not. Unfortunately, I find myself having to explain the concept of a direct object: a) The Supreme Court voided the conviction. b) The Supreme Court voided the legislation. In sentence a, "conviction" is the direct object, identifying what received the action of the verb "voided". In sentence b, "legislation" is the direct object, identifying what received the action of the verb "voided". Now look at the two verses: a) Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us b)Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even [namely] the law of commandments contained in ordinances Per a, what did Jesus blot out? Handwritten ordinances. This is why Paul goes on to assure the Colossians not to allow any "man therefore [to] judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days." (2:16) Is he describing Talmud, here? No, he is not. He is describing the Mosaic Laws, "Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ." (vs.17) Per b, what did Jesus abolish? The enmity between Jews and Gentiles (read vs. 12-14) by abolishing specifically the law of commandments contained in ordinances. Continue reading the following verse. It clarifies that the "enmity" that was abolished was the enmity between Israel and Gentiles. This is the understanding that context yields. Furthermore, context indicates that "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments" does not refer to the commandments in the Mosaic Law. Jesus is referring to the commandments he just finished giving in the verses before, Mt. 5:3-16: Repent, be meek, hunger for righteousness, be merciful, etc. He said, "Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Until the world ends, those who break one jot or one tittle of the Law are condemned by it, until they obtain forgiveness through Christ and begin fulfilling it through keeping the Law of Christ. The Law of Christ is not "TORAH!" It surpasses "TORAH!", per Mt. 5:20-48. The problem, as I see it, is that you are ignoring immediate context. If you want to place your trust in the Complete Jewish Bible, that is your choice. I do not.
giant slayer	Re: mixed bag	#212	[-]
Posts: 821 (01/17/08 15:23:15) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Hello Covenanted Sister: Your concern for my spiritual condition is noted and appreciated. Regarding the Catholic Church, we disagree. A little research will clear it up for you. Regarding bc and ad, it has nothing to do with my rejection our Lord. It is the more commonly accepted practice these days and that is why I use it. Some are young and would be confused with the old ad and bc. It is difficult to know what others prefer. Condemn me if you will. Specifically regarding your pleas: I read the Torah always in the light of the reality of Jesus Christ!!! He is the living Torah! He lived it perfectly! He commanded us to be obedient to it! He commanded us to teach it! And the Apostle John tells us that if we are in Him, we should walk as He walked. He kept Torah and I as best as I know how keep Torah. You plead that I find the grace that Jesus Christ brings in His Church that was purchased NOT on Mt. Sinai, but on the CROSS! Perhaps you didn't read my testamony after all where I freely proclaimed that I have indeed received His grace purchased for me on the Cross, not Sinai. I do not look for His grace in the Torah. I keep Torah because He has commanded me to do so and it pleases Him when I am obedient and it saddens and angers Him when I am disobedient, but even in His sadness and anger, He pardons me and extends His grace to me because I am His child and I am covered by His atoning blood! Let me assure you sister that the GRACE AND TRUTH OF Jesus Christ is indeed at the center of my life. The Torah of God given to His children through Moses that you and others refer to as the Law of Moses is merely my textbook on how to please Him in my daily walk with Him. Let me plead with you dear sister to please abandon your antinomian religious indoctrination and to do t'shuvah. Return to your Father through Jesus Christ your Lord and embrace His Torah as your instructions in how to walk in a pleasing manner before Him. Not as a means of salvation as is taught in Judaism. That is not possible. One can never gain salvation through legalistic Torah observance because it is only to be obtained through faith in the precious blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. But open your eyes and see that He taught Torah, He lived Torah and He instructed us to do the same in Matthew 5:17-20. Read it very carefully sister in light of what it actually says and not what your indoctrination has taught you. Study the things Paul had to say about the law and you will discover that he taught that we do not gain justification through the law, but he taught that the law is holy and good. You are very intelligent and educated. Just please study these things because you are wrong Covenanted Sister. You have been taught wrong. You have been lied to. It is the doctrine you are following that is dangerous, not the one I follow. Please do as the Apostle John told us to do and WALK AS HE WALKED! Did Jesus keep Sabbath? Yes, walk as He walked. Did He keep Torah? yes. walk as He walked. One would have to be blind to see it any other way. You are in my prayers Covenanted Sister. I have faith that someday He will show you your error because in your heart you want to be what he wants you to be or you wouldn't be fighting me so hard. I know you believe you are right so His grace is sufficient, but you also have the means and the intelligence to investigate these matters thoroughly to find the truth. I spent years as a Pastor in one of the most conservative Christian denominations. Having its beginnings in the Pilgrim Holiness Church which is in the same conservative school of thought as ACC. Many many years of my life has been devoted to study and research of these things. It is probably true that sometimes I may say things that seem contradictory, but I am human, I make mistakes, but on the general truth of my doctrine, I am not mistaking. I LOVE YOU IN JESUS COVENANTED SISTER! David
Unregistered(d)	Changing Positions	#213	[-]
Posts: 0 (01/17/08 15:46:47) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	GS, Perhaps you do not see where you contradict yourself throughout the statements I quoted because I quoted too much. To be clearer: Now: "No, I am not saying that the ordinances referred to in the Colossians passage is Talmud." Translation: "'Ordinances' is not Talmud." and Now: "the Colossians passasge is referring to the "record" of our Torah violations" Translation: "'Ordinances' is Torah violations. Then:"Was it not the ordinances of man and the customs of man [Talmud] that made the Word of God of no effect? YES!" Translation: "'Ordinances' is Talmud." You have gone from "ordinances" = Talmud to "ordinances" = Torah violations, not Talmud Do you see why I am confused?
giant slayer	Re: Speaking of Context . . .	#214	[-]
Posts: 821 (01/17/08 16:47:43) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Interested Sister: I have tried to be patient and loving and answer your questions. It is obvious from your replies that you read my responses with your indoctrinated glasses on and don't even want to see what I am trying to say. You believe as you believe and you are not going to change your mind even if the Apostle Paul appeared and told you that I am right. The truth is IS, you don't trust me and if I told you the sun rises in the east you would argue that it rises in the west just because it is me saying it. So why do you bother asking me questions? I am willing to spend the time and the effort to try and explain to you what I mean, if you really want to hear what I have to say on the subject. But, if you just want to argue, I have no interest in spending my time and effort in research nd study and posting answers just to have you twist what I am saying to make me look like some kind of a false prophet. So, before I go to the effort, do you really really want me to answer you?
Covenanted Sister	entanglement	#215	[-]
Posts: 156 (01/17/08 18:06:39) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	David, Thank you for your impassioned plea, but let me renew mine over yours. Stop subverting Jesus, my God, to the Torah! He is not to be understood as an exegete underneath it. He is the author over it! You said, But open your eyes and see that He taught Torah, He lived Torah and He instructed us to do the same in Matthew 5:17-20. But living Torah is not something any of us can do, or ever could do, at least in the way your interpretive system of it demands, and that is my entire point regarding the meat and blood command in Genesis. You can't explain this command to me, so how can I possibly live it? How can you possibly live it? Jesus followed the Genesis 9.4 meat/blood command perfectly, but we can't, David, because you can't even explain what it means! Your closed-Torah system prevents you from finding a God-ordained instruction for it. This is just one command out of 613+. Walk as Jesus walked, indeed. But understand that there are certain steps Christ has taken that we cannot. You can protest and say that we can't follow the ritual/ceremonial laws of the Old Testamenta path on which Jesus obviously walked, but you can't actually justify your inability to do so using the Torah! First, you prove to us upfront that you do not and cannot walk as Jesus walked in this regard by your own protestations. Second, your very interpretive system turns in on itself and against you since it does not liberate you from the ritual commands, putting your soul in some very serious danger pursuant to the foundations you yourself have laid. David, you believe in a Judaism that never existed. You believe in a closed-Torah: one that does not allow for anything beyond what is written, exactly as it is written (your words). The very evidence of the courts established by the Torah in Deuteronomy, the very evidence of the Sanhedrin referenced in the New Testament, and the very evidence of the Seat of Moses alluded to by Jesus Himself deny this closed-Torah construct. Under your system, the ritual law cannot be abolished! Under your system, none of us can accept Jesus as Savior of Jews much less of Gentiles! In all of Torah, there is only one messianic reference to another one who is coming, and this is in Deut. 18.15. This prophecy is not of a Savior as we Christians understand the term, but of a prophet. So, pursuant to your Torah, how do you even understand Jesus to be the Son of God, something far, far beyond a prophet like unto Moses? David, the Word of John 1.1 is only the Torah inasmuch as a shadow of my body is actually my body. Why are you exchanging the Body of Christ for its shadow (Col. 2.17) and why are you constraining us to be entangled in the law once more?
giant slayer	Re: entanglement	#216	[-]
Posts: 821 (01/18/08 06:59:24) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Covenanted Sister: You are a first class wordsmith. You must be a trial lawyer, but in this case you are testifying rather than cross-examining. You are making far to many assumptions of what I believe and are adding not only words but whole sentences to my mouth. First you accuse me of subverting Jesus to the Torah. I have done no such thing. I said Jesus is the living Torah. That is not subverting Him to it. It is an acknowledgment of what the Apostle John said, "In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD WAS GOD." No matter how much your Greek indoctrination calls Him the Logos, He is not Logos, He is the Living Word of God. LXX or no LXX. You said, "But living Torah is not something any of us can do, or ever could do," This I agree with except I would add one word to your statement. The word perfectlly. We cannot or never could live it perfectly but that doesn't mean that we are to throw it all away. If we could live it perfectly we would have no need of a Savior, but we can live it to the best of our light and ability. Not to earn our salvation, but to please our Lord. We can't do the Temple things because there is no Temple. We can't do the Priesthood Things because there is no Temple. We can't do the ceremonial cleansing things because those things were for entering the Temple, but we can keep Sabbath and we can keep His holy feast times, and we can keep kosher. You mention the blood thing again. We can do our best to purchase only kosher meats or we can stay away from meat. That is how we can obey this commandment. You don't have to eat your bloody steak tartar Covenanted Sister. You just like it and are not willing to give it up for the Lord. So you ask, "how can I live it or how can you live it?" The best you know how withing the light He has given you and He will bless that effort. The obedience will be there if perfection isn't. That's why He gives us grace. You said, "Your closed Torah system prevents you from finding a God-ordained instruction for it." I have no problem finding a God-ordained instruction for it. What ever you mean by my closed Torah system, I have no clue. Mo Torah isn't closed. It is very open, unlike yours which doesn't even exist. Jesus told us how to keep Torah. Through complete love for God and for our neighbor. That is my Torah system. I recognize that He gave us Torah instructions for our good and His glory and I to the best of my finite ability try to be obedient. You said, "Walk as Jesus walked, indeed. But understand that there are certain steps Christ has taken that we cannot." I'll give you some that we can. We can keep Sabbath as He did. We can keep the feasts as He did. We can keep the dietary restrictions as He did. We can love God with all our heart as He did, We can love our neighbor as He did, We can love one another as He did and commanded us to do. Are you walking in these ways as He did Covenanted Sister? more later.
giant slayer	Re: entanglement	#217	[-]
Posts: 821 (01/18/08 07:28:28) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Continued: You said, "You can protest and say that we can't follow the ritual/ceremonial laws of the Old Testament-a path on which Jesus obviously walked, but you can't actually justify your inability to do so using Torah." This is totally ignorant Covenanted Sister. What is there for me to justify? The laws you are referring to were made impossible to keep two thousand years ago. I had nothing to do with it. Because some are impossible to keep doesn't mean that we are to throw away what is left that we can obey. You said, "David, you believe in a Judaism that never existed." That is untrue. You obviously don't know what I believe. You said, "You believe in a closed Torah." I don't even have a clue what you mean by a closed Torah so how may I ask do I believe in it? Your mind is inventing things you want me to believe for your own purposes of destroying me in the eyes of other readers who may be helped from my posts if you would quit doing the work of the adversary. As Jesus would say, get the behind me satan. You said, "one that does not allow for anything beyond what is written, exactly as it is written..." That is a lie. I said that traditions should not altar, replace or pervert the Word of God. Another attempt at putting words in my mouth to try and destroy my message. You ramble on about "closed Torah construct" etc. I still don't know what you are talking about and neither does anyone else. Maybe IS, who knows. You say, "Under your system, the ritual law cannot be abolished." What is my system you are referring to? I didn't know I had a system. But you are correct that the law cannot be abolished. Ritual as you call it, or not. You may want to check the last chapter of Zechariah. You will find that even into the olam haba (world to come) the feast of tabernacles will be kept. But I'm sure you will explain it away with spiritualization as is a common practice with Theologians who wish to explain away the truth so they will not have to be obedient to it. I'v had enough of your lies and accusations against me. The Lord rebuke you. He will judge between you and I. You know nothing of my "system." I have only the Word of God. As for your little shadow referrence, It may interest you to know that we are HIS BODY on earth right now and we are supposed to be casting His shadow. The same one He cast when He was on earth. That is why He said, "the works that I do shall ye do also, and greater works than these shall ye do, because I go to the Father."His shadow was a Sabbath keeping shadow, a Torah keeping shadow. Maybe it would be good if you would look at yourself and see what kind of shadow you are casting Covenanted Sister. You try and set yourself up as a defender of the faith but you are doing nothing less than perverting the Word of God. I will do as IS said and shake off the dust of my feet.
Covenanted Sister	dust	#218	[-]
Posts: 156 (01/18/08 11:05:42) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Hi, David, I am sorry to hear that you are giving up so easily. All the same, perhaps we will hear from you again. CS
giant slayer	Re: dust	#219	[-]
Posts: 821 (01/18/08 13:46:59) Frequent User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Did I hear a squeal? Did I step on your DOGma? Forgive me. Covenanted Sister: Who said I was going anywhere? I have no intention of leaving this forum, I just feel it is futile to try and convince you of why I believe as I do. A person persuaded against his will is of the same opinion still. You have no desire to investigate whether the things I am trying to show you is truth. You are comfortable in your belief and not interested in growth. You seem to want to be the great protector of souls from my percieved heresy. Be careful Covenanted Sister that you don't stand in the way of the Holy Spirit and Biblical truth with your negative attacks on me. If you wish to continue attacking my beliefs, I will no longer defend myself. It is between you and the Lord Covenanted Sister. It is you who will answer for your words and actions. If you oppose the Spirit you may find yourself in a position of being on the witness stand of God. "If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure nor speaking thine own words; Then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father; for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it."
Unregistered(d)	So Be It	#220	[-]
Posts: 0 (01/18/08 14:27:48) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	GS, I appreciate the patience and love, but at this point, I'm just looking for logic. I do not trust you because you do not seem even willing acknowledge to me that you have presented your beliefs in a confusing and self-contradictory manner, even though I have shown you evidence of this in quoting your own words. On the contrary, you accuse me of twisting your words. "Twist" is not an option included within the cut and paste functions on my computer, GS. I do not trust anyone who takes a statement like "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances" and switches out "ordinances" for "sins" (my summary). I am not here to humor you, GS. That is not what God wants me to do. If your arguments don't match the text, they don't match the text. I am sorry that we find ourselves in such drastic conflict. IS

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

Is the ACCA/ACCN like a cult?

Quick Reply