While the rest of the world is being distracted with the current issues in Afghanistan and Iran, this G20 summit is setting up an event that is more sinister than any act of terrorism that has been perpetrated against any nation or towns in the world.Who gave the OK for our leaders to set up systems to determine who lives and who dies or who can buy and sell?It's all in the the word of God,it has been foretold and now it is coming to pass right before our eyes.We need to be ready for the soon return of the Lord and saviour Jesus Christ......So when Prime Minister Gordon Brown made his statement about a "new world" order I was happy that yet another fact has come to the front that the Bible is the true word of God we should not be afraid of what is to come but ask our selves where do we stand,and is my life hid in Him who is able to destroy both body and soul?....this is the statement from Mr Brown......
"Today’s decisions, of course, will not immediately solve the crisis. But we have begun the process by which it will be solved," Mr Brown said. "I think a new world order is emerging with the foundation of a new progressive era of international co-operation,"
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Foreign Policy, Welfare, and 9/11
The tragedy of 9/11 and its aftermath dramatize so clearly how a flawed foreign policy has served to encourage the majoritarians determined to run everyone’s life.
Due to its natural inefficiencies and tremendous costs, a failing welfare state requires an ever-expanding authoritarian approach to enforce mandates, collect the necessary revenues, and keep afloat an unworkable system. Once the people grow to depend on government subsistence, they demand its continuation.
Excessive meddling in the internal affairs of other nations and involving ourselves in every conflict around the globe has not endeared the United States to the oppressed of the world.
The Japanese are tired of us.
The South Koreans are tired of us.
The Europeans are tired of us.
The Central Americans are tired of us.
The Filipinos are tired of us.
And above all, the Arab Muslims are tired of us.
Angry and frustrated by our persistent bullying and disgusted with having their own government bought and controlled by the United States, joining a radical Islamic movement was a natural and predictable consequence for Muslims.
We believe bin Laden when he takes credit for an attack on the West, and we believe him when he warns us of an impending attack. But we refuse to listen to his explanation of why he and his allies are at war with us.
Bin Laden’s claims are straightforward. The U.S. defiles Islam with military bases on holy land in Saudi Arabia, its initiation of war against Iraq, with 12 years of persistent bombing, and its dollars and weapons being used against the Palestinians as the Palestinian territory shrinks and Israel’s occupation expands. There will be no peace in the world for the next 50 years or longer if we refuse to believe why those who are attacking us do it.
To dismiss terrorism as the result of Muslims hating us because we’re rich and free is one of the greatest foreign-policy frauds ever perpetrated on the American people. Because the propaganda machine, the media, and the government have restated this so many times, the majority now accept it at face value. And the administration gets the political cover it needs to pursue a “holy” war for democracy against the infidels who hate us for our goodness.
Polling on the matter is followed closely and, unfortunately, is far more important than the rule of law. Do we hear the pundits talk of constitutional restraints on the Congress and the administration? No, all we ever hear are reassurances that the majority supports the President; therefore it must be all right.
The terrorists’ attacks on us, though never justified, are related to our severely flawed foreign policy of intervention. They also reflect the shortcomings of a bureaucracy that is already big enough to know everything it needs to know about any impending attack but too cumbersome to do anything about it. Bureaucratic weaknesses within a fragile welfare state provide a prime opportunity for those whom we antagonize through our domination over world affairs and global wealth to take advantage of our vulnerability.
But what has been our answer to the shortcomings of policies driven by manipulated majority opinion?
We have responded by massively increasing the federal government’s policing activity to hold American citizens in check and make sure we are well-behaved and pose no threat, while massively expanding our aggressive presence around the world. There is no possible way these moves can make us more secure against terrorism, yet they will accelerate our march toward national bankruptcy with a currency collapse.
Relying on authoritarian democracy and domestic and international meddling only move us sharply away from a constitutional republic and the rule of law and toward the turbulence of a decaying democracy, about which Madison and others had warned.
Due to its natural inefficiencies and tremendous costs, a failing welfare state requires an ever-expanding authoritarian approach to enforce mandates, collect the necessary revenues, and keep afloat an unworkable system. Once the people grow to depend on government subsistence, they demand its continuation.
Excessive meddling in the internal affairs of other nations and involving ourselves in every conflict around the globe has not endeared the United States to the oppressed of the world.
The Japanese are tired of us.
The South Koreans are tired of us.
The Europeans are tired of us.
The Central Americans are tired of us.
The Filipinos are tired of us.
And above all, the Arab Muslims are tired of us.
Angry and frustrated by our persistent bullying and disgusted with having their own government bought and controlled by the United States, joining a radical Islamic movement was a natural and predictable consequence for Muslims.
We believe bin Laden when he takes credit for an attack on the West, and we believe him when he warns us of an impending attack. But we refuse to listen to his explanation of why he and his allies are at war with us.
Bin Laden’s claims are straightforward. The U.S. defiles Islam with military bases on holy land in Saudi Arabia, its initiation of war against Iraq, with 12 years of persistent bombing, and its dollars and weapons being used against the Palestinians as the Palestinian territory shrinks and Israel’s occupation expands. There will be no peace in the world for the next 50 years or longer if we refuse to believe why those who are attacking us do it.
To dismiss terrorism as the result of Muslims hating us because we’re rich and free is one of the greatest foreign-policy frauds ever perpetrated on the American people. Because the propaganda machine, the media, and the government have restated this so many times, the majority now accept it at face value. And the administration gets the political cover it needs to pursue a “holy” war for democracy against the infidels who hate us for our goodness.
Polling on the matter is followed closely and, unfortunately, is far more important than the rule of law. Do we hear the pundits talk of constitutional restraints on the Congress and the administration? No, all we ever hear are reassurances that the majority supports the President; therefore it must be all right.
The terrorists’ attacks on us, though never justified, are related to our severely flawed foreign policy of intervention. They also reflect the shortcomings of a bureaucracy that is already big enough to know everything it needs to know about any impending attack but too cumbersome to do anything about it. Bureaucratic weaknesses within a fragile welfare state provide a prime opportunity for those whom we antagonize through our domination over world affairs and global wealth to take advantage of our vulnerability.
But what has been our answer to the shortcomings of policies driven by manipulated majority opinion?
We have responded by massively increasing the federal government’s policing activity to hold American citizens in check and make sure we are well-behaved and pose no threat, while massively expanding our aggressive presence around the world. There is no possible way these moves can make us more secure against terrorism, yet they will accelerate our march toward national bankruptcy with a currency collapse.
Relying on authoritarian democracy and domestic and international meddling only move us sharply away from a constitutional republic and the rule of law and toward the turbulence of a decaying democracy, about which Madison and others had warned.
The Utopian Nightmare of One-World Government
Is the world being set-up to miss the coming of the Lord and Saviour?A great event that is soon to take place that will set everyone in their place according to the life lived.
Once the goal of liberty is replaced by a preconceived notion of the benefits and the moral justifications of a democracy, a trend toward internationalism and world government follows.
We certainly witnessed this throughout the 20th century. Since World War II, we have failed to follow the Constitution in taking this country to war, but instead have deferred to the collective democratic wisdom of the United Nations.
Once it’s recognized that ultimate authority comes from an international body, whether the United Nations, NATO, the WTO, the World Bank, or the IMF, the contest becomes a matter of who holds the reins of power and is able to dictate what is perceived as the will of the people (of the world). In the name of democracy, just as it is done in Washington, powerful nations with the most money will control UN policy. Bribery, threats, and intimidation are common practices used to achieve a “democratic” consensus-no matter how controversial and short-lived the benefits.
Can one imagine what it might be like if a true worldwide democracy existed and the United Nations were controlled by a worldwide, one man/one vote philosophy? The masses of China and India could vote themselves whatever they needed from the more prosperous western countries. How long would a world system last based on this absurdity? Yet this is the principle that we’re working so hard to impose on ourselves and others around the world.
In spite of the great strides made toward one-world government based on egalitarianism, I’m optimistic that this utopian nightmare will never come to fruition. I have already made the case that here at home powerful special interests take over controlling majority opinion, making sure fairness in distribution is never achieved. This fact causes resentment and becomes so expensive that the entire system becomes unstable and eventually collapses.
The same will occur internationally, even if it miraculously did not cause conflict among the groups demanding the loot confiscated from the producing individuals (or countries). Democratic socialism is so destructive to production of wealth that it must fail, just as socialism failed under Soviet Communism. We have a long way to go before old-fashioned nationalism is dead and buried. In the meantime, the determination of those promoting democratic socialism will cause great harm to many people before its chaotic end and we rediscover the basic principle responsible for all of human progress.
We certainly witnessed this throughout the 20th century. Since World War II, we have failed to follow the Constitution in taking this country to war, but instead have deferred to the collective democratic wisdom of the United Nations.
Once it’s recognized that ultimate authority comes from an international body, whether the United Nations, NATO, the WTO, the World Bank, or the IMF, the contest becomes a matter of who holds the reins of power and is able to dictate what is perceived as the will of the people (of the world). In the name of democracy, just as it is done in Washington, powerful nations with the most money will control UN policy. Bribery, threats, and intimidation are common practices used to achieve a “democratic” consensus-no matter how controversial and short-lived the benefits.
Can one imagine what it might be like if a true worldwide democracy existed and the United Nations were controlled by a worldwide, one man/one vote philosophy? The masses of China and India could vote themselves whatever they needed from the more prosperous western countries. How long would a world system last based on this absurdity? Yet this is the principle that we’re working so hard to impose on ourselves and others around the world.
In spite of the great strides made toward one-world government based on egalitarianism, I’m optimistic that this utopian nightmare will never come to fruition. I have already made the case that here at home powerful special interests take over controlling majority opinion, making sure fairness in distribution is never achieved. This fact causes resentment and becomes so expensive that the entire system becomes unstable and eventually collapses.
The same will occur internationally, even if it miraculously did not cause conflict among the groups demanding the loot confiscated from the producing individuals (or countries). Democratic socialism is so destructive to production of wealth that it must fail, just as socialism failed under Soviet Communism. We have a long way to go before old-fashioned nationalism is dead and buried. In the meantime, the determination of those promoting democratic socialism will cause great harm to many people before its chaotic end and we rediscover the basic principle responsible for all of human progress.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Affairs:The slippery slope to disaster
IT WAS ONE OF THOSE “BLUEBIRD” CLEAR, crisp mountain days for which Colorado’s ski slopes are famous. The sky was brilliant, the snow was perfect for skiing, and I was having a great day on the slopes. Skiing down one trail that was somewhat new to me, I saw another trail that looked interesting. It seemed to beckon to me. Ah! Something exciting! New! A challenge, I reflected to myself, coasting to a stop at the entrance to the new trail.
As I stood there, just before pushing off down the narrow chute through the trees (my ski tips were already starting over the edge onto the new territory), I heard the voice of a friend as he sped by. “Where are you going?”
My reply was innocent and instant: “Gonna try this new run! It looks interesting!”
“You idiot!” shot back my friend. “That’s the ski jump!”
“You idiot!” shot back my friend. “That’s the ski jump!”
Well, that put a totally new perspective on the adventure. A text flashed into my mind: “There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death” (Prov. 14:12). While I love to ski, I prefer to fly in airplanes, not off ski jumps. The warning changed my plans, and undoubtedly my future as well. Suddenly that which at one moment looked interesting, inviting, and exciting became threatening, dangerous, and to be avoided at all costs.
If that path had been taken, there would have been precious few chances to change course. Somewhere there would come a “point of no return” and a shattering finish. Even if I changed my mind along the way, there is a thing called momentum, which would have delivered me to disaster even as I wanted fervently to stop. I was just one little nudge away from a life-altering (and maybe life-ending) experience. All it would have taken was a small push. The event still causes me to shudder. Of course, I changed course and stayed on the safe trail.
Life Lessons
There’s a vital lesson here. Just one little nudge can send us down a slippery slope that can end in disaster and destruction. Decisions and actions inevitably lead to outcomes and consequences.
Sexual affairs are very much like my near disaster on the ski slope. No one I have counseled with who has been caught up in a sexual affair has ever intended to get involved in an affair. “It just happened,” is the comment most often heard. The reality is that once someone gets close to the edge of an affair or a ski jump, there had better be some quick, decisive, clear thinking, or one little nudge can result in catastrophe.
Sexual affairs are very much like my near disaster on the ski slope. No one I have counseled with who has been caught up in a sexual affair has ever intended to get involved in an affair. “It just happened,” is the comment most often heard. The reality is that once someone gets close to the edge of an affair or a ski jump, there had better be some quick, decisive, clear thinking, or one little nudge can result in catastrophe.
Sexual involvement in the workplace or in a friendship is more common than we realize. And those situations do have some common steps (or slips). The first and most dangerous is the idea that sex is no big deal. That is a denial of reality. Unless you have been dead at least three days, sex is a big deal, no matter who you are. No one is invulnerable. After all, God designed us with a natural, built-in sexual attraction. Sexuality is a very big deal.
Look at Adam’s response when he first saw Eve: “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh” (Gen. 2:23). The New English Bible gets closer to the Hebrew text with “Now this, at last . . .” Or as we might put it today: “Wow! At last!” Adam was excited. His words were not just some poetic response. He was all eyes and immediately attracted to her. That’s a big deal. Such a big deal that Adam elected to give up Paradise to stay with Eve (see Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 56).
Samson liked what he saw and said to his horrified parents, “She’s the right one for me” (Judges 14:3). He saw, he wanted. In verse 7 we read, “Then he went down and talked with the woman, and he liked her.” Interesting indeed. Up to this point he apparently had not yet talked with her. He just saw her and made a decision. That lack of thinking things through caused Samson lifelong and life-ending problems.
Sexual attraction is a big deal? Ask David. All he did initially was look at Bathsheba. The looking turned to attraction (lust) and actions, including adultery, murder, and living a lie. Sexual attraction is a big deal. To think otherwise is denial. Denial is dangerous.
Contrast for a moment some differences that might exist between the home and workplace environments.
Contrast for a moment some differences that might exist between the home and workplace environments.
Anatomy of an Affair
In his groundbreaking book Sex in the Forbidden Zone, Peter Rutter, M.D., shares some startling conclusions from 1,000 interviews, case studies, and contacts with people who were involved in sexual affairs. While what he wrote about was men in positions of trust and authority having affairs with women under their spheres of responsibility (the men were therapists, medical doctors, clergy, lawyers, and teachers), the same dynamics apply to women as well.
What Rutter discovered is a slippery slope leading to an affair as surely as my skis could have led me down the jump. The steps he discovered for men who are crossing the boundary into sexual affairs are:
What Rutter discovered is a slippery slope leading to an affair as surely as my skis could have led me down the jump. The steps he discovered for men who are crossing the boundary into sexual affairs are:
I’m looking her over (Samson and David merely looked at first).
Is she interested in me?
What would she be like to touch?
I can’t stop fantasizing about her.
I can’t stop fantasizing about her.
I’ll ask about her sex life.
I’ll ask if she fantasizes about me.
I’ll close the physical space between us.
I’ll test the waters by being suggestive and see how she responds.
I think she is being seductive toward me.
Fantasy about seducing her.
I’ll ask if she fantasizes about me.
I’ll close the physical space between us.
I’ll test the waters by being suggestive and see how she responds.
I think she is being seductive toward me.
Fantasy about seducing her.
Considerations:
Can I get away with it?
If it feels right, it can’t be wrong.
The voice of conscience
If it feels right, it can’t be wrong.
The voice of conscience
All restraints are gone:
Decision to go ahead.
Arrange a meeting.
Decision to go ahead.
Arrange a meeting.
Note: You can turn back at any point before the final step.
Consummation of the affair.
Consummation of the affair.
In Rutter’s study things started for the men with looking, then progressed to fantasy (imaginative looking). Men are visually stimulated and tend to experience intimacy as touching. Women, on the other hand, tend to connect emotionally and experience intimacy as talking.
So what does this mean for preventing affairs in the workplace or in friendships? Look at the progression. First he looks, then he begins to speak to her. She is pleased that he is connecting with her by talking. She may even respond with a friendly touch to his hand or arm. This tends to confirm his fantasies, and he begins to talk to her at deeper, more intimate levels. She feels connected. One little nudge, and down the ski jump they careen.
Eternal Vigilance
Maybe they don’t intend for an affair to begin, but it surely can. She may be looking to fill a need of belonging and appreciation, of personal worth and value. But the seeds of an affair are easily, and often unintentionally, sown.
Another portrait of those who get caught up in affairs is that they are:
HALT
Hungry for emotional support, appreciation, and affection. Angry because they feel neglected or unappreciated. Lonely because they feel isolated. Tired because of full work schedules or high emotional demands. People who have these issues in their lives are very vulnerable to affairs. If they experience these dynamics they must HALT, face reality (denial can be deadly), and get help immediately.
The preventive here is SALT. That stands for: Satisfied with my relationships. Appreciated by those close to me. Loved by those who count. Treasured for my uniqueness and who I am by those who matter in my life and work. These people are much less likely to be tempted into an affair.
Practical Applications to Prevent Affairs
Fortunately, there are voices of warning to keep us from thundering down the slippery slope to certain disaster. But we must listen and heed the information. To deny the reality is a design for disaster.
One of those voices is the wisdom of Scripture. Among others are these shouts of information:
“You shall not commit adultery” (Ex. 20:14).
“You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife” (Ex. 20:17).
Jesus expanded these to include the lustful look (Matt. 5:27, 28).
Seek the good of others over your own desires, and “do . . . all for the glory of God” (1 Cor. 10:24 and 31).
Even things that are permissible are not always beneficial. “The body is not meant for sexual immorality” (1 Cor. 6:12, 13).
Those of us who are clearly visually attracted need to remember the words of one who knew their meaning from bitter experience. David said in Psalm 101:3, “I will set before my eyes no vile thing.” This includes the imaginations and fantasies of my heart and mind as well as the obvious things that can lead us to come close to and/or cross boundaries of proper thought and conduct. It is much better to think on the things Paul lists in Philippians 4:8, those things that are true, noble, right, pure, admirable, excellent, praiseworthy.
There are some very easy and practical things we can do to send the right signals to others. It can start with the way we dress (men and women). As Christians we want to present a positive attitude. Some clothing sends a mixed message at best and a dangerous message at worst. Beware of what you wear.
There are some very easy and practical things we can do to send the right signals to others. It can start with the way we dress (men and women). As Christians we want to present a positive attitude. Some clothing sends a mixed message at best and a dangerous message at worst. Beware of what you wear.
In Bounds, Out of Bounds
Keeping clear boundaries in relationships is an absolute necessity. Reread the story of Joseph in Genesis 39. Joseph was “well-built and handsome” (verse 6), and you can be sure Mrs. Potiphar, with all her wealth and access to beauty treatments, wasn’t the ugly duckling of Egypt.
But Joseph knew the boundaries, even if Mrs. P didn’t.
One way to clarify boundaries is to keep photographs of your spouse and/or children in clear view in your workplace. It sends a signal that these are important people in your life, and clarifies where your loyalties are.
But Joseph knew the boundaries, even if Mrs. P didn’t.
One way to clarify boundaries is to keep photographs of your spouse and/or children in clear view in your workplace. It sends a signal that these are important people in your life, and clarifies where your loyalties are.
A key concept to help anyone remain loyal to their spouse is to keep 1 Corinthians 10:12, 13 in mind: “So, if you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don’t fall! No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it.”
The challenge for us mere mortals is to look for that escape point before the thrill outweighs the will and we have no desire to escape.
Listen to that voice before you launch: “Not down that path! The end is disaster!” ...(By Richard Stenbakken)
UNCOMFORTABLE QUESTIONS
. If the Sabbath is “against us and contrary to us” as they claim Colossians 2:14 states, why does the Lord himself (in Isaiah 58:13-14) say we should consider it “a delight, the holy of the Lord, honorable”?
2. The words of Jesus in Mark 12:29-31 (“thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength” and the second Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself “) have been so-called “the laws of Christ” and have supposedly usurped the Ten Commandments. However, these same words are found in Deuteronomy 6:4, 5 and Leviticus 19:18 so why did we need the Ten Commandments if we already had these so-called “laws of Christ” already spoken?
3. Sunday keepers always want hard facts from Sabbath keepers by asking us questions like “Why was the Sabbath not mentioned after Genesis 2:2-3 until Exodus 16?” and “Why was the Sabbath command not repeated in the New Testament?” but if you ask in return for a hard fact about where is the commandment for Sunday anywhere in the bible all you get is bewildered looks.
4. Exodus 20:2 reads “I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.” The dispensationalist often refers to the Ten Commandments as “bondage”. So are they going to have me believe God brought them out of bondage just to place them under more bondage? Huh?
5. The children of Israel were commanded some 613 laws between God and Moses Doesn’t the very fact that they’re called the TEN Commandments tell anyone that they are a separate code of laws from the rest? Why say ten if they are “the same as the others”? See Deuteronomy 4:13, 14; 2 Kings 21:8; 2 Chronicles 33:8?
6. Dispensationalist will tell you that the Ten Commandments were the old covenant but in the book of Hebrews (9:7) we find that the old covenant needed replacing for being faulty (the fault spoken of was found with the people and not the law vs. 8). Are dispensationalist prepared to argue that God wrote and spoke something faulty? (HINT: Don’t go there.)
7. “Christians” have ALWAYS worshipped on Sunday and NEVER on the Sabbath? Someone was taking a nap in religious history class! http://www.lltproductions.com/sabbath_history.shtml
8. John 17:4 says: “I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.” Could Jesus make this statement if he still had to “teach” Sunday observance by rising on that day? Is he a liar? (Again, don’t go there.)
9. The gospel commission in Matthew contains this…”Teaching them all that I have commanded” and Jesus commanded the Ten Commandments (Matthew 5:19, 19:17-19. Did Jesus command Sunday?
10. The gospel writers penned their books decades (most scholars say 70 AD or later) after the cross but none of them felt compelled to tell us about a new day of worship? Strange indeed.
11. Again, Luke (23:56) writes about the”…Sabbath according to the commandment” but why say this decades later if the Sabbath is no longer a commandment?
12. If the Ten Commandments are the old covenant then how do they explain away Exodus 19:3-8 which is a covenant made and agreed to a full three days before they (the law) are even given by God?
13. If there was no law before Mount Sinai, why does God say in Genesis 26:5 “Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws”? In the book ok Genesis both moral (6th 4:8-15; 1st 35:2-4; 7th 39:7-9; 10th 25:29-34…and more) and ceremonial (4:4; 22:8-10, 31:54; 46:1) laws are mentioned.
14. If there is no law before Sinai, doesn’t God have a lot of apologizing to do to Adam & Eve, Cain, the whole world (flood), Sodom and Gomorrah, and even SATAN HIMSELF (cast out of heaven. Why?)? Weren’t they sinners? What is sin? (1 John 3:4, see also Romans 4:15)
15. Why do Sunday advocates insist Jesus broke the Sabbath to diminish it’s importance when Jesus himself states in John 15:10 “….even as I have kept my Father's commandments.”? Is Jesus a bald-face liar? (once again, don’t go there)
16. In the gospels & Acts the Sabbath and the synagogue are synonymous with each other 11 times and yet the “2 proof texts” given in the new testament say nothing of a place of worship, why’s that?
17. With the practice of circumcision being very important to Jews, it is defrocked over 40 times in the New Testament but not the Sabbath day meetings held all through the books of acts. We remember how rabidly the Pharisees attacked Jesus over the issue of the Sabbath. So why does Paul NOT ONCE chide them on the Sabbath issue and where is their anger over it in the New Testament writings?
18. If early Christians were already worshipping on Sundays then why didn’t the Jews raise a commotion about that like circumcision? Again, Paul never rebukes anyone for keeping the “old Jewish Sabbath”
19. Why don’t ANY New Testament writers denounce the Sabbath? Don’t they know there’s a “new day of worship”?
20. If the Sabbath is Jewish, why does God (through Isaiah in the 56th chapter) encourage “the sons of the stranger”, meaning gentiles, to keep it? (See also Exodus 20:8-11 for the same “stranger” reference)
21. If the Sabbath is Jewish only then why does Luke (the gentile doctor) refer to “nation of the Jews,” “the people of the Jews,” “the land of the Jews,” and the “synagogue of the Jews.” (Acts 10:22; 12:11; 10:39; 14:1) and never “sabbath of the Jews”?
22. Since God is all powerful (Job 42:2) and all knowing (1 John 3:20), why didn’t God change the law and prevent sin so Christ wouldn’t have to die?
23. If the Sabbath no longer exists because no one is stoned for breaking it, what about some of the other commandments that the Lord prescribed a death penalty for like the third (Leviticus 24:16), fifth (Exodus 21:17), sixth (Numbers 35:16), seventh (Leviticus 20:10)? Will we throw these out, too?
24. If the meaning of “fulfilled” in Matthew 5:17 means do away with the law, what about Matthew 3:15 that states Jesus must be baptized in order “for us to fulfil all righteousness”. The Greek word “plēroō” (play-ro’-o) is the same word in both texts translated “fulfill”. So are we “doing away with” righteousness and baptism?
25. If Luke 16:16 tells us the “law and the prophets” were meant to be of no more value when John the Baptist came along, why is it read from in Acts 13:15, and declared as Paul’s rule of faith and practice in Acts 24:14?
26. If Psalm 118:22-24 is supposed to be a messianic prophecy predicting Sunday sacredness because of the resurrection of Christ then why does the New Testament never mention Sunday as a sacred day in connection with Christ’s resurrection?
27. It says in 1 Chronicles 17:27 that once the Lord blesses something it stays blessed “forever” so doesn’t that mean the Sabbath remains blessed today? Where’s the text showing God un-blessing the Sabbath
I post these question for all to punder on and also to share with the world that the Sabbath is still the day of worship that God instituted from the beinging,the enemy tried to change it and some men where fooled but only eight persons went into the ark at the time of the flood;so if only a few keep God's commandments (in the right way, because trying to keep God's law can't save us, but because we are saved by the grace of God we do keep His Commandments) the great will be the reward of all those who honor God by doing as He has Commanded....Bless
2. The words of Jesus in Mark 12:29-31 (“thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength” and the second Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself “) have been so-called “the laws of Christ” and have supposedly usurped the Ten Commandments. However, these same words are found in Deuteronomy 6:4, 5 and Leviticus 19:18 so why did we need the Ten Commandments if we already had these so-called “laws of Christ” already spoken?
3. Sunday keepers always want hard facts from Sabbath keepers by asking us questions like “Why was the Sabbath not mentioned after Genesis 2:2-3 until Exodus 16?” and “Why was the Sabbath command not repeated in the New Testament?” but if you ask in return for a hard fact about where is the commandment for Sunday anywhere in the bible all you get is bewildered looks.
4. Exodus 20:2 reads “I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.” The dispensationalist often refers to the Ten Commandments as “bondage”. So are they going to have me believe God brought them out of bondage just to place them under more bondage? Huh?
5. The children of Israel were commanded some 613 laws between God and Moses Doesn’t the very fact that they’re called the TEN Commandments tell anyone that they are a separate code of laws from the rest? Why say ten if they are “the same as the others”? See Deuteronomy 4:13, 14; 2 Kings 21:8; 2 Chronicles 33:8?
6. Dispensationalist will tell you that the Ten Commandments were the old covenant but in the book of Hebrews (9:7) we find that the old covenant needed replacing for being faulty (the fault spoken of was found with the people and not the law vs. 8). Are dispensationalist prepared to argue that God wrote and spoke something faulty? (HINT: Don’t go there.)
7. “Christians” have ALWAYS worshipped on Sunday and NEVER on the Sabbath? Someone was taking a nap in religious history class! http://www.lltproductions.com/sabbath_history.shtml
8. John 17:4 says: “I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.” Could Jesus make this statement if he still had to “teach” Sunday observance by rising on that day? Is he a liar? (Again, don’t go there.)
9. The gospel commission in Matthew contains this…”Teaching them all that I have commanded” and Jesus commanded the Ten Commandments (Matthew 5:19, 19:17-19. Did Jesus command Sunday?
10. The gospel writers penned their books decades (most scholars say 70 AD or later) after the cross but none of them felt compelled to tell us about a new day of worship? Strange indeed.
11. Again, Luke (23:56) writes about the”…Sabbath according to the commandment” but why say this decades later if the Sabbath is no longer a commandment?
12. If the Ten Commandments are the old covenant then how do they explain away Exodus 19:3-8 which is a covenant made and agreed to a full three days before they (the law) are even given by God?
13. If there was no law before Mount Sinai, why does God say in Genesis 26:5 “Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws”? In the book ok Genesis both moral (6th 4:8-15; 1st 35:2-4; 7th 39:7-9; 10th 25:29-34…and more) and ceremonial (4:4; 22:8-10, 31:54; 46:1) laws are mentioned.
14. If there is no law before Sinai, doesn’t God have a lot of apologizing to do to Adam & Eve, Cain, the whole world (flood), Sodom and Gomorrah, and even SATAN HIMSELF (cast out of heaven. Why?)? Weren’t they sinners? What is sin? (1 John 3:4, see also Romans 4:15)
15. Why do Sunday advocates insist Jesus broke the Sabbath to diminish it’s importance when Jesus himself states in John 15:10 “….even as I have kept my Father's commandments.”? Is Jesus a bald-face liar? (once again, don’t go there)
16. In the gospels & Acts the Sabbath and the synagogue are synonymous with each other 11 times and yet the “2 proof texts” given in the new testament say nothing of a place of worship, why’s that?
17. With the practice of circumcision being very important to Jews, it is defrocked over 40 times in the New Testament but not the Sabbath day meetings held all through the books of acts. We remember how rabidly the Pharisees attacked Jesus over the issue of the Sabbath. So why does Paul NOT ONCE chide them on the Sabbath issue and where is their anger over it in the New Testament writings?
18. If early Christians were already worshipping on Sundays then why didn’t the Jews raise a commotion about that like circumcision? Again, Paul never rebukes anyone for keeping the “old Jewish Sabbath”
19. Why don’t ANY New Testament writers denounce the Sabbath? Don’t they know there’s a “new day of worship”?
20. If the Sabbath is Jewish, why does God (through Isaiah in the 56th chapter) encourage “the sons of the stranger”, meaning gentiles, to keep it? (See also Exodus 20:8-11 for the same “stranger” reference)
21. If the Sabbath is Jewish only then why does Luke (the gentile doctor) refer to “nation of the Jews,” “the people of the Jews,” “the land of the Jews,” and the “synagogue of the Jews.” (Acts 10:22; 12:11; 10:39; 14:1) and never “sabbath of the Jews”?
22. Since God is all powerful (Job 42:2) and all knowing (1 John 3:20), why didn’t God change the law and prevent sin so Christ wouldn’t have to die?
23. If the Sabbath no longer exists because no one is stoned for breaking it, what about some of the other commandments that the Lord prescribed a death penalty for like the third (Leviticus 24:16), fifth (Exodus 21:17), sixth (Numbers 35:16), seventh (Leviticus 20:10)? Will we throw these out, too?
24. If the meaning of “fulfilled” in Matthew 5:17 means do away with the law, what about Matthew 3:15 that states Jesus must be baptized in order “for us to fulfil all righteousness”. The Greek word “plēroō” (play-ro’-o) is the same word in both texts translated “fulfill”. So are we “doing away with” righteousness and baptism?
25. If Luke 16:16 tells us the “law and the prophets” were meant to be of no more value when John the Baptist came along, why is it read from in Acts 13:15, and declared as Paul’s rule of faith and practice in Acts 24:14?
26. If Psalm 118:22-24 is supposed to be a messianic prophecy predicting Sunday sacredness because of the resurrection of Christ then why does the New Testament never mention Sunday as a sacred day in connection with Christ’s resurrection?
27. It says in 1 Chronicles 17:27 that once the Lord blesses something it stays blessed “forever” so doesn’t that mean the Sabbath remains blessed today? Where’s the text showing God un-blessing the Sabbath
I post these question for all to punder on and also to share with the world that the Sabbath is still the day of worship that God instituted from the beinging,the enemy tried to change it and some men where fooled but only eight persons went into the ark at the time of the flood;so if only a few keep God's commandments (in the right way, because trying to keep God's law can't save us, but because we are saved by the grace of God we do keep His Commandments) the great will be the reward of all those who honor God by doing as He has Commanded....Bless
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)