KEEPING SALVATION FREE- WITH FREE GRACE BOOKMARKS - (a sure fire way to stump doorknockers)
Hello my name is Grady,
My dear friend and Christian in a day of so many contingencies it is impossible to prove any thing beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Does this mean we should doubt our salvation as many door knockers demostrate? Quite the opposite is true. It’s not a false spirit bearing witness to a false Gospel (like burning in bosom). It’s not holy spirit goose bumps, it’s not an indwelling or a manifestation….that gives you assurance….all this can be manipulated by the god of this world (satan).
Your assurance comes in knowing the mere facts of the gospel and believing them.
This in turn gives you an absolute assurance that is indissoluble and true:
AND RELIGION IS A GOOD THING
I MEAN SOMEONE needs to feed the homeless right? (solve wellfare probs)
the problem is that RELIGION was never intended to save us.
Reforming our actions may get us better probation but they will not attian SALvation
THERE IS A GREEK WAR GOING ON RIGHT NOW
and a battle over what the bible says consistently and what the bible says literally
THIS BOOKMARK IS A COMMEMORATIVE INDEX OF FREE GRACE, the only one out there that I know of…
and it’s free….download today!
(one thing is sure….it will free your neighborhood of pesky doorknockers!)
click to download…
bookmark has a “IS YOUR GOSPEL TRUE” graphic on front and 157 free grace verses on back…which makes it impossible for people to tell you to repent and be baptized to be saved….especially in light of the other hundreds of verses
easy to STICK in any bible…
BOOKMARK [keeping salvation free with free bookmarks]
ORIGINALLY WHAT KEPT ME FROM CLASSIC DISPENSATIONAL VIEWS WAS WHEN PEOPLE WOULD INTERPRET THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT AS BEING ONLY FOR THE MILLENIUM (well they were correct, but I just needed to look into it out for myself)
ADVERTISEMENT FOR THE NET BIBLE: ARE YOU A FREE GRACER BUT STUMPED ON VERSES IN THE KJV? Then check the NET!
sometimes a verse isn’t perfectly translated in my favorite bible (the kjv). it is in those times I have learned to trust in a modern translation: the NET bible (relying on increased technology & study.)
I have adopted a new free grace phrase: until the nets are full- lets keep checking the NET-the net bible!
Filed under: FOR THE BORED — BibleAnswerMan (Check it out!) @ 11:06 am
Moral Relativism - greg koukl video downloads (facebook groups)
Posted from a facebook group on Stand to Reason Ministries
COMMENTS and REBUTALLS TO VIDEO ARE INTERESTING
Adam Schneider at 10:47am Jul 27
This is some of the worst argumentation I have ever heard. Instead of setting up straw men arguments to tear down obviously flawed statements from inconsequential people, he should instead attempt to deal with the history of thought. He should take on specific arguments from real opponents, e.g., Foucault, Sartre, Nietzsche, etc…. Instead this man treats his audience with contempt by being patronizing and misleading toward his audience.
G Grady Little at 2:09am Jul 28
I liked how he said that “what holds every cultrue together is common values expressed through law”
Adam Schneider at 8:43am Jul 28
not all cultures hold the same values though. even if there were values that were universal, that really doesn’t prove anything. It could just as easily be argued that people have developed morals as survival instincts.
G Grady Little at 4:19am Aug 3
no culture known to man exalts absolute selfish behavior, it would be like honoring the retreating enemy with a medal of honor- all cultures in fact honor some type of selfliss behavior. even in canaballism, no one would honor he who ate most his friends up, but rather he who refrained- this universal code of behavior is what cslewis called the natural law. it is many examples of this that koukl called “common values expressed through law”
Adam Schneider at 9:41am Aug 3
Selfish behavior as you say, must first be defined as different cultures consider different acts to be selfish. As I said though, it really doesnt prove the existence of god at all. It is merely an equivocation.
G Grady Little at 12:16am Aug 4
again, let me say this…no culture known to man exalts absolute selfish behavior…but this is a unique-to-human characteristic. Wolves may by instinct act unselfishly at times, but to create a primitive society even in case of pigmy type folk, they will ultimately organize some sort of system of things and the unselfish will alway be held in higher esteem than the selfish. Never will you see a society take the most cowardly of fellow and make him chief pigmy. Honor will universally follow those who follow the natural progression of things found in a naturally based code of ethics or conscience and those who go against it will ultimately be put to shame. I believe even if it is an equivocation (since you brought God into it)…that if there is in fact evidence for a natural law (and I have already laid that basis) then there would also be evidence for a natural law giver….or God
Adam Schneider at 9:14am Aug 4
You use words like “never” and “ultimately” alot. And use them in a very presumptuous manner. They really dont have the meaning that you think they do and they have not helped you lay the basis for a natural law, you are simply assuming there is one. Just like you assume there is a god, and you assume the bible is god’s word.
G Grady Little at 10:18am Aug 4
I understand your concern with subjectivity. However I think naturalists are as guilty of this or moreso.
For example: there is an equivocation of the word ’subjective’ because since we are subjects everything we percieve is a subject….whether it’s the natural world via our five senses, or intuition. Both would be considered subjective under this reasoning!
whether the things we know are moral truth through intuition or the nature of world through our five senses there is a sense in which all these are subjective because they are in fact percieved by subjects.
In fact some say that what is percieved through intuition is more relieable than our five senses, which would put super-naturalism at a higher truth level than naturalism: if you saw a dog across the room and at the same time thought 2+2=4 which then would be more true? it would be the intuition you know, because the dog could be a mirage or an illusion.
Adam Schneider at 4:19pm Aug 4
A priori reasoning has been debated in philosophy for the last 200 years and for the most part has not resulted in anything conclusive. In fact, most philosphers have a very big problem with it. Now, just because people accept something in no way makes it true. Millions of people believe in Allah, does this make him real? I’m sure you would say no. Do you think God could make 2+2=5?
G Grady Little at 4:39am Aug 6
well, truth exists apart from the perception of it. So our preception of truth was the topic at hand. I can percieve Allah as the only true God, but my perception can be false. Now on the other hand, I can see a picture of Allah in the clouds and this could also be false. My point was that the truth that is percieved by the five senses is just as subjective as truth percieved by intuition. In fact my eyes might decieve me more often than my mind. That is the premise I was making with the whole thing. And yes God can make 2+2=5, in a hyper space, or meta physical realm, other dimension, or quantum realm. Our pysical laws would be bendable there.
(end comments)
ARE YOU SICK OF ALL THE BAD NEWS IN THE WORLD?
HERE’S SOME GOOD NEWS…
SOTERIOLOGICAL JOURNAL 4:5- The Rich young Ruler- sell everything- give to poor and follow me VS free grace
GOD ENCRYPTED THE GOSPEL OF FAITH ALONE AT TIMES TO RESIST THE PROUD AND GIVE GRACE TO THE HUMBLE
Many Lordship Salvationists use the Rich young ruler as an example that we must repent and make Jesus our Lord and Master to be saved.
There is an equivocation of the word repent (as I have said before).
Repent can mean many things (sorrow, change mind, turn from bad action, turn from good action etc)
When spoken of in a salvation sense the word repent is never used as a “turn from sins plural to be saved”
but rather a “turn from unbelief to belief- which is a turning from sin singular”
I don’t have an issue with the case of the rich young ruler. For one repent isn’t even used in this passage but other verbs are…
sell everything,
give to poor,
follow me…
etc…
However when seen in context it is obviously a non issue of free grace.
See in Mark ten there is a young man ( a jew) who comes to Jesus and asks “what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life”?
Ultimately what is remembered from this passage is that Jesus says….”sell everything you have, give to the poor and follow me”
Well there is a lot more to the story that just that.
See I want to raise just a few observations here:
1 Jesus wanted everyone to know that salvation was impossible by the flesh (Mark 10:27)
2 Jesus wanted everyone to know that while it’s impossible for salvation to happen meritoriously through the flesh, yet still one who believes and works not may be saved like a child. (Mark 10:15)
It’s hard for the rich to get saved because they work for a living and it’s normal to believe we must work for salvation. Childishness is looked at as irresponsibility and therefore not honored to the rich. Secondly since salvation is by having the faith of a child (v15)….the rich normally would not be equiped do that…(v25.) This particular rich man needed to take the God he was believing in and repent toward the one true method of salvation (faith not fleshly works). He believed in a God of the Old Testament Law, Jesus said basically “if you believed the law of moses, you would have believed in ME, because the law testified of me.”
Note: it’s not that the rich can’t be saved, but it’s that it’s difficult for them, whereas for children it may be very simplistic.
Jesus knowing that the rich young ruler was just a legalist, he did not give him the way of grace (v17) but the way of law. In essence God resisted the proud and gave grace to the humble. He does this with parables too. Parables were not meant to reveal truth but to hide it. He encrypted the gospel at points so that only those who were humble and properly prepared for it….would hear and be saved. The others, simply did not have ears to hear. They were deaf and blind and cocky and proud. This was the case with the Rich young Ruler.
LORDSHIP SALVATION: HOW TO HAVE NO ASSURANCE OF SALVATION
many Christians think they need to be better people to be saved….as a result they miss the entire message of the Gospel and salvation itself….
It’s not a real faith in Christ. It’s ultimately a faith in man’s ability to abide in Jesus’ religion but not IN JESUS himself!
You must REPENT of traditional dead works to trust in the finished work of Christ!
“MEASURELESS HARM HAS BEEN DONE TO A SOUL WHEN IT HAS BEEN TAUGHT THAT A SELF-IMPOSED REPENTANCE MUST PRECEDE FAITH IN CHRIST. SUCH INSISTENCE IGNORES EVERY VITAL ASPECT OF SAVING GRACE.”
Lewis Sperry Chafer (founder of Dallas Theological Seminary) In His book called GRACE 1922 by Kregal, Grand Rapids
“if FAITH IS THE HAND that accepts salvation, REPENTANCE IS THE HAND that rejects salvation by any other means”-Ron Shea (Gospel Booklet)
Are you sick of all the bad news out there?
here is some good news…
FREE GRACE: HOW TO HAVE ASSURANCE OF SALVATION
IT’S NOT FAITH THAT GOD EXISTS,
IT’S A FAITH IN HIS FAITH-FULNESS.
It’s faith that is within something.
The object of this faith is Christ.
The subject of this faith is the Cross.
The reason of faith is the resurrection.
The result of faith is salvation.
ARE YOU SICK OF ALL THE BAD NEWS IN THE WORLD?
HERE’S SOME GOOD NEWS…
Filed under: FOR THE BORED — BibleAnswerMan (Check it out!) @ 11:01 am
Sending the ‘Very Best’? - Hallmark Introduces New Line of Cards for Gay Marriage
(christiansunite.com reports) — Hot on the heels of the California Supreme Court decision to allow same- sex “marriage,” Hallmark Cards is cravenly introducing a new line of greetings cards celebrating “gay marriage.” Playing it safe with generalized images such as two tuxedos and taglines like “one promise, two hearts,” there is no mention of the words wedding or marriage. Hallmark can easily market the cards for civil unions and domestic partnerships should the California decision go against them and be overturned in November.
Hallmark prides itself on “quality, innovation and caring.” A family-owned business since 1910, Hallmark has grown into the most recognized greeting card chain in the nation. For over 50 years, families have gathered to watch the award winning Hallmark Channel for quality movies based on American values and pro-family principles.
Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America (CWA), said, “Hallmark is jeopardizing its brand as a family-friendly company. Customers used to be able to trust Hallmark to produce quality products that were safe for all ages. Now parents will need to steer their kids from Hallmark’s section of the greeting card aisle and away from its previously heartwarming movies for fear that they too will push homosexual messages.”
Janice Crouse, Director and Senior Fellow of CWA’s Beverly LaHaye Institute, said, “By latching onto the latest fad generated by the homosexual special interest groups, Hallmark is negating its image as a wholesome company that promotes American values and pro-family principles in its products. American businesses have a corporate responsibility to the public that buys their products. Instead of bolstering campaigns by special interest groups like the homosexual activists, corporations like Hallmark should be protecting American culture from those forces that would destroy the family and create a public environment that is detrimental to general well- being, especially children’s well-being.”
Concerned Women for America is the nation’s largest public policy women’s organization.
CONSERVATIVES NEED TWO SEATS TO CAPTURE THE SENATE: remember to vote republican
OBAMA UPDATE: big labor unions donate 300 million to the cause of obama this month - lets donate more….go to NSRC.ORG and view donate link.
ELECTION08 UPDATE: “The biggest issue we have going right now is that conservatives must get out and vote. If the conservatives don’t vote, Obama will walk into the Whitehouse. I know McCain isn’t the candidate of choice, but it’s all we got. Vote Conservative…. or at least as conservative as we can get!”
• “Do you not realize what this man Obama can do to our country? He already has said that “he is a citizen of the world”. A citizen of the world? IS that what we need in the White House? No, with Obama will will definitely be headed for a One World Order. This guy is the most liberal person yet, he is by far so much more liberal than The Clintons. If you think Bill and Hillary were bad, then watch out. Think with your head not with this “sweet talking guy’s” words! I am not a big fan of John McCain but I am going to vote for him because I want my vote to count. If you vote 3rd party or don’t vote at all then you will cause Obama to get elected. It will be on your shoulders! So many of the Christians voted for their pocketbooks when they voted for Bill Clinton and look what we got. This guy is so much worse.”
• “I had decided that this election I was not going to vote for McCain or Obama either one. I was going to leave that part of the ballot blank. Then ABC, CBS and NBC sent their “anchors” on the trip with Obama. To me that was an obvious attempt to encourage Americans to jump on the Obama band wagon and vote this monster into office. They would never have done that even with a “liberal” conservative like John McCain. I wonder if Charlie, Katie and Brian bowed down and kissed Obama’s ring, his feet, or his behind? After observing this obvious attempt by the networks to force Obama down America’s throat, I have now decided that I will vote for McCain after all. I don’t like anyone telling me how to vote nor whom to vote for. Thanks to ABC, CBS and NBC, McCain picks up another vote!”
• TOO MUCH CHANGE FOR ANY COUNTRY IS DETRIMENTAL- we don’t need change, we need consistency. Once a plan is consistent, either a good plan, or a bad one. At least we will know where we stand.
• That’s why I vote republican across the board and not 3rd party or libertarian. Many don’t agree and that’s ok, but it is always their disagreeing with this that causes the worst liberal politicians in America to rule her. Some things cannot be undone. While you guys are test tubing politics, real liberals are passing irreversible legislature that is creating less freedoms for religion across the board.
• BUSH needs to be thanked not criticized, Obama needs to go back to college and McCain needs to be spanked, ranked and elected.
• No one is perfect, this is a non issue and I cannot fathom how Christians will vote for Obama. Atlantic Trade Union, open boarders, whatever. These were not be fixed in the last 30 years why do we expect one guy to fix it in the next three? That’s why I think Obama is creating to high of expectations for everyone including himself, to his demise and untrustworthiness.
• We really need another Bush in office, but I guess I can vote a McCain in there too.
Filed under: FOR THE BORED — BibleAnswerMan (Check it out!) @ 11:00 am
catholics urged vote mccain not obama….also update on discrimination of prolife doc’s
Should doctors, nurses and pharmacists be forced to participate in abortions? Abortion groups think so. And if they have their way, you could lose the ability to choose a pro-life doctor- update by concerned women for america below
Supreme Knight of catholic circles addresses on dangers of voting for democrats
(christiansunite.com reports) — Addressing the leadership and more than 1,000 members of the Knights of Columbus and their families at the organization’s 126th Annual Convention being held in Quebec, Supreme Knight Carl Anderson highlighted the organization’s accomplishments over the past year, and laid out a vision for a future in which values play a key role. The speech was also broadcast live throughout Canada and the United States on Catholic television network, and worldwide on EWTN radio and television.
Speaking after greetings to the Knights were heard from the Pope, via the Cardinal Secretary of State, and the presidents of the United States, Mexico, and the Philippines, Anderson highlighted the organization’s remarkable charitable giving last year, which totaled more than $144 million and more than 68 million hours donated to charity by the more than 1.75 million Knights worldwide.
Anderson also called on Catholics to “shine a bright line of separation between themselves and all those politicians who defend the abortion regime of Roe v. Wade.”
He added: “Imagine if this year millions of Catholic voters simply say ‘no’ — no to every candidate of every political party who supports abortion.” He added, “It’s time we stop accommodating pro-abortion politicians, and it’s time we start demanding that they accommodate us. What candidate or political party can withstand the loss of millions of Catholic voters in this election or the next?”
He concluded: “Catholic voters have the power to transform our politics. And if faithful citizens can build a new politics–a politics that is not satisfied with the status quo but one that is dedicated to building up a new culture of life. There are more than 150 million Catholics in North America, and if we stand together and demand better from our politicians, we can transform politics. And if we truly hope for a culture of life and a civilization of love, then we must first think, and then act, in new ways.”
A complete transcript is available at www.kofc.org
END REPORT BY ONENEWS NOW
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Election2008/Default.aspx?id=210638
update on discrimination of prolife doc’s
CONCERNED WOMEN FOR AMERICA REPORTS:
Mike Leavitt, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), wrote an excellent blog on why HHS is considering regulations to enforce laws protecting the right of health professionals not to participate in abortions. Abortion advocates are flooding his blog with negative comments opposing the regulations. They don’t believe pro-life doctors should have the right to choose not to do abortions.
If we don’t stand up for pro-life health providers, it could lead to them being forced to either participate in or refer for abortions, physician-assisted suicide, or other controversial practices - or simply to leave the profession altogether.
As patients, we could lose the ability to choose pro-life health professionals. Imagine having to get pre-natal care from a doctor who just moments before killed another woman’s baby.
Should doctors, nurses and pharmacists be forced to participate in abortions? Abortion groups think so. And if they have their way, you could lose the ability to choose a pro-life doctor.
Sec. Leavitt has invited our comments. The Department needs our backing to prove that pro-life professionals should have the right to choose not to participate in abortions or other controversial actions.
I posted a comment. Now’s your chance.
Your blog comment doesn’t have to be long.
Pro-abortion groups have twisted the focus on whether some types of contraception cause abortion. This is a deliberate misreading of the regulations. The regulations simply respect varying viewpoints. They allow health providers to rely on sound medical judgment. They focus on the right of health professionals to follow their conscience and their Hippocratic Oath to “do no harm.”
As patients, we depend - with our lives - on health providers to be moral and act in what they believe to be the best interest of their patients. But if moral professionals with strong consciences are forced out of the profession, patients will pay the price.
It will take only a few minutes, but you can make a big difference. Click here and scroll to the bottom to add your post.
You can read Sec. Leavitt’s response to some of the comments here: http://secretarysblog.hhs.gov/my_weblog/2008/08/physician-con-1.html
To read more about this issue go to: HHS Secretary Addresses Abortion Groups’ Lies, Seeks to Protect Pro-Life Doctors and Patients
No “Right To Choose” for Pro-Life Doctors
Let’s protect pro-lifers’ right to choose.
HHS Secretary Addresses Abortion Groups’ Lies, Seeks to Protect Pro-Life Doctors and Patients
(CONCERNED WOMEN FOR AMERICA REPORTS:)
The Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) is stepping in to correct misleading reports from abortion groups and the media. Proposed regulations to protect the right of health care providers not to participate in abortion, physician-assisted suicide, or other immoral acts, have been miscast as denying women access to contraception.
A blog entry from Sec. Mike Leavitt explains the proposed regulations. Yet blog comments from abortion enthusiasts reveal a startling lack of understanding of “contraception” and a dangerous demand that medical professionals violate their Hippocratic Oath to “do no harm.” They insist on a woman’s right to get whatever she demands from health care providers, but also insist that professionals have no right to exercise sound medical judgments and must participate in acts that can result in harm to their patients.
You can support pro-life doctors by sending a comment to Sec. Leavitt at
http://secretarysblog.hhs.gov/my_weblog/2008/08/physician-con-2.html
For over 35 years, federal laws have stated that, in programs funded by HHS, health care providers cannot be discriminated against for refusing to participate in abortions or other immoral acts that can harm patients. Yet medical students, doctors, nurses and pharmacists report being forced out of jobs, or not hired because of their pro-life convictions.
Substantiating the reports of pro-life doctors being pressured to do abortions, recently the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) released “ethics” guidelines on the “Limits on the Right of Conscience” that would require OB/GYNs to perform and refer for abortions. Not long after that, the American Board of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ABOG) released new guidelines requiring doctors to comply with all of ACOG’s ethics guidelines. ABOG provides credentials for doctors, which are necessary for them to practice in hospitals.
Sec. Leavitt sent letters to the organizations pointing out that this could violate federal laws that protect the right of health care professionals not to participate in acts that violate their conscience.
The groups’ response, according to Sec. Leavitt, was “dodgy and unsatisfying.” So he asked for regulations to be drafted to enforce the existing laws and protect the legal right of patients to choose a doctor who reflects his or her beliefs.
The proposed regulations explain the right of health care workers to follow their consciences on issues like abortion, which the professionals may define (a definition backed by medical textbooks) as “terminating a human life before or after implantation.”
Someone within HHS leaked the proposed regulations to The New York Times, claiming that the regulations “redefined” abortion to include contraception. In fact, the regulations focus on the right of health care providers to follow their consciences and make the reasoned medical judgment that abortion is an action that “terminates a human life before or after implantation.”
Medical textbooks define conception of an embryo as occurring before implantation of the embryo in the mother’s womb.
Abortion advocates, however, call this limiting access to “contraception.” They define “contraception” (against conception) as including drugs or devices that operate after conception occurs and before implantation.
If they are successful in either coercing doctors into participating in abortions or pushing pro-life professionals out of jobs there will be fewer health care workers in an already diminishing field. Patients - especially pro-life women - would be denied access to health care professionals who provide the care they need.
Many women could not trust an abortionist for their prenatal care. They would not be assured that a doctor, who moments before in another room had killed another woman’s baby, could walk into their check-up and provide the best care for their unborn child.
Plenty of health care workers, and billions of dollars from government and insurance companies, accommodate pro-choice women. Pro-life women, on the other hand, can have a difficult time finding health care providers who respect and live out pro-life convictions.
Abortion advocates are causing a ruckus about a rule that simply requires health agencies to follow the law by not discriminating against people who object to participating in unethical actions such as abortion, assisted suicide, or other actions contrary to Biblical or ethical convictions. Unless we counter the distorted claims of abortion advocates about the new regulations, those regulations could be blocked. If health care professionals are denied the right to live out moral beliefs, patients will suffer the consequences.
Action: Don’t let abortion advocates force pro-life doctors out of their jobs. Support the regulations and laws that protect the right of conscience by sending a comment to HHS. If you know a health care provider who has been discriminated against for pro-life views, your stories are especially needed.
CONSERVATIVES NEED TWO SEATS TO CAPTURE THE SENATE: remember to vote republican
OBAMA UPDATE: big labor unions donate 300 million to the cause of obama this month - lets donate more….go to NSRC.ORG and view donate link.
ELECTION08 UPDATE: “The biggest issue we have going right now is that conservatives must get out and vote. If the conservatives don’t vote, Obama will walk into the Whitehouse. I know McCain isn’t the candidate of choice, but it’s all we got. Vote Conservative…. or at least as conservative as we can get!”
• “Do you not realize what this man Obama can do to our country? He already has said that “he is a citizen of the world”. A citizen of the world? IS that what we need in the White House? No, with Obama will will definitely be headed for a One World Order. This guy is the most liberal person yet, he is by far so much more liberal than The Clintons. If you think Bill and Hillary were bad, then watch out. Think with your head not with this “sweet talking guy’s” words! I am not a big fan of John McCain but I am going to vote for him because I want my vote to count. If you vote 3rd party or don’t vote at all then you will cause Obama to get elected. It will be on your shoulders! So many of the Christians voted for their pocketbooks when they voted for Bill Clinton and look what we got. This guy is so much worse.”
• “I had decided that this election I was not going to vote for McCain or Obama either one. I was going to leave that part of the ballot blank. Then ABC, CBS and NBC sent their “anchors” on the trip with Obama. To me that was an obvious attempt to encourage Americans to jump on the Obama band wagon and vote this monster into office. They would never have done that even with a “liberal” conservative like John McCain. I wonder if Charlie, Katie and Brian bowed down and kissed Obama’s ring, his feet, or his behind? After observing this obvious attempt by the networks to force Obama down America’s throat, I have now decided that I will vote for McCain after all. I don’t like anyone telling me how to vote nor whom to vote for. Thanks to ABC, CBS and NBC, McCain picks up another vote!”
Filed under: FOR THE BORED — BibleAnswerMan (Check it out!) @ 12:35 pm
-ADVERTISEMENT- T.V.C. homosexual urban legends – the series
PG&E- gives $250k to shut down the majority of christian churches in CA
Now before this action alert I want you to know that the majority of solid Christian denominations have already taken traditional marriage vows. Meaning they will not perform a homosexual marriage even if forced by government to do so. I heard pastor Miles Mcpherson of the Rock ministries (calvary Chapel) in san diego mention that he has already been threatened by officials that “he was on their list” if he should refuse homosexual marriage ceremony to anyone.
Hmmm?
Which means…..lock up all pastors, or shut them down….
Is freedom of homosexuals worth the loss of freedom of americas pastors?
PG&E doesn’t help this issue…
(AFA.NET reports
Families in northern and central California may wonder why their gas and electric rates are going up. Well, here is one reason for the increase: Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) has just donated $250,000 to help defeat Prop 8, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman.
It is wrong for public utility PG&E to take a political position against Proposition 8.
PG&E announced that it will donate $250,000 to the “No on 8″ campaign, and join with campaign reps and officials from the sponsoring homosexual group Equality California to create a business advisory council which will encourage state businesses to help defeat the ballot measure.
Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families, says no public utility should be allowed to take such a position. “They provide power — gas and electricity. They should not be taking positions against ballot measures,” he emphasizes. “That’s like a quasi-government agency taking positions against ballot measures, which is illegal.”
(whats cool is that AFA AMERICAN FAMILY ASSOCIATION donated twice as much to protectmarriage.com !!!)
God is Good…!
but I cannot encourage you enough to lobby your representatives and pastors to support that ministry as well….click to see if your churches and business are supporting PROP 8
AFA gives $500,000 to help the fight for marriage in California
Years of savings go to fight the battle
July 30, 2008
AFA has given $500,000 to ProtectMarriage.org, the organization leading the fight for the passage of Proposition 8 in California. Proposition 8 defines marriage as being between a man and a woman.
Where did this money come from?
AFA works on the premise that we have an obligation to be good stewards of the gifts given to this ministry. We don’t buy anything on credit. We have no debt. We are careful to make sure your gifts are used wisely. We are very frugal with your gifts.
Over the years we have been putting aside some money, knowing that when the need came we would have the funds to meet that need. The $500,000 we gave to ProtectMarriage.org came from those savings.
The battle for marriage in California is very important. If California defeats Proposition 8, it will open the floodgates for same sex marriage in all the other states. The battle in California isn’t simply about California. It will affect every state, yours included. The homosexual groups have already raised millions, and are expected to spend nearly $20 million to destroy marriage as it has existed for thousands of years.
That is why we chose to give the money to the group in California fighting the battle. They needed financial support.
(endreport by AFA.NET…go to American Family Association and sign up for free alerts)
CONSERVATIVES NEED TWO SEATS TO CAPTURE THE SENATE: remember to vote republican
OBAMA UPDATE: big labor unions donate 300 million to the cause of obama this month - lets donate more….go to NSRC.ORG and view donate link.
ELECTION08 UPDATE: “The biggest issue we have going right now is that conservatives must get out and vote. If the conservatives don’t vote, Obama will walk into the Whitehouse. I know McCain isn’t the candidate of choice, but it’s all we got. Vote Conservative…. or at least as conservative as we can get!”
• “Do you not realize what this man Obama can do to our country? He already has said that “he is a citizen of the world”. A citizen of the world? IS that what we need in the White House? No, with Obama will will definitely be headed for a One World Order. This guy is the most liberal person yet, he is by far so much more liberal than The Clintons. If you think Bill and Hillary were bad, then watch out. Think with your head not with this “sweet talking guy’s” words! I am not a big fan of John McCain but I am going to vote for him because I want my vote to count. If you vote 3rd party or don’t vote at all then you will cause Obama to get elected. It will be on your shoulders! So many of the Christians voted for their pocketbooks when they voted for Bill Clinton and look what we got. This guy is so much worse.”
• “I had decided that this election I was not going to vote for McCain or Obama either one. I was going to leave that part of the ballot blank. Then ABC, CBS and NBC sent their “anchors” on the trip with Obama. To me that was an obvious attempt to encourage Americans to jump on the Obama band wagon and vote this monster into office. They would never have done that even with a “liberal” conservative like John McCain. I wonder if Charlie, Katie and Brian bowed down and kissed Obama’s ring, his feet, or his behind? After observing this obvious attempt by the networks to force Obama down America’s throat, I have now decided that I will vote for McCain after all. I don’t like anyone telling me how to vote nor whom to vote for. Thanks to ABC, CBS and NBC, McCain picks up another vote!”
Filed under: FOR THE BORED — BibleAnswerMan (Check it out!) @ 12:32 pm
Son of Hamas leader Mosab Hassan Yousef converts to Christianity
STR.blog reports:
posted by melinda at STR.org
Mosab Hassan Yousef is an extraordinary young man with an extraordinary story. He was born the son of one of the most influential leaders of the militant Hamas organization in the West Bank and grew up in a strict Islamic family.
Now, at 30 years old, he attends an evangelical Christian church, Barabbas Road in San Diego, Calif. He renounced his Muslim faith, left his family behind in Ramallah and is seeking asylum in the United States….
“Now, here’s the reality: after I studied Christianity — which I had a big misunderstanding about, because I studied about Christianity from Islam, which is, there is nothing true about Christianity when you study it from Islam, and that was the only source.
When I studied the Bible carefully verse by verse, I made sure that that was the book of God, the word of God for sure, so I started to see things in a different way, which was difficult for me, to say Islam is wrong.
Islam is my father. I grew up for (one) father — 22 years for that father — and another father came to me and told me, ‘I’m sorry, I’m your father.’ And I was like, ‘What are you talking about? Like, I have my own father, and it’s Islam!’ And the father of Christianity told me, ‘No, I’m your father. I was in jail, and this (Islam) is not your father.’”
Democratic activist Judges kick us when we are down and legislate all doctors to inseminate lesbians no holds barred. FYI McCain wouldn’t allow activist Judges to force Doc’s to inseminate lesbians for reproducing means, but obama would be tickled by it for some freakish reason.
ADD GOOGLE and RSS syndication
“Concerned Women for America” have been lobbying against this for months now….thanx for your activist efforts to bring america back to her Christian Heritage….!! The law was still passed but not without a fight, and you guys are troopers. If you don’t fight, then your just a coward to give over your house and home to enemy. These Conservative Christian women are doing a great job…and I think they deserve a hand of support and prayer so visit their site and sign up for their stuff…..(concerned women for america).
Back to our story:
Activist judges take on tradition marriage and kick us while we are down…
(onenewsnow.com reports)
The same California Supreme Court that created a “right” to homosexual “marriage” earlier this year has now ruled that the state may force healthcare professionals to provide services that support an immoral and physically dangerous lifestyle.
California’s highest court was unanimous in its decision on Monday that Christian doctors may not refuse to perform artificial insemination for homosexual patients. (See “California court says no religious exemption for doctors”) Attorney Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI), reacts to the ruling.
“This is a clear violation of the fundamental rights of individuals to live and practice their faith,” he states bluntly. “Forcing doctors to have to choose between being a doctor and being a Christian in the State of California is an outrageous violation of the fundamental rights of every American to be able to practice their faith and not to have to leave their occupation because of it.”
In the case in question, the Christian doctors refused to perform artificial insemination on a lesbian patient, but did refer her to another doctor who would perform the elective treatment. Dacus says that proves this suit was not about guaranteeing “healthcare” for homosexuals, but instead about punishing Christians for obeying God’s Word.
“This is not about denying people services,” the attorney argues. “This is, instead, about the ‘thought police’ attempting to censor Christian beliefs and Christian perspectives that don’t agree with homosexuality. We’re talking…about individuals being able to force doctors or other professionals to violate their faith in order to keep their job.” And that, he adds, is a clear violation of the rights of individuals to be able to practice their expertise and, at the same time, not to have to deny their faith.
The PJI president says the ruling is quite broad and will apply to almost every profession in the state, meaning that Christian professionals and service providers — childcare providers, for instance — will be forced to provide services to homosexuals that support their immoral lifestyle and clearly violate biblical standards.
“For example, lawyers who are engaging in marriage and family law can now be forced to [execute] documents for homosexuals adopting children…,” Dacus offers. “And individual with a wedding service, despite their Christian faith to the contrary, can now be forced to conduct wedding services and wedding preparations for lesbian or homosexual male couples.”
Dacus says the case is certain to be appealed. “This just goes to show how critically important it is for us in the United States to have a Supreme Court that is not against those who practice the Christian faith but, instead, understands what the Constitution is about and [do] not engage in outrageous judicial activism,” he says.
(end report by onenewsnow.com)
CONSERVATIVES NEED TWO SEATS TO CAPTURE THE SENATE: remember to vote republican
OBAMA UPDATE: big labor unions donate 300 million to the cause of obama this month - lets donate more….go to NSRC.ORG and view donate link.
ELECTION08 UPDATE: “The biggest issue we have going right now is that conservatives must get out and vote. If the conservatives don’t vote, Obama will walk into the Whitehouse. I know McCain isn’t the candidate of choice, but it’s all we got. Vote Conservative…. or at least as conservative as we can get!”
• “Do you not realize what this man Obama can do to our country? He already has said that “he is a citizen of the world”. A citizen of the world? IS that what we need in the White House? No, with Obama will will definitely be headed for a One World Order. This guy is the most liberal person yet, he is by far so much more liberal than The Clintons. If you think Bill and Hillary were bad, then watch out. Think with your head not with this “sweet talking guy’s” words! I am not a big fan of John McCain but I am going to vote for him because I want my vote to count. If you vote 3rd party or don’t vote at all then you will cause Obama to get elected. It will be on your shoulders! So many of the Christians voted for their pocketbooks when they voted for Bill Clinton and look what we got. This guy is so much worse.”
• “I had decided that this election I was not going to vote for McCain or Obama either one. I was going to leave that part of the ballot blank. Then ABC, CBS and NBC sent their “anchors” on the trip with Obama. To me that was an obvious attempt to encourage Americans to jump on the Obama band wagon and vote this monster into office. They would never have done that even with a “liberal” conservative like John McCain. I wonder if Charlie, Katie and Brian bowed down and kissed Obama’s ring, his feet, or his behind? After observing this obvious attempt by the networks to force Obama down America’s throat, I have now decided that I will vote for McCain after all. I don’t like anyone telling me how to vote nor whom to vote for. Thanks to ABC, CBS and NBC, McCain picks up another vote!”
• TOO MUCH CHANGE FOR ANY COUNTRY IS DETRIMENTAL- we don’t need change, we need consistency. Once a plan is consistent, either a good plan, or a bad one. At least we will know where we stand.
• That’s why I vote republican across the board and not 3rd party or libertarian. Many don’t agree and that’s ok, but it is always their disagreeing with this that causes the worst liberal politicians in America to rule her. Some things cannot be undone. While you guys are test tubing politics, real liberals are passing irreversible legislature that is creating less freedoms for religion across the board.
• BUSH needs to be thanked not criticized, Obama needs to go back to college and McCain needs to be spanked, ranked and elected.
• No one is perfect, this is a non issue and I cannot fathom how Christians will vote for Obama. Atlantic Trade Union, open boarders, whatever. These were not be fixed in the last 30 years why do we expect one guy to fix it in the next three? That’s why I think Obama is creating to high of expectations for everyone including himself, to his demise and untrustworthiness.
• We really need another Bush in office, but I guess I can vote a McCain in there too.
YET ANOTHER JOURNAL FROM THE GUY YOUR PASTOR WARNED YOU ABOUT
SOTERIOLOGICAL JOURNAL 4:5- IF I DON’T GO TO SUNDAY SCHOOL AND AIN’T SPIRIT LED WILL I GO TO HELL?
can you imagine if a oneness pentecostal told you that you were not saved because you didn’t speak in tongues?
can you imagine if a seventhday adventist told you that you were not saved because you went to church sunday instead of saturday?
well it is easy to turn christianity into a money slaving enterprise, but is this what Jesus would do?
many have made church going a necessary fruit of the spirit. Is this doctrine of law or of grace?
of faith or of works?
is it true or heresy? Don’t worry, church can’t even save the pastor! fur reals read up
blessings and enjoy one of the few people even less popular amongst the legalists than myself..
..a free grace pillar a real grace shaker…..
lllllllloooooouuuiiiissss sperry chafer… (written in 19th century poetic style)
If your pastor was alive in 1922 he would have warned you about Lewis Sperry Chafer!
& he fires up every legalist on the globe, even 100 years later!
Chafer,L.S.Grace. part of a software research project sponsored by bartimaeus.us.
It was His liberal teaching on the observance of the Sabbath which, more than aught else, provoked the wrath of the Jewish leaders against Christ, and, it may be observed, there is no religious subject today which so draws out personal convictions and opinions. The reason is evident. Few have really comprehended the exact character and principle of grace. To many, Christianity is a system of human works and character building from which merit accrues. And
the observance of a sabbath day presents extraordinary opportunities for the exercise of meritorious works.
The question is a far deeper one than the observance, or the manner of observance, of a day. It is the fundamental question whether grace is to reign supreme in place of law, or whether it is to be co-mingled with law.
The roots of this problem reach down to the bedrock issue which forms the very structure of the two opposing principles of pure law and pure grace. For its solution, the question demands more than a superficial opinion. Truly the choice of a particular day and the manner of its observance is a test question as to the individual’s intelligent adjustment to the whole grace revelation. As
there can be no proper co-mingling of the reign of law and the reign of grace, there can be no proper co-mingling of elements which, according to the Scriptures, are the essential features of these widely different days.
A “Christian Sabbath” is a misnomer, and the very use of the term indicates inexcusable inattention to Bible terms, and an unchallenged freedom of mind and heart which is willing to sacrifice the richest treasures of grace by co-mingling them with law. It is
not a problem of interpretation; it is a question of whether personal sentiment, prejudice, or ignorance, shall blindly override the very foundation of the right divisions of Scripture.
These two days, typical of two opposing governing principles and two great dispensations, are absolutely unrelated. Of the whole Decalogue, it is the sabbath-day commandment only which is not carried forward in any manner whatsoever into the reign of grace, nor could it be.
Failure to base the distinction between these age-representing days upon the essential character of their respective relationships — pure law and pure grace — is resulting in an almost universal confusion of mind on the subject among Christians, and this, in turn, provides the opportunity for present-day legalists to promote their Christ-rejecting heresies.
Intelligent comprehension of pure law is clarifying to the mind, for its very oppositeness to pure grace safeguards a clear comprehension of grace. On the other hand, the greatest foe of such clear comprehension of pure grace and its issues is the confusing, soul-wrecking and unscriptural admixture of these opposing principles. This admixture is ruinous at every point; but at
no point is it more destructive of Scriptural distinctions than in the confusion of a Jewish sabbath with the Christian’s day — the Lord’s day, or Sunday.
Consideration at length might be given to many vital differences between the law obligations and the obligations under grace, such as circumcision, tithing, and sacrifices; but unlike the sabbath question, these issues are self-adjusting when the glory of grace in some measure is comprehended. To many, on the other hand, the sabbath question bulks largest as an essential of their religion. It, therefore, demands particular consideration.
The reasons for this discussion are four: (1) It vitally determines the individual’s conception of, and blessing in, grace. (2) It, of necessity, determines the character of the believer’s conduct and measure of comprehension of his Scriptural obligation to God. (3) It is the central issue of a misleading heresy. And, (4) it is now urged as a national reform, in which it is proposed to legislate a Jewish sabbath on a Christ-rejecting world.
This consideration of the Sabbath question is based on the preceding analysis of the principles of law and grace and this discussion cannot be followed clearly apart from an understanding of what has gone before. So, also, in so far as an earnest appeal may avail, the reader is besought to leave prejudice behind, and to stand on the uncompromised “Thus saith the Lord.”
Two major aspects of this subject are here considered. (1) The Biblical testimony regarding the Jewish sabbath, and (2) The Biblical testimony concerning the Christian’s “Lord’s day.” To this is added (3) A consideration of certain current errors.
I. THE BIBLICAL TESTIMONY REGARDING THE JEWISH SABBATH
This theme is to be taken up in subdivisions in which the Jewish sabbath is considered as related to various periods of time:
First. The Period from Adam to Moses.
Two theories obtain concerning the question of sabbath observance during this period. There are those who contend that the sabbath was committed to man in Eden, and there are those who contend that the sabbath was given to Israel only, at the hand of Moses.
The first theory is usually advanced with a view to applying the institution of the sabbath to all men before the law even was given, in order that the sabbath law may be treated as now applicable to all men, even after the termination of the Mosaic law in the cross. This form of argument is not restricted to the Seventh-Day legalists; it is employed by many writers and religious leaders who are attempting to transfer the Biblical authority concerning the Jewish sabbath to the observance of the Lord’s day.
There is no record that Gentiles ever recognized the Sabbath, These, by Judaizing Christianity, are obscuring the truth about grace.
When it is claimed that the sabbath obtained from Adam to Moses it is said: “The sabbath was divinely sanctified at creation.” This sanctification, it is true, is clearly stated in Gen. 2:1-3: “Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.”
When it is assumed that the sabbath was imposed on man at Eden, it is based on the supposition that this passage so teaches; which, however, the passage does not necessarily imply. And it should also be remembered that Genesis was not written until Moses’ time, and, when seeking for Biblical evidence regarding the pre-Mosaic observance of the seventh day it will be found that, unlike other religious activities, such as prayer, circumcision (cf John 7:22), and sacrifices the observance of which is recorded of that period, there is no mention of a sabbath observance from creation to Moses.
It is incredible that this great institution of the sabbath could have existed during all these centuries and there be no mention of it in the Scriptures dealing with that time. The words of Job, who lived five hundred years and more before Moses, offer an illustration. His experience discloses the spiritual life of the pre-Mosaic saint, having no written Scriptures, and striving to know his whole duty to God. Job and his friends refer to creation, the flood, and many details of human obligation to God; but not once do they mention the sabbath. Again, it is impossible that this great institution, with all that it contemplated of relationship between God and man, could have existed at that time and not have been mentioned in any portion of the argument of the book of Job.
There is little force in the contention that a seven day week was recognized as early as Jacob’s time, and therefore a sabbath day must have existed which marked off the week. The seven-day week is the natural fourth part of a lunar month and does not necessarily demand a sabbath day with religious significance for its measurement. Likewise, there is little force in the suggestion that Chinese history hints at the observance of one sacred day in every week. Such argument, even if true, should not be set over against the positive testimony of the Scriptures.
There is one passage which determines this question beyond all discussion. The following quotation from the confession of the priests and Levites under Nehemiah definitely fixes the time of the institution of the sabbath: “Thou camest down also upon Mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments: and madest known unto them thy holy Sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant” (Neh. 9:13, 14). The Sabbath given to Israel as a sign (Ex. 31:12-17), was never given to Gentiles.
There is no record that Gentiles ever recognized the Sabbath, either between Adam and Moses, or between Moses and Christ. The Sabbath is of the law; but the law did not begin to reign until Moses (Rom. 5:12-14). It is to be concluded, then, that the Sabbath was imposed upon Israel only and as a part of the law as given by Moses.
Second, The Period from Moses to Christ.
The Sabbath began to be observed by Israel from the time of its institution through Moses. Invested with the character of a sign between Jehovah and the nation Israel, it was in no sense extended to Gentiles. These facts are disclosed in the following Scriptures:
“The LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you. Ye shall keep the Sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed” (Ex. 31:12-17).
Nothing but blind prejudice could apply this or any other Old Testament Scripture concerning the sabbath, to the Gentiles.
The sabbath was a part of Israel’s law, and it was the possession of that law which distinguished that nation from all other peoples of the earth.
It is equally erroneous to insist that the sabbath was always celebrated on the last day of the week. The sabbath, but for necessary exceptions, was the seventh in a series of seven, whether days or years. Of necessity it often fell on other days of the week as well as on Saturday. There were at least fifteen sabbaths which were fixed dates in their given month, and these sabbaths fell on those particular dates regardless of the day of the week. (From Lev. 23:37, 38, it has been claimed by some that these fixed sabbaths were extra sabbaths which were added to the regular sabbaths. This claim, however, is not supported by Num. 28:9, 10. The comparison of these important Scriptures reveals the fact that the word “besides” of Lev. 23:37, 38, does not indicate more sabbaths; but rather refers to additional offerings to be made over and above the regular sabbath offerings.)
In one instance, seven sabbaths were counted from the fifteenth day of the month, and the day following that last sabbath of the seven, was Pentecost (Lev. 23:15, 16). These seven sabbaths, it is evident, became pre-determined dates by arbitrary reckoning from the first sabbath. So, likewise, the day that Christ was in the tomb was a fixed sabbath. It was the fifteenth of Abib, which by divine arrangement in that particular year fell on a Saturday. That this was a fixed sabbath is proven by the fact that the day before was “preparation” day (Mk. 15:42), which day was determined for the fourteenth of that month (Ex. 12:2, 6). Again, certain working days were established days. The lamb must be taken on the tenth day of the first month and be killed, roasted with fire, and eaten on the fourteenth day of the month. Likewise, Abib sixteenth could in no wise have been a sabbath for that date was appointed as the beginning of harvest (Deut. 16:9. Cf Lev. 23:15). All these labors would have been direct violations of the sabbath law; yet
these ceremonies were appointed for certain pre-determined dates,
and from time to time must inevitably have been in conflict with the pre-determined sabbaths.
By all of this it is evident that the sacred character of the day belonged to its relative place in a series of seven days, and not to a particular day of the week.
During the period from Moses to Christ in which the sabbath obtained under the direct sanction of God, it was, as the word sabbath indicates, a day of physical rest. It was binding on the whole nation Israel, and death was the penalty for its violation. No fire was to be kindled, no food prepared, no journey undertaken, no buying or selling permitted, and no burden to be borne. Even the land was to have its sabbaths, (Ex. 31:12-17; 35:3; 16:22-26; Neh. 10:31; 13:15-21; Lev. 25:4; 2 Chron. 36:21).
The sabbath law, like all of the law, was so poorly observed that Jehovah finally carried the nation into captivity with the declared purpose that the land might enjoy its sabbaths.
The sabbath was inter-related with the law, just as it is embedded in the heart of the Decalogue. The exact manner of its observance is revealed only in the teachings of Moses, and since the law was a covenant of human works, the sabbath was the divine provision for rest under that covenant. The modern conception of a sabbath, isolated from the laws which governed it, and adapted to the Christian dispensation as the day of religious activity, public meetings, Christian service, and worship, is entirely out of harmony with every Scripture bearing on the sabbath.
It is taught by some that although the laws which conditioned the manner of sabbath observance have ceased, the recognition of the day, whether it be Saturday, or Sunday, remains as a binding obligation. The result of such teaching is the imposition of the observance of a day without any exact instruction as to the manner of such observance. This teaching is both inconsistent and unscriptural. Moreover, the unscriptural inconsistency is greatly increased when the celebration of the sabbath is changed from Saturday to Sunday, and is imposed on Gentiles.
The sabbath was a vital institution under the reign of the law. It depended on the entire law system for its proper observance, and the law system depended on the sabbath for its normal action.
The complete legal system stands, or falls, together. The Mosaic age was given over to the uncomplicated functioning of the entire law system; but that age, and all that characterized it, was, when Christ died, superseded by the reign of grace.
Third. The Period Represented by the Gospels.
Much confusion concerning the sabbath is due to a failure to recognize the peculiar character of the period represented by the Gospels. It should be remembered that Christ was first a “minister of the circumcision”; He was “made under the law”; and He lived and wrought under the law. The law did not pass at His birth. It passed at His death. During the days of His ministry, He recognized, kept, and enforced the sabbath as an integral part of the whole Mosaic system. True, He insisted that the Mosaic system, and the sabbath in particular, be delivered from the encrusted teachings of men which had been superimposed on the law of Moses. These man-made additions to the law were held by the Jews to be as binding and sacred as the very Word of God. Because He ignored all else but the Word of God, Christ appeared as a liberalist on the question of the sabbath.
He also claimed to be “Lord of the sabbath,” which He was, and by virtue of that position, He had authority to change the sabbath, or, if He chose, to abolish it forever.
A greater than Moses, through whom the law came, was in their midst. It is certain that He purposed to rescue the sabbath from being an enslaving institution and to restore its functions as a benefit to man. This He announced when He said: “The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.” That is, man was not made to be sacrificed for a day; but the day was made for the blessing of man.
Before His death, the sabbath was one of the most important issues in the experience and ministry of Christ. However, it is both obvious and suggestive that He never mentioned that day in the upper-room discourse, nor is that day once mentioned as an obligation in all of His post-resurrection ministry. It is inconceivable that the sabbath, which was so vital a part of the Mosaic system, should be omitted from these great age-characterizing teachings of Christ, if it was the purpose of God that this Jewish day should have any place in the present reign of grace.
DIDN’T CHRIST EXTENT SABBATH ORDINANCES TO ALL MEN, INCLUDING THE CHURCH?
It has also been claimed that Christ extended the sabbath-keeping obligation to all men, when He said: “The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.” This issue turns on the exact meaning of the word man as here used. Did Christ signify by this statement that the Jewish sabbath was by His authority extended to all men? Or did He use the word man in its more limited sense as applying only to the nation Israel? Two facts determine the answer: (1) The sabbath is never by any subsequent Scripture applied to Gentiles, and (2) the word man is used in the Old Testament no less than 336 times, when referring to Israel alone, and many times in the New Testament when referring only to Christians. It is said: “Christ is the head of every man”; the Spirit “is given to every man”; “If any man build on this foundation”; “Every man shall have praise”; “That we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus.” In all these Scriptures the word man has only the limited meaning. It is therefore evident that Christ said, in harmony with all Scripture, that the sabbath was made for Israel; for there is no Biblical evidence that Christ ever imposed the Jewish sabbath on either Gentiles or Christians; but true to the law, He did recognize its important place and obligation in relation to Israel until the reign of the law should be terminated through His death.
Fourth. The Period Represented by the Acts and the Epistles.
In considering the sabbath question, great importance must be attributed to the exact character of those teachings of the New Testament which come after the founding of Christianity through the death and resurrection of Christ, and by the advent of the Spirit on Pentecost.
It should be observed first that the law, as a rule of conduct, is not once applied to the Christian
, and that these Scriptures by overwhelming revelation, assert that the law has passed, through the death of Christ. They assert that the law has ceased both as a means of justification, and as a rule of life for the one who is justified (John 1:16, 17; Rom. 6:14; 7:1-6; 2 Cor. 3:1-18; Eph. 2:15; Col. 2:14; Gal. 3:19-25). If it is claimed that the Decalogue, in which the sabbath is embedded, was not of the law, and therefore was not terminated with the death of Christ, this contention is disposed of completely by the reference in Rom. 7:7-14 to the last of the commandments, in which Scripture this commandment is explicitly mentioned as “the law.” So, also, according to 2 Cor. 3:7-14, that which was “written and engraven in stones” — the Decalogue, including the sabbath day — is “done away” and “abolished.”
It should be observed next that, if an issue so vital as was the sabbath under the law, is imposed on the Church, it is incredible (1) that the early Christians would not be reported as having at some time discharged their personal obligation to the sabbath, or (2) that the necessity of recognizing the sabbath would not be somewhere incorporated in the new teachings of grace. Turning to these Scriptures we discover:
1. The sabbath in the Book of The Acts= Not once is it stated, or even implied, that Christians kept a sabbath.
The word sabbath is used nine times in the Acts, and wherever it is referred to as a day which is observed, it is related only to the unbelieving Jews, who, as would be expected, perpetuated, and who still perpetuate, the observance of the sabbath day. Not once in this Book is it stated, or even implied, that Christians kept a sabbath day. It is said that the Apostle Paul went into the synagogue of the Jews and reasoned with them every sabbath; but this can imply nothing more than that he took advantage of their gathering together on that day in order that he might preach to them. Such may be the experience of any missionary to the Jews today.
2. The sabbath in the Epistles= Not once is it stated, or even implied, that Christians kept a sabbath.
Turning to the Epistles, it will be seen in this portion of the Scriptures, as in the Book of Acts, that no Christian is said to have observed a sabbath day. It is highly probable that some in the early church who were drawn into the observance of the law were also complicated with issues of sabbath keeping; but the Spirit of God has omitted every such incident, if such there was, from the pages of Scripture. Thus the Inspired Record does not reveal the complication of one believer with the Jewish sabbath, even as an error in conduct; nor are sinners termed Sabbath breakers.
Upon examination of the direct injunctions and doctrinal teachings of the Epistles, it is discovered that the word sabbath is used but once, the term seventh day mentioned in one passage only, and the legalistic observance of a day is referred to but once.
These passages deserve particular attention:
Col. 2:16, 17. In the context in which this Scripture is found, the Apostle warns believers against any complicity with the law, or works-covenant, since they have been transferred to a position under grace. The passage states that they have been made “complete” in Christ, to which estate nothing could ever be added; hence for the one who is “in Christ,” the objective of all meritorious works is already gained, and the legal obligation to do good works is forever met (v. 10). The believer is also said to be “circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ.”
Therefore, since the flesh, the one thing the law proposed to control, is, in the sight of God, put away, there is no need of the law.
The Jewish child was circumcised on the eighth day, which was the first day of a new week following the passing of a completed week. The circumcision on the eighth day, or first day of a new week, typified the deliverance from the old creation which would be accomplished for believers through the resurrection of Christ from the dead; for in that death He bore all the curse of the old creation. For this reason the believer under grace is not called upon to celebrate any aspect of the old creation which was represented by the sabbath (v. 11). The one who is saved has been “buried with him in baptism, wherein [the baptism] also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God [his own faith in God's power], who hath raised him from the dead.” The use of the aorist tense In connection with the reference to a burial with Him in baptism, places that burial as being contemporaneous with the circumcision just mentioned. Therefore it is evident that the baptism with the Spirit which vitally relates the believer to Christ is in view (1 Cor. 12:13. cf Gal. 3:27). In that baptism, as in no other,
the Christian partakes of all that Christ is, and all that Christ has done.
He shares in Christ’s crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection (Rom. 6:1-10). With the old creation thus buried in the tomb of Christ, the believer is in no wise obligated to any observance related to the old creation (v. 12). Again, the believer has been delivered from the law by no less an undertaking than the nailing of the law with its handwritings and ordinances to the cross.
After this great transaction, how can the child of God reasonably recognize the law in any respect whatsoever (v. 14)?
To the one who is thus complete in Christ, circumcised in Christ, buried with Christ, and delivered from the authority of all handwritings and ordinances, the Apostle writes: “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 [day]: which are a shadow of things to come; but the body [substance] is Christ.”
All these were essential features of the law (1 Chron. 23:31; 2 Chron. 2:4; 31:3), and as such were to cease in the present age of Israel’s chastisement (Hos. 2:11), and are to be reinstated in the coming kingdom (Ezk. 45:17). They were but shadows of the Substance Christ. Having the Substance, the believer is warned against turning to the mere shadow.
According to this Scripture, the law, which included the sabbath day, is abolished. If it is objected that the reference in this passage is to extra ceremonial sabbaths, the contention cannot be sustained; for the words here used are _ton _sabbaton, which are the exact words that are invariably used to designate the regular Jewish sabbath.
It is significant, then, that in all the Epistles, wherein the believer’s obligation under grace is set forth, the only use of the word sabbath is under absolute prohibition concerning its observance, and that it is there held to be in conflict with the most vital and superseding elements of grace.
Heb. 4:4. In this passage the one reference in all the Epistles to the seventh day is found. We read: “For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works.” As before, the occasion for this reference to a seventh day is explicit in the context. In the whole passage (4:1-13) Hebrew
Christians are warned lest, as their fathers failed to enter into rest
under Joshua (v. 8), they themselves should fail to enter, experimentally, into the rest provided in the finished work of Christ, of whom Joshua was but a type. In the application of this passage, it may
be noted that the rest under Christ is not for one day in the week, nor is it that sabbath-rest which was due after a six-day strain of meritorious works. It is rather the abiding rest of faith in Another
who, as Substitute, has wrought all the “works of God.” This blessed rest is promised “to him that worketh not.” Likewise, it is in no sense the rest of death. It is rather the rest of Christ’s imparted, resurrection life, and that life is ceaselessly active. The extent and character of the activity of the new life in Christ is a violation of every commandment which enjoins a sabbath day of rest.
Gal. 4:9, 10. At this point in this Epistle, the Apostle chides the Galatian believers for observing “days” which are borrowed from the law, and tells them that by the keeping of legal days they have turned from grace to the law: “But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.” The phrase, “weak and beggarly elements,” is a description of the character of the law. As a means of securing moral and spiritual conduct, the law was “weak” since its correct observance was impossible through the “weakness of the flesh” (Rom. 8:3). As a source of heart-blessing, the law was “beggarly” (lit. poverty stricken) as compared to the riches of grace in Christ Jesus.
From this consideration of the Scriptures which describe and define the life of the believer after the cross, it is notable that in these Scriptures there is no example of the observance of a sabbath day by any believer, and no injunction for such observance. On the other hand, there is the most conclusive teaching concerning the complete ending of the law by the death of Christ, and the most faithful warnings lest the believer shall become ensnared by complicity with sabbath-day observance.
Fifth. The Sabbath in Prophecy.
There are two distinct aspects of the sabbath in prophecy: (1) Concerning its cessation in this age of Israel’s chastisement, and (2) concerning its reestablishment when the present purpose in the Church is accomplished.
1. The cessation of the sabbath.
It is clear from Hos. 2:11 that the chastisement which was to fall on Israel, and which she is now experiencing, would be characterized by the cessation of all her solemn feasts and sabbaths: “I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts.” Such is the unalterable decree of God, and had one word of this prophecy failed, He would have been proven untrue. These Jewish observances which were to cease included all her sabbaths. They ceased at the beginning of this age of grace, so far as any recognition from God is concerned. Otherwise, when will this prophecy be fulfilled? Uninstructed people may impose a solemn feast, or a Jewish sabbath, upon themselves; but this will accomplish no more than the creation of an abnormal conscience which either accuses or excuses but never satisfies the heart. Such is the invariable effect of self-imposed law (Rom. 2:14, 15).
2. The reestablishment of the sabbath.
Upon the completion of the present divine purpose in the Church, Israel’s sabbaths will be reinstated. This is assured both for the great tribulation which must precede the glorious coming of Christ, and for the kingdom age which follows that coming. Concerning the great tribulation it is said: “But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day” (Mt. 24:20). No Christian has ever been inclined to offer this prayer. The time of its fulfillment does not concern him, nor does he have any relation to a sabbath day. It will be in the “time of Jacob’s trouble,” and Israel’s sabbaths will then be observed again. Concerning the kingdom age we read: “And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD” (Isa. 66:23); “Thus saith the LORD GOD; The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east shall be shut the six working days; but on the sabbath it shall be opened, and in the day of the new moon it shall be opened” (Ezk. 46:1). This is according to all prophecy concerning the kingdom. It is then that Israel shall “do all his commandments,” including the sabbath (Deut. 30:8). The sabbath must be reinstated; for it is a “perpetual covenant” and sign between Jehovah and Israel, except for such time as He shall cause it to cease in His chastisement of that people (Ex. 31:16).
Sixth. The Exact Day.
The supposition that an exact continuation of weekly sabbaths is now being kept by all who observe the seventh day, is without foundation. It should be noted: (a) No day is holy in itself. From the natural standpoint, all days are alike and are equally subject to the same physical conditions. A day is holy by divine decree, and that decree is subject to change at the appointment of God. By no means did the day always fall on Saturday, nor were the sabbaths always separated by six full working days. (b) The sabbath was to begin with sunset and end with sunset. This was simple enough when ordered for Israel in the small geographical boundaries of Palestine. It is far different when applied to the whole earth, and, as some dare to claim, to heaven as well.
No uniformity of the observance of an exact day is possible over the whole earth. While some are keeping Saturday on one hemisphere, others are keeping Sunday (as sabbath) on the other. Should two persons start from a given point to go around the earth in opposite directions, and both observe each sabbath from sundown to sundown, upon their return to the starting point, one would be observing Friday and the other Sunday. The question of observing an exact day from sunset is even more perplexing in the far North. The sun sets there but once in six months. In that region, to be Biblical and exact, there must be a twelve-month sabbath, and a week of seven years. (c) The exact day in which God finished creation and rested is quite unknown.
He rested on the seventh day; but it could hardly be proven that sundown on Friday night at a given place on the earth is the perpetuation of the exact moment when God began to rest from His work of creation.
Who can trace the exact moment, day, or year, through Eden, the flood, the bondage in Egypt, and the dark ages? Yet apart from the assurance that Saturday at a given place on the earth is the exact day in rotation of weeks from creation, there is no basis for the claim to the sacredness of the exact time to be observed. Ignorant people are too often encouraged in the belief that they are actually celebrating the rest of God
in creation when they observe the hours as they fall on Saturday in the locality where they chance to live.
It is therefore the manner of the observance of the day, and not the exact time, which is in question. Shall it be the seventh day, or the first day! It must be one or the other; for there is nothing more unreasonable, illogical, and unbiblical, than the observance of the seventh day with confusion of Christian issues of worship and service, which is the practice of every sabbatarian, or the observance of the first day with confusion of the sabbath law, which is the present practice of Christendom.
Again,there would be little occasion for discussion of the question if the simple distinctions between law and grace were recognized.
II. THE BIBLICAL TESTIMONY CONCERNING THE LORD’S DAY
subscribe to online journal for more of “the new day” - true church going….
Sign up for FREEGRACEREVOLUTION group on facebook and recieve free journals indepth, plus get the entire directory (about three times what is available online)
(the email list is no longer in service….sorry for all those who wished I bugged you with regular spam)
ADVERTISEMENT FOR THE NET BIBLE: ARE YOU A FREE GRACER BUT STUMPED ON VERSES IN THE KJV? Then check the NET!
sometimes a verse isn’t perfectly translated in my favorite bible (the kjv). it is in those times I have learned to trust in a modern translation: the NET bible (relying on increased technology & study.)
I have adopted a new free grace phrase: until the nets are full- lets keep checking the NET-the net bible!
BibleAnswerMan @ 11:07 am 
