A Warning of Impending Punishment OR An Announcement of Salvation Through Jesus Christ?
As longtime readers of this blog know, I have devoted a great many posts over the years to attacking the messaging of the Armstrong Churches of God. Why this focus? Because they are preaching a FALSE Gospel! Instead of the good news which the New Testament is all about, they insist on preaching a warning message to the English-speaking nations of the world. Indeed, the contrast is stark. It is the difference between hope and doom! In other words, the messaging of the ACOGs is the antithesis of the real message which God intended for his people to deliver to the world!
In the January-February edition of their Beyond Today magazine, the United Church of God has published an article by John LaBissoniere titled God's Urgent Warning Message to You. The Armstrongian hook for the article reads: "God sent an urgent warning message through Ezekiel to the nations of present-day Israel. Discover what this prophetic message includes and why it has vital significance for you." Hence, we see that the article is based on the completely discredited (and wholly fanciful) teaching that the English-speaking nations of the world are the descendants and heirs of the Israelite tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh.
LaBissoniere opens the article by pointing out that God made the prophet Ezekiel a "watchman" to the House of Israel. He contends that Ezekiel's message wasn't simply for the Jewish captives in Babylon, but that his message was also for the Israelites. John went on to state that: "As his prophetic warning message applies to the last days, we should recognize that it’s destined to reach the nations of present-day Israel and not just the Jewish people of today’s state of Israel. It will surprise many to learn that the modern Israelites are primarily the people of the major English-speaking countries, including the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand (see the study guide offered at the end of this article for the biblical and historical evidence)."
LaBissoniere continued: "Looking ahead, God foresaw a society that turned away from Him and His righteous biblical values and corrupted itself by ungodly, fleshly, materialistic behavior. As Ezekiel wrote, 'The iniquity of the house of Israel and Judah is exceedingly great, and the land is full of bloodshed, and the city full of perversity' (Ezekiel 9:9). This passage pertains to contempt for law and order and the fostering of moral depravity. Again, the conditions Ezekiel decries are evident in today’s nations—not just the original audience of his day. His message is for now." In other words, this warning message for the ancient Israelites has been transformed by Armstrong and his agents into a warning message for the U.S., Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
Moreover, the message incorporates yet another feature of the Armstrong heresy: that God expects Christians, Jews, and English-speaking folks to continue to obey the commandments of Torah - the tenets of the Old Covenant with Israel. What about the New Testament? you ask. The author of the article drags the Apostle to the Gentiles into his argument: "Instead of a righteous, commandment-keeping society, in our age we see an expansion of what the apostle Paul wrote about the debased culture of his day: 'Being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful' (Romans 1:29-31).
La Bissoniere went on to say: "In abandoning godly values, many people in America and the other formerly blessed nations of modern-day Israel surrendered themselves to moral decadence, selfishness, greed, dishonesty, bribery, injustice, thievery, drug and alcohol abuse, sexual deviance, and violence. Of course, these iniquities are not exclusive to the contemporary nations of Israel, since the entire world is awash in sinful conduct (Romans 3:23). For this man and his Armstrong Church of God brethren, God's message for these folks is a warning of impending wrath and punishment for sins. It is decidedly NOT about how God decided to redeem mankind from his sins and cure us of their effects and consequences! In other words, the United Church of God's message is that God is pissed, and he's about to kick our asses up around our shoulders!
Of course, the real Gospel message was summarized by Christ in his meeting with Nicodemus. He said: "For this is how God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. God sent his Son into the world not to judge the world, but to save the world through him." (John 3:16-17, NLT)
Paul described the message to the Christians at Rome by saying: "The Good News is about his Son. In his earthly life he was born into King David’s family line, and he was shown to be the Son of God when he was raised from the dead by the power of the Holy Spirit. He is Jesus Christ our Lord. Through Christ, God has given us the privilege and authority as apostles to tell Gentiles everywhere what God has done for them, so that they will believe and obey him, bringing glory to his name...For I am not ashamed of this Good News about Christ. It is the power of God at work, saving everyone who believes—the Jew first and also the Gentile. This Good News tells us how God makes us right in his sight. This is accomplished from start to finish by faith. As the Scriptures say, 'It is through faith that a righteous person has life.'" (Romans 1:3-5 and 16-17, NLT)
Likewise, Paul wrote to the saints of Galatia: "Jesus gave his life for our sins, just as God our Father planned, in order to rescue us from this evil world in which we live. All glory to God forever and ever! Amen. I am shocked that you are turning away so soon from God, who called you to himself through the loving mercy of Christ. You are following a different way that pretends to be the Good News but is not the Good News at all. You are being fooled by those who deliberately twist the truth concerning Christ." (Galatians 1:4-7, NLT) This passage, of course, is followed by Paul's double curse on anyone who would dare to bring a different message (Galatians 1:8-9)!
What about you? Are you going to heed United's warning message? OR Are you going to accept the Good News about Jesus Christ, and what he has done for you? Which one sounds like good news to you?
Miller Jones/Lonnie C Hendrix
This post is good timing. I have just finished a study on the use of the phrase “house of Israel” in Ezekiel. Here is the introduction:
ReplyDeleteIn Ezekiel, What do you mean “House Israel”?
Isa 8:14 He will be a sanctuary; but for the two houses of Israel, He will be a stone to stumble over and a rock to trip over, and a trap and a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. (HCSB).
"In all lexical study, it is imperative that the meaning in the present context be given precedence over all other considerations. The fact that a word may be used 99 percent of the time it is found in ancient writings to mean one thing is essentially irrelevant if in the context of the biblical passage under study it is used to mean something else. Any author may choose to use even a common word in an unusual way. Thus the final question must always be "How is it used here?" [ie in its immediate context]" (Quote sent to me by someone I know).
The same principle for a “word” also applies to a phrase.
Jer 5:11 For the house of Israel and the house of Judah have dealt very treacherously against me, saith the LORD.
Eze 9:9 Then said he unto me, The iniquity of the house of Israel and Judah is exceeding great,
Ezekiel choose not to use the term “house of Israel,” as a political term, for the northern of the two houses of Israel. It appears that he considered the northern house of Israel illegitimate and not worthy to be called “house of Israel”. The northern kingdom is there in a few places but is referred to indirectly — for example “Samaria,” (23:4):
Eze 23:4 And the names of them were Aholah the elder, and Aholibah her sister: and they were mine, and they bare sons and daughters. Thus were their names; Samaria is Aholah, and Jerusalem Aholibah.
“Jer 3 had described the two women with the qualifying names of msbh [“backsliding”] and bgwdh (bgdh) [“treacherous”], but at the same time added to these freely the names Israel and Judah which were in current use in the political sphere. Since “Israel” in Ezekiel is the emphatic name for the whole people of God [but see also the nuance for its use below], the antithesis Israel-Judah is impossible for him” (Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1, Herm., p.483).
From the introductory quote, just because Jeremiah can use the term “House of Israel” for the northern kingdom it doesn’t follow that Ezekiel uses it the same way.
The term “house of Israel” is never used by Ezekiel for the northern kingdom that existed from around 931 to 722 BC. This may see contradictory in light of Eze 9:9 but a careful reading of Ezekiel’s use of the term in his book, the context in which it is used and the use of Hebrew terminology will reveal that there is no apparent contradiction.
“It is remarkable how emphatically in the book of the Judaean Ezekiel it is of “Israel” that is spoken. The total of one hundred and eighty-six occurrences of yisra’el is contrasted with a total of fifteen occurrences of yhudah. This observation has led J. Smith to see in Ezekiel a prophet of the northern kingdom. A closer examination quickly shows, however, that the thesis cannot be sustained” (Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, Herm., p.563).
A quick point to the immediate above: the northern kingdom lasted for some 200 years. But in Eze 4:5 the iniquity of the “house of Israel” is said to be 390 years. That there is a discrepancy of nearly 200 years may suggest that the “house of Israel” in this verse is not the northern kingdom of Israel. It will be argued below that “house of Israel” in 4:5 is not the northern kingdom.
It will be argued that Ezekiel uses “house of Israel” in two ways:
Eze 20:13aα But the house of Israel rebelled against me in the wilderness...
Eze 20:40a For in mine holy mountain, in the mountain of the height of Israel, saith the Lord GOD, there shall all [kol] the house of Israel, all of it [kulloh] in the land, serve me:
(1) as a term for the ideal nation of Israel — a nation consisting of twelve tribes.
Part 2
ReplyDeleteTwo notes on the verses above before proceeding: In the first verse/dispensation, Yahweh dwelt in the tabernacle; and the phrase “all the house of Israel, all of it” used for the twelve-tribes in 20:40a is also used in 11:15 of the Jewish exiles in Babylonia. See below.
1 Ch 28:4aα Yet the LORD, the God of Israel, chose me out of all my father’s house to be king over Israel forever. For He chose Judah as leader... (BSB).
But the real ideal Israel was only realized, in a new dispensation under Solomon, for around some twenty-eight years: a united nation of twelve tribes in their own land, with its capital in Jerusalem, ruled by a Davidic king, with Yahweh ‘dwelling’ in the temple and a Levitical priesthood mediating between God and man.
Isa 48:1 Hear ye this, O house of Jacob, which are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters of Judah, which swear by the name of the LORD, and make mention of the God of Israel, but not in truth, nor in righteousness.
Isa 48:2 For they call themselves of the holy city, and stay themselves upon the God of Israel; The LORD of hosts is his name.
Isa 48:4 Because I knew that thou art obstinate, and thy neck is an iron sinew, and thy brow brass;
“Eventually, “Israel” came to be a comprehensive term for the chosen people, and in Isaiah it commonly is used in more of a religious than a political or geographical sense... “Isaiah uses ‘Israel’ in a religious sense for the heirs of the old Davidic and Solomonic empire,” ” (Clements, Isaiah 1-39, 58” (Christopher R. Seitz, The Book of Isaiah 40-66, NIB, Vol.6, pp.88-89).
“Ezekiel’s favorite designation for his primary audience is bet yisra’el, “house/family of Israel.” The expression occurs 83 times in this book, accounting for 57 percent of the phrase’s usage in the OT (146 times). By contrast bene yisra’el, literally “sons of Israel,” which occurs 638 times in the OT, appears only 11 times... [Ezek. 2:3; 4:13; 35:16, 21; 43:7; 44:9, 15; 47:22; 48:11...]... Ezekiel’s preference for the prefixed bet seems to have been deliberate... Ezekiel’s preference for this form of the name intentionally expresses the nation’s family solidarity...” (Daniel I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel, Chapters 1-24, NICOT, pp.31-32).
In the OT, thanks to Ezekiel, the designation “house of Israel” is used just over twice as many times for the Southern Kingdom than it is for the Northern Kingdom.
“Note that Jesus, too, first sends his disciples not to the Gentiles or the Samaritans, but “to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 10:5-6)... In the Torah, “house of Israel” is only used for all Israel — the entire assembly of the twelve tribes — and only in priestly material (Exod 16:31; Lev 10:6; Num 20:29), particularly in the Holiness Code (Lev 17:3, 8, 10; 22:8)” (Steven Tuell, Ezekiel, NIBC, p.21).
“In the case of Ezekiel [the priest] one might ask further whether he is not in addition influenced by priestly tradition, which from the early times addressed Yahweh’s covenant people as “Israel”...” (Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, Herm., p.563).
“In any case, however, Ezekiel differs markedly from Jeremiah, his older contemporary by whom he is nevertheless very strongly influenced” (Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, Herm., p.564).
Part 3
ReplyDeleteWith the nation of Israel splitting in two, it was the house of Judah that represented ideal Israel - the covenant nation; Judah was the heir of the old Davidic and Solomonic empire. The Chronicler shares this perspective:
“Although Israel and kings from the northern kingdom are not completely absent from Chronicles, Chronicles clearly presents the kings of Judah as the royal line from David and Solomon, and the people of Judah as being God’s chosen people... The northern kings and their kingdom was viewed as illegitimate by the Chronicler... the Chronicler did not limit his definition of God’s people to those living in Judah. He often uses the concept of All-Israel and gives clear indications that the northern inhabitants were also considered to be part of this identity and that they belonged to the same cultic community that was centered in Jerusalem” (Louis C. Jonker, 1 & 2 Chronicles, UBCS, pp.5, 17).
“... the Chronicler wished to make the point that Judah was in unbroken continuity with Israel of the past” (Raymond B. Dillard, 2 Chronicles, WBC, p.95).
(2) Ezekiel uses the term “house of Israel” for the remnants of Israel in Judah and Babylonia. That is, after the exile of Jehoiachin, Ezekiel can address the remnant of ideal Israel in Babylonia as “house of Israel” and the remnant of ideal Israel in Judah as “house of Israel”; and he can use the terms “house of Israel” and “house of Judah” interchangeably; as will be easily shown in Ezekiel 8 and a little less so in Ezekiel 4 and 9.
Ezekiel uses “house of Israel” for the ideal twelve-tribe nation/peoples and the representative nation/peoples of ideal Israel; and he can also use it for the remnant of the nation in Judah and Babylonia, but never for the northern kingdom as a political entity, whom Ezekiel and the Chronicler consider an illegitimate kingdom.
“With his narrowly parochial view, for Ezekiel the identity of the “people of God” is inextricably linked to the nation of Israel, which consisted primarily of the descendants of the eponymous ancestor Jacob/Israel, a fact reflected in his frequent references to bet yisra’el, “house/family of Israel,” and his occasional bene yisra’el, “sons/descendants of Israel. Although the nation had divided into two kingdoms in the 10th century, and ten of the twelve tribes had been swallowed up in the neo-Assyrian empire in the 8th century, like the rest of the prophets, Ezekiel uses the designation “Israel” for all who are left of the nation, currently represented primarily by the rump state of Judah and the exilic community in Babylon” (Daniel I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel, Chapters 1-24, NICOT, p.51).
(Just as Ezekiel goes his own way in the use of language, so John goes his own way compared to the synoptic gospels. In the latter the gospel is the “reign of God” and in the former the equivalent is “eternal life”; the “reign of God”/“eternal” life have both present and future realities).
Millar writes:
ReplyDelete“Are you going to accept the Good News about Jesus Christ, and what he has done for you?”
While Christ is the center and heart of the Gospel there is more to it. But I agree with your sentiment:
Matthew
Matt 3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. (AV).
Matt 3:2 and saying, 'Reform, for come nigh hath the reign of the heavens,' (YLT, 1st publ. 1862).
Matt 3:2 proclaiming this message, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has arrived.” (R. T. France).
“While no statement would command universal assent, there is general agreement that, rather than denoting a specific time, place, or situation called “the kingdom” — a misleading abbreviation which is conspicuously absent from the Synoptic tradition as it is dominant in modern discussion — the phrase “the kingdom of God” in both Hebrew and Greek forms denotes the dynamic concept of “God ruling.” It represents, in other words, a sentence of which the subject is not “kingdom” but “God.” This dynamic sense is now better conveyed by an abstract noun such as “kingship” or “sovereignty rather than by “kingdom,” which has become in general usage a concrete noun” (R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, NICNT, p.102).
“Our traditional English phrase derives from the KJV (following William Tyndale), which was translated at a time when “kingdom” in English still carried this dynamic sense of “kingship,” a sense now rightly described by the OED as “obsolete.” The concrete sense of “kingdom” in current English (as a place or group of people under a common rule) now inevitably distorts the more dynamic connotations of he basileia ton ouranon [transliteration supplied instead of the Greek] when “the kingdom of God” continues to be used in Bible versions despite the changed meaning of the word. Translators have still to catch up with the scholarly preference for such phrases as “the rule of God”...” (R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, NICNT, p.102).
“Matthew’s summary of John’s (and Jesus’) declaration, “The kingdom of heaven has arrived,” might thus be paraphrased as “God’s promised reign is beginning” or “God is now taking control” (R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, NICNT, p.102).
“The kingdom of heaven is the rule of God and is both a present reality and a future hope” (NIVSB on Matt 3:2).
“... the Kingdom of God is the redemptive reign of God dynamically active to establish his rule among men, and that this Kingdom, which will appear as an apocalyptic act at the end of the age, has already come into human history in the person and mission of Jesus to overcome evil, to deliver men from its power, and to bring them into the blessings of God's reign. The Kingdom of God involves two great moments: fulfilment within history, and consummation at the end of history” (George Eldon Ladd, The Presence of the Future, Rev. ed., p.218).
Mark
Mk 1:1 The beginning of the gospel concerning Jesus Messiah, Son of God,
Mk 1:2 as written by the prophet Isaiah: “Take note, I send my messenger before you [Jesus] who will prepare your way.
Isa 40:3 The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway [tribos, LXX] for our God.
Mk 1:3 “A voice of one calling in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way for the Lord [Jesus], make straight paths [tribos] for Him.’ ” (BSB).
“The beginning of the gospel ... refers specifically to the events of 1:4-15 that stand at the outset of the message of good news about the presence of the long-anticipated age of salvation...
Ac 10:36 The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all:)
Ac 10:37 That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;
Ac 10:38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
Part 2
ReplyDelete“To this extent Mark’s Gospel amplifies the outline of Peter’s sermon to Cornelius in Acts 10:36-38 and indicates the broader scope of the Church’s preaching than simply the death, resurrection, and Parousia of Jesus Christ, supposedly characteristic of Paul’s writings...
“Mark qualifies the “gospel” as the “gospel concerning Jesus Messiah, Son of God.” But this gospel concerning Jesus Messiah includes by virtue of its content the gospel proclaimed by Jesus both in word and deed during his earthly ministry. Indeed, the gospel concerning Jesus Messiah (1:1) consists of Jesus’ preaching, teaching, and acts of mercy and healing that created conflict and led to his ultimate rejection in death.
“In Mark, therefore, Jesus’ proclamation of the good news by word and deed in view of the Kingdom expectation of the OT promise (cf. 1:14-15) comes together with the Church’s proclamation of the good news with Jesus’ death, resurrection and return as the primary focus. Jesus’ coming and ministry fulfill the OT promise of the age of salvation typified by Isaiah but do so in the one who suffers rejection and death only to be vindicated by the resurrection to return in glory. The heart of the gospel, therefore, is Jesus Messiah, Son of God (cf. 1:11; 8:29; 14:61-64; 15:32, 39)” (Robert A. Guelich, Mark 1-8:26, WBC, p.12).
Mk 1:1 The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;
Mk 1:14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom/reign of God,
“For Mark, Jesus was both the one who proclaimed the good news from God in terms of the coming of God’s promised redemptive rule and the one through whom this good news was effected in history. Jesus, the one preaching the gospel of God, thus himself becomes part of that which is preached as the gospel. Consequently, Mark could open his Gospel with the heading: “The beginning of the gospel concerning Jesus Messiah, Son of God, as written by the prophet Isaiah...” (1:1-3)” (Robert A. Guelich, Mark 1-8:26, WBC, p.46).
Luke
Lk 4:18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
Lk 4:19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord. (AV).
Lk 4:21 And He began to say to them, "Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing." (BLB).
“By reading Isa. 61:1-2, Jesus not only announces fulfillment of prophecy (v. 21) but defines what his messianic role is. Isaiah is a servant song, and “anointed me” means “made me the Christ or Messiah.” When understood literally, the passage says the Christ is God’s servant who will bring to reality the longing and the hope of the poor, the oppressed, and the imprisoned. The Christ will also usher in the amnesty, the liberation, and the restoration associated with the proclamation of the year of jubilee (v. 19; Lev 25:9-12). At the close of the reading, Jesus said “Today this has been fulfilled in your hearing” (v.21). It is interesting that in Luke’s Gospel, the first word of Jesus as an adult, apart from reading Scripture, is “today.” The age of God’s reign is here; the eschatological time when God’s promises are fulfilled and God’s purpose comes to fruition has arrived; there will be changes in the conditions of those who have waited and hoped. Those changes for the poor and the wronged and the oppressed will occur today. This is the beginning of jubilee. The time of God is today, and the ministries of Jesus and of the church according to Luke-Acts demonstrates that “Today” continued. Throughout these two volumes, “today” never is allowed to become “yesterday” or to slip again into a vague “someday.” The history of the church does not, however, bear unbroken testimony to Jesus’ announcement, “Today this scripture has been fulfilled” ” (Fred B. Craddock, Luke, Int., p.62).
Part 3
ReplyDeleteJohn
Jn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Jn 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
“God’s intent is a saving intent, and the scope of his salvation is worldwide. His love for the whole human race expresses itself in the giving of his only Son to die on the cross (v. 16). This “giving” is more specific than “sending” (v. 17). God “sent” his Son into the world (the Incarnation), but he gave his Son in death (the Passion) so that the world might be saved and not condemned (v. 17). The universality is qualified, however, by the phrases everyone who believes in verse 15 and whoever believes in verse 16. To gain eternal life, a person must believe... Eternal life is this Gospel’s equivalent of the kingdom of God... It is not simply endless life; nor is it a life that begins after death. It is a new kind of life, a new order of existence that characterizes even now the person who believes in Jesus and is born again” (J. Ramsey Michaels, John, NIBC, p.59).
“The expressions ‘life’ (zoe) and ‘eternal life’ (zoe aionios) are used extensively and interchangeably in the Gospel of John...
“The nature of eternal life, as it is experienced by humans, is defined in 17:3: ‘Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ , whom you have sent.” Eternal life is knowing God, but as in the Old Testament, this knowledge is not simply knowing information about God; it is having a relationship with him, involving response, obedience and fellowship...
“Eschatologically speaking, ‘eternal life’ is life of the age (to come), which is the literal meaning of zoe aionios. Understood in the light of Christ, this involves a changed perspective, for eternal life is now understood to be something that may be experienced in part in the present age: ‘Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal live and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life’ (5:24)... God’s plans were inaugurated through the ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus, and will be consummated at his return as the Son of Man. In the Synoptic Gospels this is expressed in terms of the kingdom of God which is already present but yet to come in its fullness. In Paul it is expressed in terms of salvation — believers are already saved, presently being saved and yet to be fully saved. But in the Gospel of John this ... Christian eschatology is expressed in terms of eternal life experienced now and consummated in the resurrection...” (Colin G. Kruse, John Rev., TOTC, pp.121-22).
Jn 12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
“There is an apparent contradiction in what the Gospel of John says about judgment. In one place we read that ‘God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world’ (3:17), but other places imply that Jesus does pass judgment on people (5:22, 30). The resolution to the apparent contradiction is that in this world Jesus did not pass judgement upon people because his purpose in coming was to save, not condemn. However, now that he has carried out that commission, the Father has placed in his hands responsibility for the final judgment (5:22) On the last day the very words Jesus spoke in the world will condemn those who rejected him (12:48). What that condemnation involves is (1) forfeiture of life because God’s wrath remains on them (3:16); (2) death in their sins — that is, dying unforgiven and therefore bearing the consequences of their sins themselves (8:21, 24); and rising from the dead only to be condemned (5:29)”(Colin G. Kruse, John Rev., TOTC, p.128).
I will accept the good news of what Christ has done for me, for us all, and as we repent and call upon His name.
ReplyDeleteI will reject the stupidities of United, et al. This organization refers to Ezekiel as you've noted, and in the same manner to Jeremiah also.
Thus, where these prophets refer to ‘’Israel’’ they take it as demonstration that the prophecies are intended for another people and another time - because “Israel’’ is alleged to be different to ‘’Judea’’ .
A big error arises because a quick check with a concordance shows that after the Assyrian invasion of the northern kingdom, Judaens continued to use the name ‘Israelites’, and applied it to themselves. I located three prophecies where Jeremiah used the name ‘Israel’ both for the old northern kingdom as well as for his contemporaries in Judah.
Their whole message of things prophetical, a term I use as they don't claim to be prophets, is completely nonsensical.
Yes, we ought accept the Good News Of Jesus and not be influenced by such silly warning pronouncements. Cheers
The Armstrong hook or message has always been about throwing and keeping you off guard, creating a dependency on them (the preachers of it) and controlling you in a poor imitation of the way in which scripture tells us the Holy Spirit is supposed to do. It is a false and inherently toxic system which universally corrupts its leaders. In no way do the members thrive or live an abundant life, because they live in fear of prophesied events, fear that they might not "qualify" to escape them, and a fear based (as opposed to loving) relationship with the ministry. Programming, ie the imposition of a totally new system of logic, functions as a set of spiritual blinders which make it nearly impossible to properly evaluate any incoming information which counters or provides a second opinion to their teaching. In short, it's like quicksand, or punching a tar babe. Run, don't walk!
ReplyDeleteBB
This reminds me of something my Mom told me a long time ago. She and my sister were at Shriner’s Parade in a large midwestern city where my family lived. As they were waiting for the parade to start, she noticed in the crowd nearby several teenaged girls who had a little boy with them. They sat the little boy down on the curb and then stood nearby. Then the parade came and the crowd surged forward because the Shriner’s would always throw candy, mostly caramels, to the nearby crowd. The teenaged girls surged forward with the crowd but the little boy held fast to his seat on the curb. He was totally surrounded by the crowd, got no candy and could not even see the parade.
ReplyDeleteMy Mom felt sorry for him and went over and asked if he wouldn’t like to move forward with the rest of the people so he could see the parade and maybe get some candy. He looked at my Mom sorrowfully and said that his sisters told him that if he got up from his seat on the curb that God would not love him.
Mom watched the parade and afterward the teenaged girls came back and got the little boy, who sat on the curb for the duration, and they all walked down the street.
True story. Real life. I think you get the picture. It’s called control.
Scout
Speaking of the Shriners, people should dig below the surface and find out what they are really about. You will get a gut-ache when you see how evil and deceitful it all is. Maybe that will wake a few people up a bit.
ReplyDeleteSorry, won't read Scout, Lonnie stuff anymore. Lonnie let the scat out of the bag writing in another thread the Bible was full of contradictions and Scout has spiritualized himself out of physically observing the sabbath.
ReplyDelete"Sorry, won't read Scout, Lonnie stuff anymore."
DeleteAnd yet you felt the need to get on and run off at the mouth, I am sure that scared them both.
20:42, you just told us more about your own seriousness as a seeker of truth than about Scout or Lonnie. You shut out and reject anything which does not fit your own preconceived notions. If scientists had done that, we would not have penicillin.
DeleteIf so offended best you don't read. If a need to physically observe such is your right - but don't judge others who don't see these same strictures. The rest of God is associated with the “good news” ⎯the gospel of Christ - and one enters this “rest” by believing (Heb. 4:3).
DeleteWow, Scout. That's a very powerful example! I'm wondering if our greater audience will pick up on the fact that the sisters were teaching that child that God's love is conditional. It's important, because that's pretty much the basis of Armstrongism.
ReplyDeleteBB
Terribly sad to read about the above article by ucog. To the uneducated it would seem quite reasonable to accept BI and their interpretation of Ezekiel or Jeremiah. Scratching under the surface reveals another reality as this blog has pointed out many times. It’s very sad to see this totally unscriptural nonsense still taking up so much space. And its prominence within Armstrongism while neglecting the gospel of Jesus Christ. BI cannot be defended.
ReplyDeleteScout your comments were very hard hitting and rather true. This type of coercion is alive and well within many a sect/cult. In my area JWs are active, many with children in tow knocking on doors. I’m sure the children are delighted to be out there spreading their ‘gospel’, most of whom I have noticed never look up but always to the ground. Probably in mourning for a lost childhood. Bet they had no choice. Poor bast**ds.
I am impressed with the deep dives in the multi-part commentaries in this thread. They underscore the importance of context and digging below the superficial analysis which is too common among people of faith. The understanding of how Ezekiel used the term Israel completely destroys the Armstrong narrative about the warning to "modern" Israel. I also appreciated the nuance in understanding about the "kingdom" of God which encompasses a much broader notion than the Armstrongist teaching about a future literal worldwide nation.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Byker Bob that Scout's example is a good one. I hope that the lesson didn't go over the heads of too many folks. The truth is that God's love is unconditional, eternal, and devoted to reconciling all of us to "him."
Finally, I'm sorry that my rejection of the modern doctrine of biblical inerrancy was a shock to someone in the thread. Must be a newcomer to these discussions, as my views on this subject are well-known and well-documented in a number of posts and comments here and on my own blog. Nevertheless, this is a standard Armstrongist and Fundamentalist response to anything which contradicts or disproves their narrative. In other words, don't confuse me with reality or the facts!
Miller Jones/Lonnie C Hendrix concluded his article by asking several questions: "...What about you? Are you going to heed United's warning message? OR Are you going to accept the Good News about Jesus Christ, and what he has done for you? Which one sounds like good news to you?..."
DeleteAnd in the following thread comment Miller Jones/Lonnie C Hendrix, Saturday, January 11, 2025 at 6:26:51 PM PST, wrote:
"...I hope that the lesson didn't go over the heads of too many folks. The truth is that God's love is unconditional, eternal, and devoted to reconciling all of us to "him."..."
******
And yes, God's love is unconditional, eternal, and devoted to reconciling all of us to "him."
The apostle Paul would agree:
"To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation." 2 Cor 5:19
It is the Good News about what The God, The God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob (Acts 3:13), Jesus' God/Father does by His Spirit through Jesus Christ to reconcile all of us.
It's the gospel of Abraham:
"And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, [saying], In thee shall all nations be blessed." Galatians 3:8
Are all nations blessed today? I think we all know the answer to that question.
Will all nations be blessed after Satan exits that pit, over a 1000 years from today? No, but that blessing upon all nations will occur beyond a short/little time/season after Satan exits the pit.
After the ancient Israelites made (Exodus 24:3,7) a covenant with God, they, the stiffnecked Israelites, broke (Exodus 32) it almost immediately.
Subsequently, God made a covenant with the Israelites:
Exodus 34:10 "And he said, Behold, I make a covenant: before all thy people I will do marvels, such as have not been done in all the earth, nor in any nation: and all the people among which thou [art] shall see the work of the LORD: for it [is] a terrible thing that I will do with thee."
And the people would again break it:
"And the LORD said unto Moses, Behold, thou shalt sleep with thy fathers; and this people will rise up, and go a whoring after the gods of the strangers of the land, whither they go [to be] among them, and will forsake me, and break my covenant which I have made with them." Deut 31:16
Did it matter if the people broke the covenant or not? No, but oh, they would experience either blessings or cursings over time.
But The God who made the covenant? He is faithful (1 Thess 5:24), and He will keep that covenant, as a perpetual covenant, an everlasting covenant, because His: "...love is unconditional, eternal, and devoted to reconciling all of us to "him."..."
How will He do it? By working out His plan of salvation to save all Israel, all mankind, and subsequently destroying Satan and his angels/devils, but it's a long range plan. Again, how will The God do it?
"But to us [there is but] one God, the Father, of whom [are] all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom [are] all things, and we by him." 1 Cor 8:6
This has nothing to do with some Mickey Mouse Millennium of some Jesus to come "very soon" on earth for 1,000 years as the hirelings of the former WCG so often still like to say...via their false gospels.
God told Abraham some real Good News:
"And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed." Genesis 1:3
Did that God of the Old Testament (not any Jesus Christ), Jesus' God/Father lie to Abraham or not?
Time will tell...
John
Anonymous 10:42 wrote, “…Scout has spiritualized himself out of physically observing the sabbath.”
ReplyDeleteYou make this sound as if the physical has priority over the spiritual. This is 180 degrees out. The spiritual is the most important aspect of the Sabbath. I recall Ron Dart analyzing the Sabbath and stating that it consisted of both meaning and form. He clearly placed the meaning ahead of the form. His warning was that if you did not stay in the form, you would eventually abandon the meaning. I disagree with him on the point. I think it is the reverse. If you become preoccupied with the form, you lose the meaning.
Dart’s “meaning” most closely matches the spirit of the Sabbath. The physical seventh day Sabbath is a shadow, as Paul said, of the substance of Jesus. Jesus is our Rest from sin that goes far beyond loafing on the seventh day. Jesus is our Rest from sin every day. This goes far beyond one day out of seven. You elevate the seventh physical day and suddenly you’re thinking you are earning your salvation through rigorous observance. Jesus and his sacrifice do not become a discard but become less than adequate to the task for you. So that you must roll up your sleeves and get lost in doing some serious work of “not working.”
Scout
Scout, Saturday, January 11, 2025 at 6:36:24 PM PST, wrote:
Delete"...The physical seventh day Sabbath is a shadow, as Paul said, of the substance of Jesus. Jesus is our Rest from sin that goes far beyond loafing on the seventh day. Jesus is our Rest from sin every day. This goes far beyond one day out of seven. You elevate the seventh physical day and suddenly you’re thinking you are earning your salvation through rigorous observance. Jesus and his sacrifice do not become a discard but become less than adequate to the task for you. So that you must roll up your sleeves and get lost in doing some serious work of “not working.” ..."
******
Just curious: Where in the Bible does it say: "...Sabbath is a shadow, as Paul said, of the substance of Jesus..."?
Sometimes it appears that people put so much emphasis on Jesus, like He was their sole hero, while ignoring, or paying very little attention, to Jesus’ God/Father: almost like idolatry, or blasphemy, but people may think whatever they desire on this “substance of Jesus,” whatever that is. Doesn’t The God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob (Acts 3:13), that God of the Old Testament by His Spirit/power (Zech 4:6), enter this salvation picture somehow? There is no “self” in salvation.
Colossians 2:16-17 tell us that the Sabbath, and holyday, among other things, may be considered as: "...a shadow of things to come;...."
What thing(s) might be coming?
How about considering God's seventh annual holyday, the Eighth Day, especially when it is fulfilled in the future?
That will be a rest day, and some rest day at that! It will be a great day. It will be a last day, or to add them together: a Great Last Day. Didn't Jesus refer to something like this in John 7:37?
"In the last day, that great [day] of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink."
Wouldn't that picture God's Kingdom on earth in the Eighth Day when all human beings would thirst and come to Jesus Christ? Will they finally all, in that future day, have a rest (Hebrews 4) from this present evil world?
Scout, you wrote: "...Jesus is our Rest from sin every day..."
How does that happen? Isn't there still sin in your daily life? And you know that the wages of sin is death, and there is no way you will get around that, is there? You already sinned. Wages are due, are they not? You, like the rest of us, will pay them; will you/we not?
Jesus Christ came in the flesh, just like us: born of flesh.
I John 4:2 "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that [spirit] of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world."
God's law is against us, contrary to us, composed of flesh and blood and bone.
"Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us,..." Col 2:14
And those ancient physical Israelites, without God's Spirit (Deut 29:4) would/could not keep God's law, and they were all of flesh, blood and bone...just like Jesus was as a 100% human being.
Yet, only Jesus Christ fulfilled God's law. How come? One God! Jesus' God/Father worked it all out in accordance with His perfect plan to save all Israel, all mankind, and subsequently destroy Satan and his angels:
"But to us [there is but] one God, the Father, of whom [are] all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom [are] all things, and we by him." I Cor 8:6
It is not a matter of anyone loafing or not loafing on a Sabbath, and no human, of and by SELF, is going to earn salvation. We all sinned; we're all going to die, remember? Will God still impute sins/trespasses to us?
God is reconciling (2 Cor 5:19) us through His plan to allow us all to live again, but...
Time will tell...
John
'You elevate the 7th Physical day and suddenly you're thinking you are earning your salvation through rigorous observance.'
ReplyDeleteNot necessarily that's a huge assumption marking every human the same. Ron Dart was a realist and repeatedly emphasised how life is short and the days we have are only 24 hours. He always wanted his listeners to think for themselves and be realistic on how and what they do in those 24 hours.
Dart always warned about power and control from religious leaders towards members and always taught people to watch that their religious leaders 'talk from the pulpit' actually matched their real lives walk. So from that, what do the writers on here actually do on the 7th day Sabbath ?
Anonymous 3:12 wrote, “Not necessarily that's a huge assumption marking every human the same.”
ReplyDeleteArmstrongists work on the Sabbath. Keeping the Sabbath is one of the works that they perform in order to earn salvation. They are pre-occupied with trying to conform to the customary denominational activities on the Sabbath. They work at avoiding certain kinds of work but following prescribed activities.
I acknowledge that not every Armstrongist is on this same trendline. But going non-secular on the seventh day is something that most Armstrongists are not up to. I remember Sabbath services in the WCG. People chatted about all manner of secular concerns. Sabbath services was decidedly not a great spiritual event in the WCG. People engaged the economy by going to restaurants. I can’t help but think that the entire day followed that same mixed secular/non-secular pattern.
I believe that most Armstrongists do not even realize that they are fully engaged in Armstrongist culture, rather than Bronze Age Israelite culture or even the culture of Second Temple Judaism, in their Sabbath observation. An Armstrongist who says “I keep the Sabbath” is almost always wrong.
What do I do on the Sabbath? The same thing I do on every day. I seek to rest from sin in Christ. In this I am not trying to earn my salvation but to live in the sanctification that results from salvation. My performance is never perfect but my salvific status in Christ is. The previous statement will be derided by Armstrongists because they believe their salvation is in suspense until the judgment and, therefore, they must energetically work the denominational agenda for Sabbath in order to receive salvation at the judgment.
Scout
I don't believe we can even know when the seventh day sabbath was. The scribes and priests of Old Testament times used to compose the calendar on a day to day basis based on their observation of the moon, which is why there were new moon celebrations. The sabbath was counted out from each new moon in increments of seven, and often there were days left over which fell outside of the lunar months, and were throw aways as opposed to being part of the counting process. Following the destruction of the second temple, methods were developed to mathematically calculate each year's calendar in advance This pre-calculated calendar is called the fixed calendar, to differentiate it from the calendar which was compiled by observation, and the sabbath became an event which recurred every seven days.
ReplyDeleteI also believe that this was orchestrated by God, along with other changes, and has made it physically impossible for man to keep the rituals of the Old Covenant in New Covenant times. That would be a pollution of both covenants, new wine in old wineskins. The commandments Jesus referred to keeping are the two great commandments of the Lord, love for God and love for man, and a Christian lives by what He outlined in the Sermon on the Mount and the beatitudes. This is an expansion, more difficult for physical man to keep than all the rituals of the Sinai Covenant, and is called the Christian's sabbath rest, a daily rest from sin and the old ways. Whereas "the law" can be kept selfishly and used to exclude or hurt others, this expansion into the spiritual always generates good "karma" (for lack of a better term).
This is my understanding, but I am not the best example of living it. There are others here among us who are far more spiritually advanced than I.
BB
6.44 am, Nope, Herb and his splinters have never taught that Sabbath keeping is required "to earn salvation." They have never taught that about the other ten commandments either. Rather they have always taught that eternal life is a gift from God, with conditions that need to be met.
ReplyDeleteRevelation 22:15 "Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood." There's enough legitimately wrong with these groups without trying to discredit them with straw men arguments.
everyone who loves and practices falsehood.
DeleteI wonder if this verse would also include those who love and follow false prophets.
Armstrong wrote:
Delete‘It is only those who are willing to DO the Ten Commandments who shall enter in thru the gates into the City’ ; -
see his article ARE THE TEN COMMANDMENTS IN THE LAWS OF MOSES., wherein he quotes (but misquotes) Rev. 22:14. :
His emphasis on DOING shows that he did teach commandment keeping was essential for salvation. Thus, those who don't keep sabbath are doomed.
What you say is not correct.
The calendar. After years and years I've concluded this: the Jews (Romans 3) have preserved a fixed calendar, fixed from creation - Gen 1. Lev 23:2 should be translated "fixed times" as in the Tanakh, not "feasts". I know many won't believe this but if Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever I conclude His calendar is as well.
ReplyDeleteThe moon is there, in the sky, to confirm the calendar. Looking at the first light of a new moon to determine a calendar seemingly is problematical. What if there are clouds? Then a partial calculation is done. Where, what location is appropriate, Biblical, to look at the moon? Those who observe are still not sure at times when God's festivals occur as to the exact day months into the future.
Byker Bob,
ReplyDeleteSuccinct and spot-on, Amen! Armstrong based his entire theology on a set of false assumptions/premises. In my opinion, their attempt to observe the commandments of Torah while ignoring the spiritual foundation of God's Law (the Two Commandments which Christ himself identified). Indeed, too many traditional Christians ignore these essentials and expose themselves and their faith to the charge of hypocrisy. And, rather than engage in a little introspection and repentance, they all blame Satan for the decline in attendance at their services. If it wasn't so sad, it would be funny!
Hell was invented by pagans and stolen by Christians to put the fear in the subjects.
ReplyDeleteByker Bob 933 writes, "I don't believe we can even know when the 7th day sabbath was".
ReplyDeleteThat is the same conclusion made by R.L. Sumner in his book called "Armstrongism". After quoting Ignatius (110 AD), Justin Martyr (140 AD), and Tertullian (200 AD) as proof that the Christian church now observed Sunday, the first day of the week (pages 79-81), he goes on to say later (page 200) that it's questionable whether Saturday is actually the 7th day, even though Tertullian mentions Saturday by name (Apology, Ch LXVII).
You can't have it both ways. The orthodoxy of the Christian church depends on Saturday being the 7th day sabbath!
No, it really does not depend on the 7th day sabbath, BP8! Sunday keeping Gentile Christians from Paul's churches were tortured horribly right next to their sabbath keeping Jewish Christian counterparts, simply because they believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, and considering the gravity of the torture, they would have to have had the Holy Spirit to withstand those horrible tortures unto death!
DeleteBB
You may want to read up on Ignatius of Antioch, BP8, a disciple of John.
DeleteByker 9:33
ReplyDeleteI do believe it became impossible after 70 AD to keep the Torah as delivered from Sinai and implemented in national Israel. The Jews had a big conclave and repackaged the Torah so that it might be kept sans Temple and sans Tabernacle in the Diaspora after 70 AD. Armstrongism has never done such a repackaging and yet claims to keep the Torah as delivered from Sinai. Even the Jews don't make that claim. They did the re-packaging because that claim could no longer be made.
I am glad that Christianity is not burdened by all kinds of calendrical calculations and uncertainties. And especially glad to know that our salvation is not contingent on the perfect implementation of the Torah in our lives. If it were so contingent, nobody would ever see salvation.
Scout
What about you? Are you going to heed United's warning message? OR Are you going to accept the Good News about Jesus Christ, and what he has done for you? Which one sounds like good news to you?
ReplyDeleteThat is a false dilemma argument. Actually, I have other options. I do not need either the Jesus or the United or the Jesus that you portray either. Maybe I do not need any Jesus at all. Nobody has proven there was ever a real Jesus, either yours or theirs. I suspect that you know that.
As with ALL human studies, the consensus of recognized authorities in a field is what gives credence to the conclusions that are reached. The overwhelming consensus among scholars is that Jesus of Nazareth was a real person (and there is good reason for them to have reached that conclusion), but you are free to believe and think whatever you want to believe and think. After all, Americans have always loved a good conspiracy theory (the more bizarre and outlandish the better).
ReplyDeleteKnowing which weekday is the 7th day has not been lost at all. The Roman Empire operated on a eight day market week but quickly changed to a seven day week matching the Jewish 7 day week.
ReplyDeleteThe Armstrongian hook for the article reads: "God sent an urgent warning message through Ezekiel to the nations of present-day Israel. Discover what this prophetic message includes and why it has vital significance for you."
ReplyDeleteIt couldn't be all that urgent if God chose to issue this "warning" thousands of years ago through cryptic means, where you have to crack the code by listening to a corrupt crackpot radio preacher from the 1900s to know that Ezekiel (and others) were actually talking about the United States of America in the early to mid-2000s.
That would be a bad, unhelpful warning.
A good warning for every person is to preach the gospel to all the world about Jesus, and the consequences of dying without repentance -- a plain warning not only found in the enduring Sacred Scriptures, but proclaimed ubiquitously by the Church throughout all ages (even before 1934!).
Good comment cog catholic.
Delete*Looking forward to the day Lonnie learns what the gospel is*
ReplyDeleteIf this is intended to mean only Armstrong preached the true gospel, then sadly you have not learned much at all about the gospel in the scriptures. May I suggest you start with the Book of Romans, the opening several chapters, putting out of your mind if possible the arguments of the Armstrong organizations.
DeleteThat would be a good start.
Both BB 933 and Scout 238 make valid points concerning the "impossibility" for man to keep Torah after a specific time period. But would it be heretical to suggest that it was NEVER possible for man to keep it as delivered from Siani? Isn't that what Deut.5:29 and Romans 8:7 tells us?
ReplyDeleteI believe that the purpose of the OC experiment was to demonstrate once and for all time that carnal, hostile man CANNOT work the righteousness of God. He can perform a few rituals even as a dog can learn a few tricks, but that is mere external compliance, a performance orientation (Ex 19:5-8), that eventually leads to legalism and self righteousness (Matt.23, Rom.10:1-4). Even the Israelites of old struggled with something as simple as resting on the sabbath (Ex.16).
Ron Dart use to say, 'God would never give man a law he could not keep'! In the right context he is right. But it's the "inward" man, walking after the spirit, living in the NC and not the Old, that makes it true (Rom7:22-25, 8:1-4, Heb.8:8-10).
Also, BB 610. I thought my comment on the 7th day was self explanatory but allow me to restate the point. In order for Sunday to be the first day of the week, the day of Christian worship for orthodox Christianity, it is absolutely necessary that Saturday, the day before, be the 7th day!
Tertullian wrote, "we solemnize the day after Saturday in contradistinction to those who call this day their sabbath" (Apology, ch XVI).
I have not looked into the lunar sabbaths, but in the first century the days of the week were not based on the moon AND the day called Sunday was the day of Christ's Resurrection and observed as the day for worship. So, the weekly reminder of Christ's Resurrection is what we know as Sunday and repeated accurately.
DeleteWhat Byker seems to be saying is that the day we call Saturday may well not be the original sabbath according to our current weekly reckoning since Israel had used a lunar calendar that restarted the week each month.
Tertullian is not obligated to a historically accurate sabbath and can start afresh with the weekly Sunday observance because the weekly pattern of Sunday is verifiable and commemorates an event that actually occurred within the same calendar system: Christ's resurrection on Sunday. That is what matters to Tertulliam, not verifying which day is the original sabbath in a different calendar system.
However, the day we call Sunday is verifiably the weekly Sunday of Christ's resurrection.
So, in fact, you can have it both ways. The sabbath can be on a day unknown/different from that which was established at creation or sinai by our weekly reckoning. AND what we recognize as Sunday can follow the day we now recognize as Saturday even though they may not be the original Sunday and Saturday, BUT, Sunday is the correct weekly remembrance of Christ's resurrection.
I hope I am being reasonably clear with this. If not, maybe Scout can edit it. lol
BertB
This is ludicrous the order of the week and the day that is the original 7th Day Sabbath has NOT been lost. It is easily researched and proved to have not been lost.
DeleteDo I dare say.......3 days Nisan 14,15,16.....3 nights Fri PM (a few minutes? - Luke 23:44), Fri night, Sat night. If Saturday night was mere minutes or even 3-4 hours but before midnight, Jesus' resurrection would be on "Saturday".
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteLabissoniere quotes from Eze 5. That chapter is about Jerusalem.
To continue......Ezekiel 5 is a prophecy that will never happen again-v.9!!!!!!!!! But Herb came along and said prophecy is dual ........FALSE. There is no verse supporting the dual prophecy fallacy including Isaiah 41:22 which was quoted.
Deletehttps://godcannotbecontained.blogspot.com/2025/01/the-reign-of-god.html
ReplyDelete