- This topic has 1,371 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 2 weeks, 1 day ago by
.
- Posts
I’m glad you found the number of times the term “Satan” occurred in the Tanakh, but the point of that exercise was what? What was asked was where does it state Satan rebelled against G-d?
In the Job passages we read Satan was only allowed to do what G-d said he could do; which sounds like he did as G-d commanded verses rebelled against HIM.
When studying the Hebrew, I Chron 21:1 is the only passage to drop the article “the” in front of Satan; in every other passage given, the article “the” is included. So the passage translated from Hebrew would read “the adversary/accuser.” The word translated in Hebrew is “ha-satan”; see how the english translators got “Satan.” Everywhere you see the word “Satan” in the King Jimmy it should have been translated to “the adversary/accuser” except in I Chronicles 21:1.
What’s another fascinating discovery is I Chron 21:1 and II Sam 24:1 are the same account; David being sent out to count Israel. II Sam 24:1 And again the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel and He moved David against them, saying, “Go count Israel and Judah.” So was it G-d or Satan or did G-d send Satan?
I think it would be safe to say, and we would be in agreement on, G‑d is never absent from the affairs of man. In light of Isa 45:7, events or circumstances that seem “bad” or “evil” come from G‑d for a purpose; and that’s to fulfill our ultimate potential, what G-d created us for. From this perspective, “the Satan” doesn’t lay traps for us to fall into; but to administer tests for us to overcome and learn from.
According to G-d you have power over sin “Gen 4:7”; why does christianity make it so difficult? Why does every religion have a different interpretation of what the same book they are reading from says? Why aren’t all “christians” on the same page of understanding, aren’t you all possessed by the same spirit? Or is Satan testing to see if one will follow G-d or man?
Is the king of Tyre prophecy in Ezekiel 28 referring to Satan?
I quite agree with this interpretation below
👇
“At first glance, the prophecy in Ezekiel 28:11–19 seems to refer to a human king. The city of Tyre was the recipient of some of the strongest prophetic condemnations in the Bible (Isaiah 23:1–18; Jeremiah 25:22; 27:1–11; Ezekiel 26:1– 28:19; Joel 3:4–8; Amos 1:9, 10). Tyre was known for building its wealth by exploiting its neighbors. Ancient writers referred to Tyre as a city filled with unscrupulous merchants. Tyre was a center of religious idolatry and sexual immorality. The biblical prophets rebuked Tyre for its pride brought on by its great wealth and strategic location. Ezekiel 28:11–19 seems to be a particularly strong indictment against the king of Tyre in the prophet Ezekiel’s day, rebuking the king for his insatiable pride and greed.
However, some of the descriptions in Ezekiel 28:11–19 go beyond any mere human king. In no sense could an earthly king claim to be “in Eden” or to be “the anointed cherub who covers” or to be “on the holy mountain of God.” Therefore, most Bible interpreters believe that Ezekiel 28:11–19 is a dual prophecy, comparing the pride of the king of Tyre to the pride of Satan. Some propose that the king of Tyre was actually possessed by Satan, making the link between the two even more powerful and applicable.
Before his fall, Satan was indeed a beautiful creature (Ezekiel 28:12–13). He was perhaps the most beautiful and powerful of all the angels. The phrase “guardian cherub” possibly indicates that Satan was the angel who “guarded” God’s presence. Pride led to Satan’s fall. Rather than give God the glory for creating him so beautifully, Satan took pride in himself, thinking that he himself was responsible for his exalted status. Satan’s rebellion resulted in God casting Satan from His presence and will, eventually, result in God condemning Satan to the lake of fire for all eternity (Revelation 20:10).
Like Satan, the human king of Tyre was prideful. Rather than recognize God’s sovereignty, the king of Tyre attributed Tyre’s riches to his own wisdom and strength. Not satisfied with his extravagant position, the king of Tyre sought more and more, resulting in Tyre taking advantage of other nations, expanding its own wealth at the expense of others. But just as Satan’s pride led to his fall and will eventually lead to his eternal destruction, so will the city of Tyre lose its wealth, power, and status. Ezekiel’s prophecy of Tyre’s total destruction was fulfilled partially by Nebuchadnezzar (Ezekiel 29:17–21) and ultimately by Alexander the Great.”
https://www.gotquestions.org/King-of-Tyre.html
Still stuck on what Ezk 28 is saying? You like “gotquestions” interpretation because it agrees with your religion, NOT because it’s truth. You just confirmed the interpretations of man is more to you than G-d’s words.
Did you read chapters 26 and 27 before you got to 28 and place this entire prophecy in context or did you parachute onto 28:13-14 and because you where told it was Satan, it’s Satan? Never mind this is a prophecy given to the king of Tyre, two and half chapters worth, and is spoken in a figurative fashion. How do you NOT see this? Explain why G-d was referencing Satan when HE was speaking to the king? I know you won’t, because you can’t. If you can’t explain it, why do you believe it?
Those who are willing to hear the truth will understand the truth.
There are enough explanations in this article to understand the truth.The article would have to be truth for truth to be understood.
Fact, G-d is addressing the king.
Fact, there is no transition to reference Satan; G-d is speaking to the king figuratively.
Fact, you still haven’t explained why Satan was wearing a covering of precious stones…what the what!?!
Fact, the cherub in this passage is a reference to a large bird (Hebrew study) and NOT a type angel (christian interpretation to arrive at Satan).
Fact, you copied and pasted the words of someone else to explain why you believe something; who offered their (man made) interpretation of what they were told was truth.
Fact, you still can’t explain why you believe what you believe.
Fact, “christians” as a whole reject the Hebrew understanding of their scriptures
Fact, you believe something without having verified or questioned it; two and half chapters speaking of the coming judgment on Tyre and you believe two verses speak of Satan. May want to do a history lesson on Tyre before Babylon destroyed it. Hint, it was powerful and majestic for its time; hence the allegorical references used to describe the king and city.
This is simple, why continue to make it difficult?
Hi all
Charlie Kirk’s Funeral was Characterized as Muscular Christian Nationalism
Steve Bannon is a highly influential and controversial American political activist, media executive, and former White House Chief Strategist during Donald Trump’s first presidency. He has long been a leading advocate of linking Christian identity with political power.
At Charlie Kirk’s funeral—held on Sunday, September 21, 2025, at State Farm Stadium in Glendale, Arizona—Bannon characterized the event as a striking display of muscular Christian nationalism, where political power and religious fervor came together in full view of the nation. He described the massive, high-profile memorial, which combined the atmosphere of a worship service with the intensity of a political rally, in the following way:
• “The whole service was muscular Christianity. This is what I put out. The New York Times and MSNBC are gonna melt down. Muscular, you know, a form of muscular Christianity, Christian nationalism, was put forward here in the memorial for a slain American martyr. You had the United States Director of National Intelligence, the Secretary of War, the Secretary of State, the President of the United States, Charlie’s team, and the widow. The most powerful people in the U.S. government. Never in the 18th or 19th century have we seen that professed about a man who lived Christianity.” (X video).
For Steve Bannon, this was an example of “muscular Christianity”—a gathering of the highest levels of the U.S. government during a Sunday worship and revival service. By invoking this phrase, he sought to portray the Christian faith as strong, militant, and prepared to confront secularism through strength and force. The vision is one of warfare aimed at reclaiming America’s soul and public witness through the nation’s laws, culture, and institutions.
From a biblical perspective, this development calls to mind the warning of Revelation 13, where civil and religious powers unite to enforce a counterfeit form of worship under the pretense of preserving peace and morality. The imagery of “muscular Christianity”—a faith projected not through meekness and humility but through the power of the state—is precisely the danger foretold in prophecy. What was intended as a tribute to a fallen conservative leader, Kirk, instead became a rallying point where the highest levels of government displayed a nationalistic version of Christianity.
Jesus Himself said that His kingdom is “not of this world” (John 18:36) and that the kingdom of God does not come with outward show, observation, or political display (Luke 17:20–21). Yet, Christian nationalism insists that the kingdom be made visible through law, public policy, and national identity. Charlie Kirk’s funeral, in this light, offered a glimpse of the coming union of church and state. What unfolded before the eyes of the world was not a mere conspiracy theory but a deliberate and troubling union of apostate Christianity with corrupt political power—cloaked in the language of patriotism and faith.
“Political corruption is destroying love of justice and regard for truth; and even in free America, rulers and legislators, in order to secure public favor, will yield to the popular demand for a law enforcing Sunday observance” (Great Controversy, p. 592).
🙏
Charlie Kirk’s Funeral was Characterized as Muscular Christian Nationalism
Did you just politicize the death of Charlie Kirk? Have you no shame!??!
How does a memorial service for a man gunned down in his prime suddenly being an event to enact a Sunday law? Your cult leader said this was going to happen in her time (150 years ago) and you’re still waiting. May want to reevaluate what you believe and begin questioning and verifying everything they’re telling you. It sounds like a lot of false teachings…
Hi all
Rome Says it is Better for the World to Live without the Sun than without Sunday Mass
For centuries, Rome has promoted what Scripture calls the “wine of her fornication” (Revelation 17:2)—teachings and traditions that replace God’s truth with human authority. Chief among these is the elevation of Sunday as the “Sabbath,” a direct contradiction to the seventh-day Sabbath established at Creation (Genesis 2:2–3), reaffirmed in the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:8–11), and upheld by Christ and His apostles (Mark 2:28; Acts 17:2). Today, the Catholic Church continues to advocate this counterfeit day of worship, calling Sunday observance an essential part of Christian life.
ChurchPOP, a Catholic news outlet dedicated to spreading the Catholic faith throughout the world, published an article on September 19, 2025, discussing the importance of observing Sunday and how this day is essential for spiritual life, family relationships, and restoring our commitment with the Lord. It even went so far as to claim that the world could more easily survive without the sun than without Sunday Mass. The article expressed the following:
• “Keeping the Sabbath holy is an important aspect of Catholic life!” [1]
• “Sometimes, it can seem easy to slip into our normal routines every day of the week.” [1]
• “Despite our very complex and busy modern times, we must strive to keep the ‘Sabbath Day’—Sunday—holy.” [1]
• “Since the days of the Apostles, the Church community has gathered together on Sunday to attend Mass.” [1]
• “It would be easier for the world to survive without the sun than to do without Holy Mass.” [1]
• “Of course, the best way to keep the Sabbath day holy is to attend Mass.” [1]
• “In our fast-paced world, sometimes Sunday becomes ‘catch-up’ day—of running to the store, doing laundry, and the like.” [1]
• “During the week, our relationships can get pushed to the side. Make time on Sunday to reconnect with loved ones!” [1]
By continually teaching that Sunday is the day of rest and worship, Rome is perpetuating the great deception warned of in Bible prophecy. Substituting Sunday for the true Sabbath is a direct challenge to the authority of God’s law. Revelation 13 foretells a time when the enforcement of this false worship will culminate in the “mark of the beast,” a sign of allegiance to human authority above the word of God.The final crisis will hinge upon worship—whether people will obey the commandments of God or the teaching of men. As Rome continues to promote the wine of Sunday sacredness, many are being led to believe that honoring this counterfeit day is the true test of faithfulness. Yet Scripture declares that the seventh-day Sabbath remains God’s eternal sign of loyalty (Ezekiel 20:12, 20).
“The Sabbath will be the great test of loyalty; for it is the point of truth especially controverted. When the final test shall be brought to bear upon men, then the line of distinction will be drawn between those who serve God and those who serve him not. While the observance of the false sabbath in compliance with the law of the State, contrary to the fourth commandment, will be an avowal of allegiance to a power that is in opposition to God, the keeping of the true Sabbath, in obedience to God’s law, is an evidence of loyalty to the Creator. While one class, by accepting the sign of submission to earthly powers, receive the mark of the beast, the other, choosing the token of allegiance to divine authority, receive the seal of God” (Great Controversy, p. 605).
Sources[1] https://www.churchpop.com/6-ways-to-keep-the-sabbath-day-holy-in-response-to-our-lady-of-la-salette/
Rome Says it is Better for the World to Live without the Sun than without Sunday Mass
“The Sabbath will be the great test of loyalty; for it is the point of truth especially controverted. When the final test shall be brought to bear upon men, then the line of distinction will be drawn between those who serve God and those who serve him not. While the observance of the false sabbath in compliance with the law of the State, contrary to the fourth commandment, will be an avowal of allegiance to a power that is in opposition to God, the keeping of the true Sabbath, in obedience to God’s law, is an evidence of loyalty to the Creator. While one class, by accepting the sign of submission to earthly powers, receive the mark of the beast, the other, choosing the token of allegiance to divine authority, receive the seal of God” (Great Controversy, p. 605).
You have a scriptural passage stating sabbath observance is a test of loyalty? If not, you’re following the words of man and NOT G-d. Oh wait, you continually quote the words of your goddess verses the words of G-d; who do you really follow? Seems G-d is a side note.
It’s funny (in a sad way) how you know and quote the words of White, but you don’t know what G-d said and can’t quote HIM. You also continually quote a single passage as proof to what you say (Rev 13), you have another passage to support and confirm what you believe G-d said? I was taught the Bible confirms itself and is done thru additional supporting passages that confirm the idea being conveyed.
Time to questions and verify everything you have ever been taught and told; when will you?
Hi all
The Catholic–Protestant Union That Will Change America
There is a growing cooperation between the Catholic Church and the White House that is based on a shared set of political and religious interests. Revelation 13 describes two beasts—the first representing Roman Catholicism, the papal power, and the second symbolizing apostate Protestantism, the United States. Even though historically they were opposed, prophecy warned that these two would one day unite to enforce religious observances upon society. In fulfillment of this prediction, Catholics for Catholics—a political-faith organization dedicated to promoting Catholicism in public life—recently announced its partnership with President Donald Trump in a national prayer campaign leading up to the 250th anniversary of the United States.
Catholics for Catholics recently published the following statements:
• “Catholics for Catholics officially partners with the White House for national campaign of prayer for America in the lead-up to the 250th Anniversary Celebrations!” [1]
• “The White House Office of Faith reached out to Catholics for Catholics to ask if we would come and help represent Catholics at their historic hearing on Religious Liberty.” [1]
• “The White House has listed on its website Catholics for Catholics as one of the main organizations they are partnering with to actively promote this powerful initiative.” [1]
• “In support of the White House’s America Prays initiative, we’re launching the Catholic complement to this with a campaign called ‘Catholic Prayer for America.’ Our mission is to have thousands of Catholics across the nation praying at least one Patriotic Rosary for America. In addition, we will be releasing a blitzkrieg effort of Masses, Novenas, and other devotionals to pray for this Country.” [1]
• “This prayer campaign will culminate in our much-anticipated Catholic Prayer for America Gala, which, as we announced last June, will take place March 19, 2026, in Washington, D.C.” [1]
This event clearly reveals a growing warmth in relations between the Catholic Church and the Executive Branch of the United States. They are coming together to mix religion with politics under the banner of “renewing America.” By engaging in these kinds of initiatives, the Trump White House is asserting that Catholic teachings have a rightful place at the highest levels of American government. Over a century ago, we were warned that Catholics and Protestants would unite under a common cause—one that would ultimately lead to the enforcement of Sunday worship.
“Protestantism shall give the hand of fellowship to the Roman power. Then there will be a law against the Sabbath of God’s creation” (Review and Herald, June 1, 1886).
The movement to establish a national day of rest—Sunday—will be preceded by a visible and deliberate union between church and state, joined together in the cause of religious activism. We are witnessing the early stages of this cooperation unfolding before our very eyes today.“Protestantism shall give the hand of fellowship to the Roman power. Then there will be a law against the Sabbath of God’s creation, and then it is that God will do His “strange work” in the earth” (Last Day Events, p. 130).
The desire for unity among Christians will ultimately lead to compromise, the surrender of biblical truth, and the final crisis—the enforcement of the mark of the beast.“The papist can see that they are deceiving themselves, willingly closing their eyes to the facts in the case. As the movement for Sunday enforcement gains favor, he (the papist) rejoices, feeling assured that it will eventually bring the whole Protestant world under the banner of Rome” (Great Controversy, p. 448).
“When the leading churches of the United States, uniting upon such points of doctrine as are held by them in common, shall influence the State to enforce their decrees and to sustain their institutions, then Protestant America will have formed an image of the Roman hierarchy, and the infliction of civil penalties upon dissenters will inevitably result” (Great Controversy, p. 445).
The growing partnership between the Catholic Church and the White House raises many concerns. Whenever religious institutions become entangled with the power of the state, liberty begins to die. This very trend fulfills the warning of Revelation 13, which foretells the union of church and state in the closing scenes of earth’s history. When religious bodies join hands with civil power to enforce worship practices, they abandon the principles of religious liberty, unite church and state, and repeat the very apostasy that leads to persecution and the enforcement of the mark of the beast.Sources
[1] https://x.com/cforcatholics/status/1965294322494177564
🙏
Who forms light and creates darkness, Who makes peace and creates evil; I am the Lord, Who makes all these.
The verse Isaiah 45:7 comes from God’s message to Cyrus, king of Persia, where God declares His complete power:
I form the light and create darkness, I make peace and create evil; I the Lord do all these things.
In context, this is not saying that God creates moral evil. It means He controls everything, both peace and calamity, showing that no other power or god is responsible.
The Hebrew word translated as ‘evil’ is ra (רָע), which can mean moral evil, but also trouble, disaster, or distress. Most modern translations use ‘disaster’ or ‘calamity’, showing that the verse is about God’s control over difficult events, not sin or wrongdoing.
The passage teaches that nothing happens outside God’s rule. The same one who brings peace and blessing can also allow or bring disaster when needed. God does not cause sin, but He may permit hardship or suffering as part of His purpose, often to correct or guide people.
Other verses confirm this. James 1:13 says God cannot be tempted by evil or tempt anyone, and 1 John 1:5 says there is no darkness in Him at all.
And there it is!!!! Finally someone went out and studied a scriptural passage!! There is hope for one finding the truth!
Now what you need to do is apply this same method to EVERYTHING you have been told is truth! Like I have said, spend your time in the Tanakh and NOT the NT and study what G-d said. G-d never once spoke in the NT the way he did in the Tanakh. Verify every passage quoted in the NT from the Tanakh, does it match AND is it being used in its original context. IF you do this, your eyes WILL open and you will find a G-d waiting for you with arms open; there isn’t a “mediator” between you and HIM, it’s just HIM.
Once again you quote your goddess as proof and not scripture. You quote her more than you do the bible; how do you not see that as an issue?
And there it is!!!! Finally someone went out and studied a scriptural passage!! There is hope for one finding the truth!
I’ve been doing this for decades; it’s not something I’ve only just decided to take up. The New Testament is precise, and I never accept anyone’s words at face value without first questioning and studying them carefully.
Also, don’t assume that a delayed reply means I’m off researching. Most of the time, I already know the answer but simply don’t have the time to respond right away. As you know, crafting an accurate answer takes time, and rushing it often leads to mistakes.
The New Testament is precise…
Yet, I have pointed out over the last 1.5+ years the errors of the NT and how it doesn’t align with the Tanakh or how passages quoted from the Tanakh are taken out of context and/or twisted to fit the christian narrative. I have shown Paul is a liar and manipulator. I have proven the Jesus canNOT be the true Messiah spoken of by the prophets because he never fulfilled what the Messiah was prophesied to do when he came and the christian response it he’ll do it when he returns (except the Jesus will judge the world, not unite it and the world ISN’T only “christians” to be united; then there’s the millennial reign and after debacle).
If the NT is “precise”, why are there so many different interpretations of the same words and who’s right? Why are most religions at odds with one another when they are supposedly filled with the same “spirit”?
You went to prove me wrong concerning Isa 45:7 and what you found was truth. Of course G-d doesn’t create the evil men do, men do that of their own accord. This entire passage, as you found, dealt with Cyrus – G-d’s mashiach, anointed one, aka – messiah; HE is the one who causes kings and nations to rise and fall and the Babylonian king is going to get crushed by Cyrus. You, sadly, were the only one who actually looked into this passage after my “claim”; everyone else ran from it. I don’t claim to have all the answers as I’m still (re)learning; however, I’m not afraid of change.
After spending 40 years in christianity, I began verifying everything, only to discover most everything I was taught was a lie. Your an intelligent person, you verified the Isa 45:7 “claim”; what’s preventing you from verifying the rest of what christianity claims is truth? Start with Isa 7:14 and Matt 1:22-23; did the writer of Matthew use the Isaiah passage in context or did they distort it?
How the Media Promotes Sunday While Attacking Seventh-day Sabbath Keepers for Exposing the Papal Counterfeit
In recent times, major media outlets have begun doing the bidding of Rome by shifting attention away from the true biblical Sabbath to the man-made substitute and false day of worship. A recent article published by MSN News on October 13, 2025, titled “Is Sunday God’s True Sabbath?” boldly asserts that Christians are free to choose their own day of rest and that the early church, under Peter’s authority, changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. The article also attacks Seventh-day Sabbath keepers for claiming that the Pope changed the day of worship without divine authority. Such claims not only misrepresent Scripture but also perpetuate one of the most enduring deceptions in Christian history. From Genesis to Revelation, the Bible consistently identifies the seventh day—not the first—as the true Sabbath of the Lord.
MSN News published the following claims on October 13, 2025:
• “In the grand scheme of worker exploitation and the unrelenting pursuit of profit, is it not right for there to be a dedicated day of rest? If the answer is yes, then who determines that day, and does there have to be universal agreement for it to be viable?” [1]
The question of rest is not about whether there should be a day, but which day God Himself sanctified. Genesis 2:1–3 and Hebrews 4:4 clearly state that God rested on the seventh day, blessed it, and sanctified it—long before sin, Israel, or any human institution existed. The Sabbath is therefore a divine commandment that reminds us that God is our Creator. Exodus 20:8–11 affirms this truth, pointing back to creation as the reason for keeping the seventh day holy. The Bible never authorizes any transfer that blesses or sanctifies the first day of the week.• “Are believers free to choose the day they want to set aside for worship? The Apostles seemed to worship on two days. They worshipped on Saturdays because they were Jews, as did Jesus, and the Old Covenant was existing, and they, after the crucifixion, worshipped also on Sundays under the New Covenant, the first day of the week.” [1]
This interpretation is a distortion of New Testament history. The apostles never sanctified Sunday or declared it the “new Sabbath.” Scripture records 84 Sabbath meetings in the Book of Acts.
3 Sabbaths: Acts 13:14, 42, 44; Acts 16:13
3 more Sabbaths: Acts 17:2-4
78 Sabbaths (18 months): Acts 18:4, 11
Total: 3+3+78=84Jesus Himself, after His resurrection, told His disciples, “Pray that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath day” (Matthew 24:20)—proving the Sabbath would still be sacred decades later during the destruction of Jerusalem and even in the last days before the second coming of Christ.
• “The Sabbath was given to Israel only for its day of worship, not to any other people. The first day of the week is the day the Apostles and the early church chose to meet on and it is the day that Christ rose from the dead and so worshipping on the first day each week is an everlasting memorial of the resurrection.” [1]
This claim directly contradicts Jesus’ words in Mark 2:27: “The Sabbath was made for man”—not for Jews only. God instituted the Sabbath at creation, when only Adam and Eve existed, long before the existence of Israel. Exodus 20 calls it a memorial of creation. Nowhere does the Bible say the resurrection transfers holiness to another day. The Lord gave baptism as the memorial of His resurrection (Romans 6:3–5), not Sunday worship. To call Sunday an “everlasting memorial” is to replace God’s divine institution with the mark of Papal apostasy.• “Saturday worshippers are quick to point out that man, the Pope, changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday, and is not Sunday named after a false god. This argument is meant to derogate (insult) the first day of the week but it signally fails to do so.” [1]
It is a historical fact, not conjecture, that the Roman Church replaced the seventh-day Sabbath with Sunday keeping. The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine admits, “We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday” (Peter Geiermann, C.S.S.R., The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, 1957, p. 50). No biblical text authorizes that change. To deny this is to reject Bible truth and history. The name “Sunday,” derived from pagan sun worship, reflects its origin in human authority (see Ezekiel 8:16-17).• “However it must be understood that when the church was united, Jesus gave its leader Peter, and hence the early church, some awesome powers, among them the power to make sweeping and profound changes on earth.” [1]
This is a dangerous misuse of Matthew 16:19. Jesus did not give Peter—or any human authority—the power to change God’s moral law. The “binding and loosing” refers to matters of church discipline (Matthew 18:17-18), not to altering divine law. God’s law is eternal (Psalm 111:7–8). Even Christ declared, “Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law” (Matthew 5:18). To claim the Church can “change” the Sabbath is to contradict Jesus Himself.• “Jesus replied, ‘Blessed are you Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven’ (Matthew 16:17–19).” [1]
This authority wasn’t just given to Peter. It was also given to the rest of the apostles and to the church as a whole (see John 20:19-23 and Matthew 18:17-18).• “It can be argued that The Church, acting under authority of this scripture, and the dictates of The Holy Spirit can so decide which day Christians regard as their Sabbath. Since no Sabbath was prescribed for Christians then The Church has every right to make such a prescription for its members.” [1]
The Holy Spirit never leads anyone to contradict the Word of God. John 16:13 says the Spirit “will guide you into all truth,” not away from it. The New Testament never gives the Church authority to redefine the Sabbath. When religious leaders elevate tradition above Scripture, they repeat the sin of the Pharisees whom Christ rebuked: “In vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Matthew 15:9). The Church’s “right to prescribe” a new day of worship is blasphemy—the very claims of the beast power in Revelation 13, which seeks to “speak great words against the most High” and “change times and laws” (Daniel 7:25).The MSN article is reinterpreting Scripture and history to defend Sunday as the day of rest and worship, a man-made institution. The Sabbath is not Jewish or optional—it is God’s own sign of creation (Exodus 20:8-11) and sanctification (Ezekiel 20:12, 20). Sunday observance rests on human tradition and will become the mark of the beast when enforced by law. In the final conflict between Christ and Antichrist, those who “keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus” (Revelation 14:12) will be sealed with the seal of the living God, which is the unchanging truth that the seventh day, blessed and sanctified by God Himself, remains the only true biblical Sabbath.
Sources
[1] https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/devout-christians-is-sunday-god-s-true-sabbath-a-biblical-case-for-christian-worship-day/ar-AA1Olo9u
🙏
Still attacking the catholic church and its leader; please explain Paul’s words concerning the Sabbath.
Col 2:16,17a “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: 17 Which are a shadow of things to come; Here Paul states one isn’t to judge another of the “sabbath days.” What are you doing, if not judging others every time you speak on this topic? Then your faith claims to be more special and set apart from others because you do…no arrogance at all!
Rom 14:5-6 “One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. 6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it.” Basically Paul is stating it doesn’t matter what day one “esteems” to be “higher”, it’s that day one “esteems” that’s for the “Lord.”
Who do I listen to, G-d or Paul? If I listen to the words of G-d, then Paul is a liar; if I accept Paul’s words as truth, then G-d is the liar. Is G-d speaking truth or is Paul? The NT has a problem!
Are you verifying anything?!?!
Hi
God’s Eternal Law
So shall I keep Your law continually, forever and ever. Psalm 119:44.
How wonderful in its simplicity, its comprehensiveness and perfection, is the law of Jehovah! …
There is no mystery in the law of God. The feeblest intellect can grasp these rules to regulate the life and form the character after the divine Model….
The infinite sacrifice which Christ has made to magnify and exalt the law testifies that not one jot or tittle of that law will relinquish its claims upon the transgressor. Christ came to pay the debt which the sinner had incurred by transgression, and by His own example to teach us how to keep the law of God. Said Christ, “I have kept my Father’s commandments.” In consideration of all the facts so clearly establishing the claims of God’s law, with heaven and eternal life in view to inspire hope and induce effort, it is inconceivable how so many professing to be servants of God can set aside His law and teach sinners that they are not amenable to its precepts. What a fatal delusion! Satan first devised this heresy, and by it he enticed Eve into sin. The sad results of that transgression are before us….
Christ came to teach us the way of salvation. And when the shadowy services of the former dispensation were no longer of any value—when type had met antitype in the death of Christ—then we might expect that if the law of ten commandments were no longer binding, Christ would declare its abrogation. If the Old Testament Scriptures were no longer to be regarded as a guide for Christians, He would make known the fact….
Holy prophets have foretold the manner of Christ’s birth, the events of His life, His mission, and His death and resurrection. In the Old Testament we find the gospel of a coming Savior. In the New Testament we have the gospel of a Savior revealed as prophecy had foretold….
There is no discord between the teachings of Christ in the Old Testament and His teachings in the New….
In the very last message to His church, by way of Patmos, the risen Savior pronounces a benediction upon those who keep His Father’s law: “Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.”—The Review and Herald, September 14, 1886.
From From the Heart – Page 287
🙏
Hi all
Vice President JD Vance Publicly Rejects the Separation of Church and State During a Turning Point USA Event.
On Wednesday, October 29, 2025, Vice President J.D. Vance spoke at the University of Mississippi during the first Turning Point USA campus event since the assassination of Charlie Kirk. About 10,000 people attended the gathering. During the question-and-answer session, Vance talked about what he called a misunderstanding of the phrase “separation of church and state.” He said that those exact words do not appear in the U.S. Constitution. According to JD Vance, the Constitution only prevents Congress from creating a national religion, but it does not stop individual states or local communities from supporting religion or having an official church if they choose to do so.
Here is a portion of Vice President J.D. Vance’s speech at the Turning Point USA event held at the University of Mississippi:
• “I want to make sure that we are all on the same page. If you go back to the First Amendment, it doesn’t say “separation of church and state,” it says, ‘Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion.’ But if you go back to the founding time, there were actually a number of states that had formally recognized churches. There was the Anglican Church of Virginia. That was the official state church of Virginia. Maryland at the time was the only majority Catholic colony, or at least had a significant Catholic representation of the original 13 colonies. There’s a lot there.” (Video)
• “What I believe happened is the Supreme Court interpreted, ‘Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion,’ to effectively throw the church out of every public space at the federal, state, and local level. I think it was a terrible mistake, and we are still paying for the consequences of it today.” (Video)
• “But if you were to undo that, and if we were to get back to a system actually meant by the founders where Congress is not setting up an established religion, but people in their local communities can kind of do whatever it is that they want to do, I think that would be a better system than what we have today. But I think the most important principle that we have got to remember is you do not have to completely kick God out of the public square, which is what we’ve done in modern America. It’s not what the founders wanted, it’s not good for the United States of America, and anybody who tells you it’s required by the Constitution is lying to you. Thank you.” (Video)
While it is true that when the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment—“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”—adopted in 1791, was originally applied only to the federal government and not to the states; however, Vice President Vance left out a major important fact: After the Civil War, the Fourteenth Amendment was added to the Constitution in 1868. This amendment made sure that all citizens, including former slaves, had the same rights and protections in every state throughout the country. It also meant that the freedoms in the Bill of Rights, such as the rule against establishing a state religion, now applied to state and local governments as well as the federal government.
Notice how the Fourteenth Amendment places limits on what states can do when it comes to matters of religious liberty:
• “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” (14th Amendment, Section 1).
Since then, all levels of government—federal, state, and local—have been bound by the Establishment Clause. This principle was confirmed in the Supreme Court case Everson v. Board of Education (1947), which ruled that the Establishment Clause applies to state and local laws through the Fourteenth Amendment. [1] This means that neither the federal government nor any state or local government can establish an official church.Any politician or group—including J.D. Vance and Turning Point USA—that claims states can create their own official religion, apart from the Fourteenth Amendment, is not only mistaken about the Constitution but also pushing a dangerous idea. This belief threatens one of America’s most important freedoms: the separation of church and state. The Fourteenth Amendment makes it clear that no state can deny its citizens the same protections guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, including religious liberty. To argue otherwise is to roll back more than a century of constitutional precedent and open the door to religious coercion.
From a prophetic perspective, the idea that individual states could enforce religious observance is precisely the kind of union of church and state foretold in Revelation 13. The “image of the beast” represents the restoration of the same persecuting power that once sought to control conscience through the union of religion and civil government. When the state begins to enforce the doctrines or observances of the church—whether in the name of morality, tradition, or “Christian nationalism”—it steps onto a path that history has repeatedly shown to lead to oppression.
This same line of thinking was used in the past to justify Sunday laws across many states. As a result, many Adventists were arrested, fined, or even sent to prison and forced to work on chain gangs simply for refusing to work on Saturday and choosing to work on Sunday instead. Ellen G. White gave the following warning about the union of church and state:
“The beast mentioned in this message, whose worship is enforced by the two-horned beast, is the first, or leopard-like beast of Revelation 13,—the papacy. The image to the beast represents that form of apostate Protestantism which will be developed when the Protestant churches shall seek the aid of the civil power for the enforcement of their dogmas” (Great Controversy, p. 445).
The growing claim that states have the right to establish their own religion is not only constitutionally false—it is dangerous. Such ideas open the door to the same spirit that once persecuted dissenters and forced people to act against their conscience in the name of public morality. Whenever civil government takes it upon itself to define or enforce religion, it inevitably leads to discrimination, punishment, and the loss of freedom. From the Sunday law imprisonments of faithful Sabbath keepers in the 19th century to the persecution of minority faiths throughout history, the record shows that when church and state unite, it always leads to the revival of tyranny.Sources
[1] https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/establishment-clause-separation-of-church-and-state/
🙏
Hi all
Militarizing the Faith: When the Lord’s Prayer Becomes a Weapon
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth holds one of the most powerful positions in the federal government. As head of the War Department, he serves as the nation’s chief military strategist and principal advisor to the President on matters of war and national defense. His decisions influence not only the operations of the U.S. armed forces but also political developments across the globe.
On September 20, 2025, Pete Hegseth released a video on the official United States Secretary of War X account featuring himself reciting the Lord’s Prayer as images of warplanes, tanks, and bombs flashed across the screen. [1] In this display, faith was used to justify force, and biblical texts were used to make violence seem like it was approved by God. However, true religion seeks peace and reconciliation—not domination.
The merging of Christ’s prayer—a sacred appeal for peace and forgiveness—with symbols of war sends a message that is both dangerous and deeply contradictory. At the heart of this issue lies the principle of church–state separation, enshrined in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Secretary of War, acting in his official capacity, is not merely a private citizen but a representative of the state. By invoking the Lord’s Prayer through official government media, he presents the U.S. military as a Christian army engaged in divinely sanctioned warfare—an image that stands in direct conflict with the very foundations of American freedom and religious liberty.
The Lord’s Prayer, given by Christ Himself, is a call to advance God’s spiritual kingdom—not to defend or conquer earthly territories. It is a plea for forgiveness and deliverance from evil, spoken in the language of humility and reconciliation, not a rallying call for conquest and destruction. To take this sacred prayer and overlay it with images of bombs and tanks is to transform a prayer of peace into an instrument of psychological Christian warfare. This approach not only corrupts the spiritual meaning of the Lord’s Prayer but also implies, falsely, that Jesus endorses many of the earthly military campaigns we see today.
History has shown that when nations mix divine authority with military power, it leads to crusades, persecution, and bloodshed carried out in the name of God. Such actions represent a betrayal of the very faith they claim to uphold. The underlying message is this: the United States’ military policies are guided by religious motives rather than by constitutional principles. In other words, this is a declaration of Christian nationalism and the revival of the idea of holy war.
The United States Armed Forces are supposed to defend citizens of every faith and religion—not elevate one faith above another. By seeking to sanctify instruments of war with the Lord’s Prayer, Pete Hegseth’s video undermines the principle of religious neutrality and alienates those of other faiths—or of no faith—who serve under the same flag and have taken the same oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.
When the state begins to borrow the language of the church to justify its military actions, it dishonors both the Bible and the Constitution. Government and religion must never be merged—and the Lord’s Prayer should not be used against the backdrop of warplanes and bombs.
Sources
[1] https://x.com/secwar/status/1969530822127407323?s=46&t=azRr_ngnUtc8OYPKRt4F5Q
https://adventmessenger.org/militarizing-the-faith-when-the-lords-prayer-becomes-a-weapon/
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
