PART #2 ---> My Response to Brother ROLLY DUMAGUIT a SDA REFROM MOVEMENT Member regarding his personal Stand, Comments, Understanding, and Belief with regards to LEVITICUS CHAPTER 11 accordingly being part of the CEREMONIAL LAW and the Passages of ISAIAH 22:12-14; 22:20-22, or ROMANS 14:21,22, & 23 and other quoted Bible Passages/Verses as being A BIBLICAL ENDORSEMENT for VEGETARIANISM. ROLLY DUMAGUIT Who symbolized Eliakim ? The enemies of the present truth have been trying to open the door of the holy place, that Jesus has shut, and to close the door of the most holy place, which He opened in 1844, where the ark is, containing the two tables of stone on which are written the ten commandments by the finger of Jehovah. {EW 43.1} So the application of Isaiah 22: 12-14 will be 1844 onwards. SAGUT #1 ---> PROPER AND APPROPRIATE COMMENTARY: (FALL OF JERUSALEM) PROPHECY CONCERNING JERUSALEM, ISAIAH 22:1-14. SENTENCE AGAINST SHEBNA, WHO WAS OVER THE HOUSEHOLD, ISAIAH 22:15-19. PROPHECY CONCERNING ELIAKIM, THE SON OF HILKIAH, ISAIAH 22:20, ISAIAH 22:21. FROM ELIAKIM, ISAIAH, (AGREEABLY TO THE MODE UNIVERSALLY ADOPTED IN THE PROPHETICAL WRITINGS, OF MAKING THE THINGS THEN PRESENT, OR WHICH WERE SHORTLY TO BE ACCOMPLISHED, TYPES OR REPRESENTATIONS OF THINGS TO BE FULFILLED UPON A LARGER SCALE IN DISTANT FUTURITY), MAKES A TRANSITION TO THE MESSIAH, OF WHOM ELIAKIM WAS A TYPE, TO WHOM THE WORDS WILL BEST APPLY, AND TO WHOM SOME PASSAGES IN THE PROPHECY MUST BE SOLELY RESTRAINED, ISAIAH 22:20-24. THE SENTENCE AGAINST SHEBNA AGAIN CONFIRMED, ISAIAH 22:25. HIS PROPHECY, ENDING WITH THE FOURTEENTH VERSE OF THIS CHAPTER, IS ENTITLED, “THE ORACLE CONCERNING THE VALLEY OF VISION,” BY WHICH IS MEANT JERUSALEM, BECAUSE, SAYS SAL. BEN MELECH, IT WAS THE PLACE OF PROPHECY. JERUSALEM, ACCORDING TO JOSEPHUS, WAS BUILT UPON TWO OPPOSITE HILLS SION AND ACRA, SEPARATED BY A VALLEY IN THE MIDST. HE SPEAKS OF ANOTHER BROAD VALLEY BETWEEN ACRA AND MORIAH, BELL. JUD. 5:13; 6:6. IT WAS THE SEAT OF DIVINE REVELATION; THE PLACE WHERE CHIEFLY PROPHETIC VISION WAS GIVEN, AND WHERE GOD MANIFESTED HIMSELF VISIBLY IN THE HOLY PLACE. THE PROPHECY FORETELLS THE INVASION OF JERUSALEM BY THE ASSYRIANS UNDER SENNACHERIB; OR BY THE CHALDEANS UNDER NEBUCHADNEZZAR. VITRINGA IS OF OPINION THAT THE PROPHET HAS BOTH IN VIEW: THAT OF THE CHALDEANS IN THE FIRST PART, ISAIAH 22:1-5, WHICH HE THINKS RELATES TO THE FLIGHT OF ZEDEKIAH, 2 KINGS 25:4, 2 KINGS 25:5; AND THAT OF THE ASSYRIANS IN THE LATTER PART, WHICH AGREES WITH THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THAT TIME, AND PARTICULARLY DESCRIBES THE PREPARATIONS MADE BY HEZEKIAH FOR THE DEFENSE OF THE CITY, ISAIAH 22:8-11. COMPARE 2 CHRONICLES 32:2-5. ROLLY DUMAGUIT Bro Ranan let us discuss about Rom 14: 21 Let me quote your comments 2ndly Bro Rolly Dumaguit, Romans 14:21 - it is not about VEGETARIANISM AGAIN... NOT EVEN A SINGLE DOT OF ROMAS 14 ARE TALKING ABT VEGETARIANISM.. It simply deals about WEAKER & STRONGER FAITH... If what a Stronger Faith do even if its Legitimate could somehow be a Stumbling BLOCK to a brother who has a Weaker Faith then, if necessary avoid doing it... NO WAY THAT VEGETARIANISM IS BEING ENDORSED OR DISCEUSSED IN THIS CHAPTER. So you mean that this verse does not discuss about vegetarianism. Okay let us analyse those verses. ROLLY DUMAGUIT Let quote here Rom14:21 [It is] good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor [any thing] whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak. 14:22 Hast thou faith? have [it] to thyself before God. Happy [is] he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. 14:23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because [he eateth] not of faith: for whatsoever [is] not of faith is sin. SAGUT #1 ---> PROPER INTERPRETATIONS OF ROMANS CHAPTER 14: IN THINGS INDIFFERENT, CHRISTIANS SHOULD NOT CONDEMN EACH OTHER, ROMANS 14:1. PARTICULARLY WITH RESPECT TO DIFFERENT KINDS OF FOOD, ROMANS 14:2-4. AND THE OBSERVATION OF CERTAIN DAYS, ROMANS 14:5, ROMANS 14:6. NONE OF US SHOULD LIVE UNTO HIMSELF, BUT UNTO CHRIST, WHO LIVED AND DIED FOR US, ROMANS 14:7-9. WE MUST NOT JUDGE EACH OTHER; FOR ALL JUDGMENT BELONGS TO GOD, ROMANS 14:10-13. WE SHOULD NOT DO ANY THING BY WHICH A WEAK BROTHER MAY BE STUMBLED OR GRIEVED; LEST WE DESTROY HIM FOR WHOM CHRIST DIED, ROMANS 14:14-16. THE KINGDOM OF GOD DOES NOT CONSIST IN OUTWARD THINGS, ROMANS 14:17, ROMANS 14:18. CHRISTIANS SHOULD ENDEAVOR TO CULTIVATE PEACE AND BROTHERLY AFFECTION, AND RATHER DENY THEMSELVES OF CERTAIN PRIVILEGES THAN BE THE MEANS OF STUMBLING A WEAK BROTHER, ROMANS 14:19-21. THE NECESSITY OF DOING ALL IN THE SPIRIT OF FAITH, ROMANS 14:22, ROMANS 14:23. IT SEEMS VERY LIKELY, FROM THIS AND THE FOLLOWING CHAPTER, THAT THERE WERE CONSIDERABLE MISUNDERSTANDINGS BETWEEN THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHRISTIANS AT ROME, RELATIVE TO CERTAIN CUSTOMS WHICH WERE SACREDLY OBSERVED BY THE ONE AND DISREGARDED BY THE OTHER. THE PRINCIPAL SUBJECT OF DISPUTE WAS CONCERNING MEATS AND DAYS. THE CONVERTED JEW, RETAINING A VENERATION FOR THE LAW OF MOSES, ABSTAINED FROM CERTAIN MEATS, AND WAS OBSERVANT OF CERTAIN DAYS; WHILE THE CONVERTED GENTILES, UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION LAID HIM UNDER NO OBLIGATIONS TO SUCH CEREMONIAL POINTS, HAD NO REGARD TO EITHER. IT APPEARS, FARTHER, THAT MUTUAL CENSURES AND UNCHARITABLE JUDGMENTS PREVAILED AMONG THEM, AND THAT BROTHERLY LOVE AND MUTUAL FORBEARANCE DID NOT GENERALLY PREVAIL. THE APOSTLE PAUL, IN THIS PART OF HIS EPISTLE, EXHORTS THAT IN SUCH THINGS, NOT ESSENTIAL TO RELIGION, AND IN WHICH BOTH PARTIES, IN THEIR DIFFERENT WAY OF THINKING, MIGHT HAVE AN HONEST MEANING, AND SERIOUS REGARD TO GOD, DIFFERENCE OF SENTIMENTS MIGHT NOT HINDER CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP AND LOVE; BUT THAT THEY WOULD MUTUALLY FORBEAR EACH OTHER, MAKE CANDID ALLOWANCE, AND ESPECIALLY NOT CARRY THEIR GOSPEL LIBERTY SO FAR AS TO PREJUDICE A WEAK BROTHER, A JEWISH CHRISTIAN, AGAINST THE GOSPEL ITSELF, AND TEMPT HIM TO RENOUNCE CHRISTIANITY. HIS RULES AND EXHORTATIONS ARE STILL OF GREAT USE, AND HAPPY WOULD THE CHRISTIAN WORLD BE IF THEY WERE MORE GENERALLY PRACTISED. THAT IT IS PROBABLE ST. PAUL LEARNED ALL THESE PARTICULARS FROM AQUILA AND PRISCILLA, WHO WERE LATELY COME FROM ROME, ACTS 18:2, ACTS 18:3, AND WITH WHOM THE APOSTLE WAS FAMILIAR FOR A CONSIDERABLE TIME. THIS IS VERY LIKELY, AS THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT HE HAD ANY OTHER INTERCOURSE WITH THE CHURCH AT ROME. ROLLY DUMAGUIT Paul said good not to eat meat! Bro Ranan Vegetarianism is eating meat or not eating meat? of course not to eat meat. What is vegetarian then? A person who dont eat meat.There are many kinds of vegetarian. but the general concept of the word vegetarian is a person who dont eat meat. To the person who dont want to understand this point will make many excuses. SAGUT #1 ----> NO ACCOUNT IN THE NEW TESTAMENT THAT JUSTIFIED “VEGETARIANISM NOT EVEN APOSTLE PAUL HIMSELF NOT EVEN THE 12-DISCIPLES NOT EVEN JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF. -– NO MENTIONED IN THE WHOLE BIBLE AND NO ACCOUNT ABOUT VEGETARIANISM EXCEPT “DURIGN THE TIME OF ADAM & EVE AFTER THE FALL OF SIN AND AFTER THEY WERE CAST OUT FROM THE GARDEN OF EDEN. IN GARDEN OF EDEN NO VEGETABLE FOOD ARE MENTOINED EXCEPT FOR GRAINS, NUTS, & FRUITS. THESE ARE THE ONLY ORIGINAL AND FIRST HUMAN FOOD OR DIET. ROLLY DUMAGUIT Maybe Bro Ranan will say, It is good not eat meat if my brother will be offended or made weak. That is not the concept of the verse: What did paul say? [It is] good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor [any thing] whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak. What are good points that Paul are mentioning here? 1. Good not to eat meat.2 good not to drink wine, 3 good not to do anything whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak. Bro Ranan, you should use the English grammar correctly. Every idea separated by comma is independent from the other. SAGUT #1 ---> FIRST LINE BRO IS VERY OUT OF CONTEXT I AM SORRY FOR THAT. PLS DON’T INTERPRET ROMANS CHAPTER 14 ON YOUR OWN PERSONAL UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE IT IS VERY WRONG AND SO OUT OF CONTEXT. AGAIN BRO ROLLY --- IT SEEMS VERY LIKELY, FROM THIS AND THE FOLLOWING CHAPTER, THAT THERE WERE CONSIDERABLE MISUNDERSTANDINGS BETWEEN THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHRISTIANS AT ROME, RELATIVE TO CERTAIN CUSTOMS WHICH WERE SACREDLY OBSERVED BY THE ONE AND DISREGARDED BY THE OTHER. THE PRINCIPAL SUBJECT OF DISPUTE WAS CONCERNING MEATS AND DAYS. THE CONVERTED JEW, RETAINING A VENERATION FOR THE LAW OF MOSES, ABSTAINED FROM CERTAIN MEATS, AND WAS OBSERVANT OF CERTAIN DAYS; WHILE THE CONVERTED GENTILES, UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION LAID HIM UNDER NO OBLIGATIONS TO SUCH CEREMONIAL POINTS, HAD NO REGARD TO EITHER. IT APPEARS, FARTHER, THAT MUTUAL CENSURES AND UNCHARITABLE JUDGMENTS PREVAILED AMONG THEM, AND THAT BROTHERLY LOVE AND MUTUAL FORBEARANCE DID NOT GENERALLY PREVAIL. THE APOSTLE PAUL, IN THIS PART OF HIS EPISTLE, EXHORTS THAT IN SUCH THINGS, NOT ESSENTIAL TO RELIGION, AND IN WHICH BOTH PARTIES, IN THEIR DIFFERENT WAY OF THINKING, MIGHT HAVE AN HONEST MEANING, AND SERIOUS REGARD TO GOD, DIFFERENCE OF SENTIMENTS MIGHT NOT HINDER CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP AND LOVE; BUT THAT THEY WOULD MUTUALLY FORBEAR EACH OTHER, MAKE CANDID ALLOWANCE, AND ESPECIALLY NOT CARRY THEIR GOSPEL LIBERTY SO FAR AS TO PREJUDICE A WEAK BROTHER, A JEWISH CHRISTIAN, AGAINST THE GOSPEL ITSELF, AND TEMPT HIM TO RENOUNCE CHRISTIANITY. HIS RULES AND EXHORTATIONS ARE STILL OF GREAT USE, AND HAPPY WOULD THE CHRISTIAN WORLD BE IF THEY WERE MORE GENERALLY PRACTISED. ROLLY DUMAGUIT Maybe you will say That Paul was not prohibiting to eat meat , he was only counselling ! But look the next verse! Rom 14:22 Hast thou faith? have [it] to thyself before God. Happy [is] he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. 14:23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because [he eateth] not of faith: for whatsoever [is] not of faith is sin. SAGUT #1 ----> THE ONLY TRUE ACCOUNT OF ROMANS CHAPTER 14 IS BETEWEEN JEWS & GENTILES. TRUE ACCOUNT TRUE EPISTLES FOR THE CHRISTIAN JEWS AND CHRISTIAN GENTILES IN ROME DURING THE TIME OF PAUL WHICH TACKLES ABOUT A STROGER FAITH AND A WEAKER FAITH. PLS READ MT ABOVE ANSWERS. ROLLY DUMAGUIT Paul was asking! Hast thou faith? of what? of the preceding verse! Good not to eat meat! If you say yes Paul I belive! I will not eat meat Then Paul will tell you. have [it] to thyself before God. Means not to be proud because you are vegetarian. Do not condemn others who did not know the light.See Rom 14:1-4. If you this you are blessed Happy [is] he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. The word happy means Blessed if you will not eat meat. SAGUT #1 ----> THE ONLY TRUE ACCOUNT OF ROMANS CHAPTER 14 IS BETEWEEN JEWS & GENTILES. TRUE ACCOUNT TRUE EPISTLES FOR THE CHRISTIAN JEWS AND CHRISTIAN GENTILES IN ROME DURING THE TIME OF PAUL WHICH TACKLES ABOUT A STROGER FAITH AND A WEAKER FAITH. PLS READ MT ABOVE ANSWERS. ROLLY DUMAGUIT First person - believeth that he may eat all things- he is not eating yet he is only believing. The second person - weak in faith ,already eating, what he ate? herbs ( vegetarian.) But Paul in verse one Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, [but] not to doubtful disputations. AGAIN BRO ROLLY --- IT SEEMS VERY LIKELY, FROM THIS AND THE FOLLOWING CHAPTER, THAT THERE WERE CONSIDERABLE MISUNDERSTANDINGS BETWEEN THE JEWISH AND GENTILE CHRISTIANS AT ROME, RELATIVE TO CERTAIN CUSTOMS WHICH WERE SACREDLY OBSERVED BY THE ONE AND DISREGARDED BY THE OTHER. THE PRINCIPAL SUBJECT OF DISPUTE WAS CONCERNING MEATS AND DAYS. THE CONVERTED JEW, RETAINING A VENERATION FOR THE LAW OF MOSES, ABSTAINED FROM CERTAIN MEATS, AND WAS OBSERVANT OF CERTAIN DAYS; WHILE THE CONVERTED GENTILES, UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION LAID HIM UNDER NO OBLIGATIONS TO SUCH CEREMONIAL POINTS, HAD NO REGARD TO EITHER. IT APPEARS, FARTHER, THAT MUTUAL CENSURES AND UNCHARITABLE JUDGMENTS PREVAILED AMONG THEM, AND THAT BROTHERLY LOVE AND MUTUAL FORBEARANCE DID NOT GENERALLY PREVAIL. THE APOSTLE PAUL, IN THIS PART OF HIS EPISTLE, EXHORTS THAT IN SUCH THINGS, NOT ESSENTIAL TO RELIGION, AND IN WHICH BOTH PARTIES, IN THEIR DIFFERENT WAY OF THINKING, MIGHT HAVE AN HONEST MEANING, AND SERIOUS REGARD TO GOD, DIFFERENCE OF SENTIMENTS MIGHT NOT HINDER CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP AND LOVE; BUT THAT THEY WOULD MUTUALLY FORBEAR EACH OTHER, MAKE CANDID ALLOWANCE, AND ESPECIALLY NOT CARRY THEIR GOSPEL LIBERTY SO FAR AS TO PREJUDICE A WEAK BROTHER, A JEWISH CHRISTIAN, AGAINST THE GOSPEL ITSELF, AND TEMPT HIM TO RENOUNCE CHRISTIANITY. HIS RULES AND EXHORTATIONS ARE STILL OF GREAT USE, AND HAPPY WOULD THE CHRISTIAN WORLD BE IF THEY WERE MORE GENERALLY PRACTISED. ROLLY DUMAGUIT Let us analyze verse 3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. Who is this person that eateth? the one who ate herbs (VG). Who is this person who eateth not? - the person who believes to ate everything, but he is not yet eating! Let not him that eateth ( VG) despise him that eateth not ( person who believes to ate everything.) and let not him which eateth not( person who believes to ate everything.) judge him that eateth (VG): for God hath received him. Who is received by God? He is that eateth ( VG) SAGUT #1 ----> BRO ROLLY, I ADVISE YOU TO PLEASE STOP INSERTING THE WORD VG OR VEGETARIANISM BECAUSE THAT IS VERY VER OUT OF CONTEXT. CHAPTER 14 DOES NOT EVEN TALK ABOUT VEGETABLES OR GRASS OR FRUITS OR BREAD -- THE ONLY TRUE ACCOUNT OF ROMANS CHAPTER 14 IS BETEWEEN JEWS & GENTILES. TRUE ACCOUNT TRUE EPISTLES FOR THE CHRISTIAN JEWS AND CHRISTIAN GENTILES IN ROME DURING THE TIME OF PAUL WHICH TACKLES ABOUT A STROGER FAITH AND A WEAKER FAITH. PLS READ MT ABOVE ANSWERS.
Posted on: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 15:11:22 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015