Posted on 07/03/2025 5:38:42 PM PDT by Angelino97
I have just finished reading “The Old Covenant: Revoked or Not Revoked?” by Dr. Robert Sungenis. It is a study debunking the notion, now regnant in liberal theological circles, that the Old Covenant still stands side-by-side with the New Covenant.
According to this novelty, in essence, God’s “A Plan” and God’s “B Plan” are both currently pleasing to Him and both fully in effect.
Opposed to this, the Catholic Faith teaches that the Old Law — itself good, holy, and of divine origin — was a preparation for the New, and that the New Law superceded and fulfilled the Old.
Indeed, as Dr. Sungenis shows, Pope John Paul II affirmed the traditional teaching in a not-much-quoted passage of Redemptoris Mater: “Christ fulfills the divine promise and supersedes the old law.”
Years ago, I made an effort at debunking this vogue theology in an article on the Epistle to the Hebrews: A Better Testament. Dr. Sungenis quotes from Hebrews, but he does not limit himself to this, as the pilfered quotations below adequately show.
The following is a series of scriptural, patristic, and magisterial citations from “The Old Covenant: Revoked or Not Revoked?“:
Hebrews 7:18: “On the one hand, a former commandment is annulled because of its weakness and uselessness…”;
Hebrews 10:9: “Then he says, ‘Behold, I come to do your will.’ He takes away the first [covenant] to establish the second [covenant]…”;
2 Corinthians 3:14: “For to this day when they [the Jews] read the Old Covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away”;
Hebrews 8:7: “For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another”;
Colossians 2:14: “Having canceled the written code, with its decrees, that was against us and stood opposed to us; He took it away nailing it to the cross”;
Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, para. 29: “…the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished…but on the gibbet of His death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross”;
The Catechism of the Council of Trent: “…the people, aware of the abrogation of the Mosaic Law…”;
Council of Florence: “that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosaic law…although they were suited to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began”;
Council of Trent: “but not even the Jews by the very letter of the law of Moses were able to be liberated or to rise therefrom”;
Cardinal Ratzinger: “Thus the Sinai [Mosaic] Covenant is indeed superseded” (Many Religions – One Covenant, p. 70).
St. John Chrysostom: “Yet surely Paul’s object everywhere is to annul this Law….And with much reason; for it was through a fear and a horror of this that the Jews obstinately opposed grace” (Homily on Romans, 6:12); “And so while no one annuls a man’s covenant, the covenant of God after four hundred and thirty years is annulled; for if not that covenant but another instead of it bestows what is promised, then is it set aside, which is most unreasonable” (Homily on Galatians, Ch 3);
St. Augustine: “Instead of the grace of the law which has passed away, we have received the grace of the gospel which is abiding; and instead of the shadows and types of the old dispensation, the truth has come by Jesus Christ. Jeremiah also prophesied thus in God’s name: ‘Behold, the days come, says the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah…’ Observe what the prophet says, not to Gentiles, who had not been partakers in any former covenant, but to the Jewish nation. He who has given them the law by Moses, promises in place of it the New Covenant of the gospel, that they might no longer live in the oldness of the letter, but in the newness of the spirit” (Letters, 74, 4);
Justin Martyr: Now, law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one; and an eternal and final law – namely, Christ – has been given to us, and the covenant is trustworthy…Have you not read…by Jeremiah, concerning this same new covenant, He thus speaks: ‘Behold, the days come,’ says the Lord, ‘that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah…’” (Dialogue with Trypho, Ch 11).
“You and I don’t have the same Jesus or the same Gospel”
That’s because I have the Jesus in the Gispels as taught by the Apostles who learnt it from Christ God Himself.
You have numerology and 20th century Scooby doo philosophy.
No contest.
Your latest response is a chaotic, vitriolic rant that doubles down on dispensationalist distortions, slanders the Catholic Church as the “Mother of Harlots,” and accuses it of peddling “demon-possessed unclean doctrines” over a 2,000-year Church age corrupted by Satan. You weave a speculative web, linking the 2,000 cubits of Joshua 3:4, the 2,000 swine of Mark 5:13, and the “three measures of leaven” in Matthew 13:33 to paint the Church as a leavened, demonic failure, awaiting a literal Jewish millennium. Your attack on Catholic practices—Christmas, Marian devotion, even the liturgical calendar—is not just unbiblical but a grotesque caricature of the apostolic faith. This isn’t exegesis; it’s a dispensationalist fever dream, riddled with hermeneutical holes and exegetical errors. Below is a deeply Catholic, biblically grounded response that obliterates your claims, exposes the bankruptcy of your hermeneutics, and defends the Church’s truth with Scripture, Tradition, and reason, holding no punches as requested. Your accusations crumble under the light of Christ’s Word.
Let’s point out your theology’s holes:
1. Your Hermeneutics are not more than speculative Numerology, not exegesis
Your entire argument hinges on a fanciful numerological scheme—connecting the 2,000 cubits in Joshua 3:4, the 2,000 swine in Mark 5:13, and the “three measures of leaven” in Matthew 13:33 to a 2,000-year Church age corrupted by demons. This is not biblical exegesis but eisegesis, imposing a dispensationalist agenda onto unrelated texts. Let’s expose the holes:
- Joshua 3:4: You claim the 2,000 cubits distance from the Ark symbolizes 2,000 years of the Church age, separated from Christ (the “Ark in heaven”). This is pure speculation. Joshua 3:4’s context is practical: the distance ensured reverence and visibility as Israel crossed the Jordan. No New Testament text links this to a 2,000-year Church age. The Ark prefigures Christ’s presence (Hebrews 9:11–12), accessible now through the Church (Ephesians 2:18), not distant. Your numerology lacks any scriptural warrant.
- Mark 5:13: You equate the 2,000 demon-possessed swine with the Church age, calling it “demon-possessed unclean years.” This is a grotesque misreading. Mark 5:1–13 shows Jesus’ authority over evil, casting demons into swine, which drown, symbolizing their defeat (Mark 5:15). The number 2,000 is incidental, describing the herd, not a prophecy. No apostle or Father connects this to the Church. Your slander of Christ’s Church (Matthew 16:18) as demonic contradicts His promise: “The gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”
- Matthew 13:33: You misinterpret the “three measures of leaven” as demonic corruption in the Church. In context, Jesus’ parable of the leaven depicts the Kingdom’s growth, permeating the world positively (Luke 13:20–21), like yeast in bread. Leaven is not inherently evil—Scripture uses it neutrally (Leviticus 23:17). Your negative spin is dispensationalist pessimism, assuming the Church’s failure, which contradicts Ephesians 5:27: Christ presents the Church “without spot or wrinkle.”
Your hermeneutic cherry-picks numbers, ignores context, and invents connections absent from Scripture. This isn’t exegesis—it’s fantasy, rooted in John Nelson Darby’s 19th-century dispensationalism, not the apostles’ teaching.
2. The Church Age: Christ’s Reign,
You portray the Church age as 2,000 years of “demon-possessed doctrines,” with Satan’s influence corrupting the gospel. This is a blasphemous attack on Christ’s Church, contradicting Scripture and the Holy Spirit’s guidance.
You deny Christ’s Victory: Revelation 20:2–3 says Satan is “bound” during the “thousand years,” which Catholics interpret as the Church age, where Christ’s resurrection limits Satan’s deception (John 12:31: “Now the ruler of this world will be cast out”). The gospel’s spread (Acts 1:8) fulfills this binding, despite Satan’s ongoing activity (1 Peter 5:8). Your claim of a demon-ruled Church denies Christ’s lordship (Ephesians 1:20–22: “He seated Him… above every name”).
You deny the Church’s Endurance: Jesus promises the Church’s invincibility (Matthew 16:18) and the Spirit’s guidance (John 16:13). Paul calls the Church “the pillar and bulwark of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15), not a leavened lump of demons. Your dispensationalist view, expecting a future Jewish kingdom, dismisses the Church as a failure, contradicting its role as Christ’s Bride (Ephesians 5:25–27).
You call the Church the “Mother of Harlots” (Revelation 17:5), a dispensationalist trope misapplied to Catholicism. In context, the “harlot” is apostate Jerusalem of 67 AD.
3. The Leaven and Pentecost: Your Misreading of Parables and Feasts
You claim the “three measures of leaven” (Matthew 13:33) and the “two leavened loaves” at Pentecost (Leviticus 23:17) prove the Church’s corruption, contrasting with Christ as the “Unleavened Bread of Sincerity and Truth” (1 Corinthians 5:8). This is exegetical malpractice.
Parable of the Leaven: Matthew 13:33’s leaven symbolizes the Kingdom’s transformative growth, not corruption. Jesus compares the Kingdom to yeast that leavens dough, spreading invisibly but powerfully (Luke 13:20–21). Your negative reading ignores the parable’s context, where the mustard seed (Matthew 13:31–32) also depicts growth, with “birds” (not demons) as nations resting in its branches (Ezekiel 17:23). The early Fathers, like Irenaeus (Against Heresies 5.9), saw leaven as the gospel’s spread, not demonic infiltration.
Pentecost’s Leavened Loaves: Leviticus 23:17’s two leavened loaves at the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost) represent the firstfruits of the harvest, offered to God. Leaven here is neutral, part of a prescribed offering, not a symbol of evil. You contrast this with Christ as “unleavened” (1 Corinthians 5:7–8), but the analogy fails—Pentecost’s loaves prefigure the Church, Jew and Gentile united (Acts 2:1–4), not corruption. Your claim that the Church is “insincerity and falsehoods” slanders the Spirit’s work (Acts 2:38).
Christ as Unleavened: 1 Corinthians 5:7–8 calls Christ our “Passover lamb” and urges believers to be “unleavened” in holiness. This doesn’t negate the Church’s mission but calls it to purity, which the Catholic Church upholds through sacraments and doctrine (CCC 1324). Your portrayal of the Church as leavened with demons defies Christ’s cleansing (Ephesians 5:26).
You rail against Christmas, January 1 (likely New Year’s or Mary’s Solemnity), February 2 (Candlemas), and days named after pagan gods (“Frigg Day,” “Saturn Day”), calling them “doctrines of demons” destined for the “Lake of Fire.”. This is sheer historical ignorance on your part
Christmas: Celebrating Christ’s birth (circa December 25) is rooted in early Christian tradition, possibly linked to the Annunciation’s dating (Luke 1:26–38). Sol invictus came AFTER Christian’s had started celebrating December 25.
Day Names: English weekdays (Friday, Saturday) derive from Norse and Roman mythology, but this is linguistic, not theological. Catholics don’t worship Frigg or Saturn by saying “Friday.” Your legalism echoes Colossians 2:16: “Let no one pass judgment on you in questions of… festivals or sabbaths.”
You accuse me of reading a “different Bible” and being “led into Babylon,” while slandering the Church as a harlot peddling demonic doctrines.
Prove your “doctrines of demons” charge—name one Catholic teaching that denies Christ’s gospel—or admit you’re bearing false witness (Exodus 20:16).
Prove your “doctrines of demons” charge—name one Catholic teaching that denies Christ’s gospel—or admit you’re bearing false witness (Exodus 20:16).
....
I did with 3 days.
Passover - the 14th Day in accordance with scriptures.
Unleavened Bread -the 15th Day in accordance with scriptures
First Fruits- the 16th Day in accordance with the scriptures.
Your religion doesn’t believe in that First/Chief importance of the gospel.
Paul and the first disciples don’t have the same Jesus or gospel as your religion either.
When it says Satan deceives the Whole World, believe it.
Or don’t
I believe it.
And Islam, Judaism and Christianity have a Satan deceiving them problem.
Your response is a jumbled mess of numerology, vague accusations, and dispensationalist sleight-of-hand, but it fails spectacularly to answer my challenge.
I asked for a specific Catholic teaching that denies Christ’s gospel, and instead, you got a cryptic word salad about Passover dates and a smug “Satan deceives the whole world” jab
You are tossing out Jewish feast dates from Leviticus 23, trying to tie them to Christ’s death and resurrection, and implying Catholics somehow reject this. But you explain how this proves a Catholic teaching denies the gospel. It’s a non-sequitur. The Catholic Church absolutely affirms the historical and theological reality of Christ’s death and resurrection, which fulfilled the Passover (1 Cor 5:7) and initiated the new covenant. The dates? We don’t quibble over them because the gospel isn’t a math problem—it’s the truth of Christ’s atoning sacrifice, which Catholics proclaim in every Mass. If he’s got a beef with Catholic liturgy or calendar, he needs to say so, not hide behind numerology.
Then
Then, your accusation that Catholics “don’t believe in that First/Chief importance of the gospel” is baseless. The “chief importance” Paul speaks of in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 is that Christ died for our sins, was buried, and rose on the third day, according to the Scriptures. The Catholic Church has taught this for 2,000 years. It’s in the Nicene Creed, the Catechism (CCC 613-618), and every Eucharistic celebration. If you are claiming Catholics deny this, you’re either ignorant of Catholic doctrine or willfully misrepresenting it.
Name the teaching, brother—where’s the “doctrine of demons”? You can’t just fling mud and call it an argument.
Third, the claim that “Paul and the first disciples don’t have the same Jesus or gospel” as Catholics is a cheap shot. The Catholic Church traces its teachings to the apostles, including Paul, through unbroken apostolic succession. Paul’s gospel of justification by faith (Rom 3:24-26) is Catholic to the core: we’re saved by grace through faith, not works, but faith works through love (Gal 5:6; CCC 1814-1816). If you’re hung up on sola scriptura or some dispensationalist twist, that’s his innovation, not a Catholic deviation. The first disciples celebrated the Eucharist (1 Cor 11:23-25), baptized for the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38), and built a visible Church (Matt 16:18). Sounds pretty Catholic to me.
You failed failed to name a single Catholic teaching that denies Christ’s gospel because you cannot find any, there aren’t any.
The Church has preached Christ crucified and risen since Pentecost, and no amount of numerological smoke or dispensationalist swagger changes that. If you want to keep slinging “doctrines of demons” charges, then bring a real argument or repent for slandering Christ’s Body. Until then, you are just shouting into the wind.
I asked for a specific Catholic teaching that denies Christ’s gospel, and instead, you got a cryptic word salad about Passover dates and a smug “Satan deceives the whole world” jab
.....
Passover isn’t cryptic.
It’s Scriptural
That’s your Catholic religion’s problem
That’s the very first/Chief part of the Gospel Paul teaches.
Christ, the Passover Lamb, died for our sins, in accordance with the scriptures.
That means on Passover.
Not false goddess good Friday in accordance with Daniel’s 4th Beast and the Antichrist Papacy/Pope..
Do you know what day Passover was this year?
Hint:
It never changes
It’s always the 14th Day of His 1st month.
Do you know if Old Covenant Israel missed Passover in that first month, they could keep it on the 14th Day of His 2nd month?
The 14th Day isn’t cryptic. It’s Biblical.
And the 3rd Day from Passover is also not cryptic.
It’s First Fruits in the First month, and it happens to be the first day of the week manna fell in the 2nd month.
It’s just not observed by your Catholic religion because your religion changed times and law that false goddess frigg day is more important than the actual Day Christ died in accordance with the scriptures. (Try telling Islam and Judaism they’re following you to their own blindness, they’ll appreciate the heads up /s)
Do you know what Roman Catholic day was blessed to host Passover this year?
The Day that commemorates the Lamb dying for our sins?
I’ll give you a little hint:
It was the day your Catholic religion was commemorating your version of Jesus entering Jerusalem.
That’s what changing times and laws, like Daniel the prophet predicted, does to the whole world.
Again.
There isn’t any Truth in Roman Catholic religion.
It’s Counterfeits, lies, doctrines of demons used as a vessel to deceive.
Your holy days are the cryptic counterfeits that have Zero to do with the Way,Truth and Life.
That includes the 3 days you commemorate for His birth, circumcision and presentation in the temple, AND the three days you commemorate the death,burial and resurrection.
The bible, His Creation, and His own appointments can reveal your version as counterfeit. As ‘Anti’, as substitute, as false.
And your version of Mary isn’t any more biblical as your version of Christ.
And all we have to do is wait for the demon possessed swine years to end.
And wait till the world finds out they haven’t just been celebrating Christ’s birth, death and resurrection wrong thanks to Satan, the Church has been celebrating its own birth wrong. (Again, Judaism isn’t going to appreciate that tidbit neither because they’ve again been following you)
But the blind can’t see.
The deaf can’t hear.
It’s baked into the leavened cake so to speak.
I don’t expect you to buy any of this.
Gold refined by fire isn’t available at the Roman Catholic religion market place.
There’s an end time Beast that resembles a Lamb but speaks as a Dragon.
Nice to know there’s precedent for falsehoods and deceits and counterfeits for the end times in the actual scriptures.
It’s not cryptic.
It’s a little uncomfortable for religions, though.
I stand by my claim they are separate because they are.
The Law was spoken by God Deut. 4:12,13
Written by God with the finger of God Ex 24:12
Written in stone Deut. 10:1 - 4
Placed in the Ark Deut. 10:5
Called the Law of God Psa. 1:2 119:1
lasts forever Ps. 111:7,8
A perfect law Ps. 19:7
POINTS OUT SIN 1 John 3:4
Not abolished by Christ Matt 5:17
Is holy, just and good Romans 7:12
You and metmom have NO excuse. You do not wish to bend the knee and follow Gods COMMANDS. You have the knowledge but choose to willingly ignore Him.
BIpolarBob “I stand by my claim accusing metmom of mistruths”
Your Adventist doublespeak, stubbornly insisting that the Law and Old Covenant are separate revelations while accusing me of rebellion against God’s commands, is a desperate attempt to cling to Ellen G. White’s heretical distortions. Your laundry list of proof-texts—ripped out of context to prop up your Sabbath idolatry—crumbles under biblical scrutiny and exposes the demonic deception at the heart of Seventh-day Adventism.
You throw a barrage of verses to claim the Law (the Ten Commandments, with your Sabbath obsession front and center) is a separate, eternal revelation from the Old Covenant. Let’s shred your cherry-picked citations one by one, showing how they don’t support your case:
Deuteronomy 4:12-13: “The Lord spoke to you… declaring his covenant, the Ten Commandments.” You say the Law was spoken by God, implying it’s distinct. Wrong. The verse explicitly calls the Ten Commandments God’s covenant, tying them directly to the Sinai covenant, not a standalone revelation. You’re ignoring the text’s plain meaning.
Exodus 24:12: God gives Moses “tablets of stone with the law and commands.” This describes the Ten Commandments as part of the covenantal instructions (24:3-8), not a separate entity. The context is the Sinai covenant’s ratification, not a universal Law revelation.
Deuteronomy 10:1-4: The tablets are rewritten and placed in the Ark (10:5). Again, this is within the covenant God made with Israel (10:2: “the words of the covenant”). The Ark housed the covenant’s terms, not a distinct “Law of God.” Your separation is baseless.
Psalm 1:2, 119:1: These praise God’s law as blessed. Fine, but they refer to the Torah—Israel’s covenantal law, not just the Ten Commandments. Psalm 119:32 mentions “commands,” including ceremonial laws. You’re projecting your Sabbath focus onto broad poetic praise.
Psalm 111:7-8: God’s precepts are “established forever.” In context, this refers to God’s covenant faithfulness (111:5), not the literal Ten Commandments enduring eternally. Jesus fulfills the Law (Matthew 5:17), and Hebrews 8:13 declares the Old Covenant obsolete. Your “forever” claim ignores the New Covenant.
Psalm 19:7: “The law of the Lord is perfect.” Yes, the Torah guides Israel, but it’s fulfilled in Christ (Romans 10:4). The psalm doesn’t isolate the Ten Commandments as eternal apart from the covenant.
1 John 3:4: “Sin is lawlessness.” True, but this doesn’t specify the Ten Commandments. The New Testament defines sin broadly—unbelief (John 16:9), unrighteousness (1 John 5:17)—not just Sabbath-breaking. You’re forcing your agenda onto the text.
Matthew 5:17: Jesus says, “I have not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it.” Exactly—He fulfills it, completing its purpose (Galatians 3:24-25). The Law points to Him, not to an eternal Saturday mandate. You misread “fulfill” as “perpetuate.”
Romans 7:12: “The law is holy, just, and good.” Paul affirms the Law’s divine origin but says it reveals sin, not salvation (7:7-14). In 7:4-6, he says believers are “released from the law” to serve in the Spirit. Your selective quoting ignores the New Covenant’s freedom.
Your verses don’t prove the Law is separate from the Old Covenant—they confirm the Ten Commandments are its core (Deuteronomy 4:13, 5:1-3). The Sinai covenant, including the Law, was given to Israel, not all humanity (Exodus 19:3-6). Your claim of a distinct “Law of God” is a White-inspired fantasy, not Scripture.
Bipolarbob, Your accusation that I “refuse to bend the knee” to God’s commands stems from Adventism’s satanic deception, built on Ellen G. White’s false prophecies and heretical doctrines.
Ellen G. White’s Lies: White’s visions, treated as divine (SDA Belief #18), fail Deuteronomy 18:22:
1. 1856 Failure: She predicted some 1856 conference attendees would see Christ’s return (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 1, p. 131-132). All died. False.
2. Shut Door Heresy: She claimed salvation closed in 1844 (A Word to the Little Flock, 1847, p. 14), then backtracked. This misled thousands.
3. 1845 Flop: White foresaw Christ’s return in June 1845 (Lucinda Burdick, 1874 letter). Another lie. White’s false prophecies, presented as God’s voice, make her a demonic fraud, not a prophetess.
Besides those FAILED PROPHECIES, you have the non Christian Adventist beliefs:
Investigative Judgment Blasphemy: Your Law-Covenant split ties to White’s 1844 Investigative Judgment, claiming Christ began judging believers in the heavenly sanctuary (The Great Controversy, p. 421-422). This denies Hebrews 9:12: “He entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood.” White’s doctrine, born to salvage Miller’s 1844 failure, perverts Christ’s atonement (John 19:30), a satanic assault on the Gospel.
Sabbath Idolatry: Adventism’s salvific Sabbath-keeping, with a future Sunday law as the mark of the beast (The Great Controversy, p. 605-612), lacks biblical support. Colossians 2:16-17 and Romans 14:5-6 free Christians from such legalism. Your obsession with Saturday is a Judaizing heresy (Galatians 5:4), exalting a ritual over Christ’s grace (Ephesians 2:8-9).
Adventism is a demonic cult, enslaving you to White’s lies and a works-based gospel. Your Law-Covenant split is a White-inspired trick to justify Sabbath legalism, not a biblical truth.
Bipolar, your claim that the Law and Old Covenant are separate is a demonic deception, rooted in Ellen G. White’s false prophecies and Adventism’s cultish legalism. Your proof-texts—Deuteronomy 4:13, Exodus 24:12, and others—prove the Law is the covenant, not a distinct revelation. The Adventist Sabbath obsession lacks New Testament support, and your accusation that I defy God is a slanderous projection of Adventism own falseness. Adventism’s evils—White’s lies (1856, 1844, 1845), Investigative Judgment blasphemy—mark it as a satanic trap, not Christ’s truth.
Produce one verse explicitly separating the Ten Commandments from the Sinai covenant or mandating Saturday worship for Christians. You can’t, because your theology is White’s garbage, not Scripture. The Catholic Church, Christ’s bride (Ephesians 5:25-27), proclaims salvation through Christ, not a day.
You still haven’t answered the challenge: name one Catholic teaching that denies Christ’s gospel. Instead, you’re obsessed with Passover dates and throwing around “antichrist pope” and “false goddess Frigg” conspiracies. That’s not an argument—it’s a tantrum.
Your fixation on the “14th day” of Passover (Lev 23:5) misses the point. The gospel isn’t about nailing Christ’s death to a Jewish calendar slot—it’s that He died for our sins and rose again (1 Cor 15:3-4). Catholics proclaim Christ as the Passover Lamb (John 1:29; 1 Cor 5:7) every Mass. Your numerology doesn’t prove we deny this; it just shows you’re dodging the question.
I repeat: you are dodging the question
You claim Catholics “changed times and laws” (Dan 7:25) by not following the Jewish calendar. The early Church, led by the apostles, established Christian worship apart from Old Covenant feasts (Acts 15; Col 2:16-17). Sunday celebrates the Resurrection (Acts 20:7), not a pagan plot. Our liturgical year—Christmas, Lent, Easter—centers on Christ’s life and victory. If that’s “counterfeit,” you’re calling the apostles liars.
Passover was April 12 this year. You say it fell on Palm Sunday, not Good Friday, and act like that’s a gotcha. It’s not. The Christian calendar doesn’t always align with the Jewish one, but we celebrate Christ’s death and resurrection in the Paschal Triduum. Your hint about “commemorating Jesus entering Jerusalem” on Passover is flat-out wrong—Good Friday is about the Cross. Get your facts straight.
You have eyes that do not see, ears that do not hear and a mind that does not comprehend. I gave verses showing the difference. Gods law was written by the Finger of God in stone, the Sinai covenant was spoken by Moses. That is a difference. Your hatred for Ellen G. White (which I did not bring up or quote) blinds you. You do not worship God, you worship the Catholic Church.
You do not follow Gods Commandments but the dogma of the RCC. Matt. 15:9 And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men (the RCC).
Of course you hate the Law because it exposes your sins. You hate the Judgment because "And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
Are you blind or just insolent and arrogant? I needed only start with Revelation, for was John not an apostle? What is issue here in the light of clear teaching of the 1,000 reign of Christ, and the fulfillment of the extensive prophesies of Ezekiel, Zechariah, and which comport with related ones in Isaiah, is your recourse (along with preterists) of spiritualizing these away.
Thus, if I were to forsake others awaiting help in my morning to evening labor, and provided more apostolic teaching and its prophetic foundation, then you would also blithely dismiss it as referring to a literal earthly kingdom, as if all the extensive detailed descriptions of Ezekiel, Zechariah can all be relegated to the Heavenly Jerusalem that awaits the final battle over the enemies of the people of God.
Yet before I go on to others worthy of help and or edification I will briefly cite the Lord stating thru John,
And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations: And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father. (Revelation 2:26-27; cf. Psalms 2:8, 9, 149:5-9; Dan. 7:22)
And again,
Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. (Revelation 20:6)And which Zechariah speaks of,
And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles. And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain. And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the Lord will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. (Zechariah 14:16-19)
And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season. (Revelation 20:2-3)
During which,
And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles. And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain. And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the Lord will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. (Zechariah 14:16-19)
For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, Until I make thy foes thy footstool. Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord [functioning as administrator and judge] and Christ. (Acts 2:34-36)
Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. (1 Corinthians 15:24, 25) And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God [the Father, as regards functioning as the Lord over all once again] may be all in all. (1 Corinthians 15:28)
Which test (the devil being bound, yet man sins) is followed by the final battle and putting all enemies under His feet,
And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
And is followed by the Lord God Jesus judging and sentencing the lost, with their degree of punishment being determined in accordance with how much light and grace was given, (Lk. 10:12-13, 12:47, 48) and with the saints being as judges:
And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. (Revelation 20:7-15)
And in which judgment believers will be part of the jury in the judgment of men and angels, (1 Corinthians 6:3) for this great white throne judgment occurs 1,000 years after “the first resurrection” (Rv. 20:6) the “resurrection of life, (”(Jn. 5:29a) at of “the judgment seat of Christ,” which is only for believers, and who will be judged as to rewards or loss thereof due their manner of workmanship in building the body of Christ, the church. (Lk. 14:14; cf. 1Cor. 3:8ff; 4:5; Acts 24:15)
However, your dismissal-response to such brevity itself evidences that providing more apostolic verses and their prophetic basis would be met with the same recourse as before, thereby manifesting that you are simply not fit for more, as long as you are bound to force all Scripture to cultic conform to a self-proclaimed one true church.
The RCC has been trying for over 500 years to convince people that it’s not the Little Horn/Antichrist power that the bible says it is. Jesuit-trained stooges like Cronos just repeat the same lies that were told back then. Preterists can’t help themselves. Imagine a church that would think it could change God’s times and laws. They hate anyone that calls them out on it, especially SDA’s or any Sabbath-keeper that challenges changing the Sabbath to Sunday. To this day, Cronos still tries to convince everyone that Antiochus is the Little Horn in Daniel and he makes up farcical evidence, weaving truths and lies, hoping it’s believable. God’s true saints didn’t buy it during the reformation, even when tortured, and they won’t buy it today. Satan knows the end is near. That’s why he’s doubling down with Jesuit dopes. He’s also going for the homosexual community’s blessing in telling his church to openly recruit homosexual men for the priesthood. He only has 20% more to go to make it an even 100% at the Vatican. It wouldn’t surprise me if the RCC took out ads on Grinder.
Your Adventist retort, accusing me of spiritual blindness, worshiping the Catholic Church, and hating God’s Law while doubling down on your Law-Covenant split, is a pathetic dodge drenched in Ellen G. White’s demonic distortions.
You claim God’s Law (the Ten Commandments) is separate from the Sinai covenant because it was written by God’s finger in stone while Moses spoke the covenant. This is a flimsy, unbiblical distinction that collapses under scrutiny, and your reliance on Adventism’s false prophetess betrays the Adventist bondage to non Christian philosophies like Investigative Judgement.
.
1. The Adventist Law-Covenant Split is biblicaly false
You insist the Ten Commandments, written by God’s finger (Exodus 24:12, Deuteronomy 10:1-4), are a separate revelation from the Sinai covenant, which Moses spoke. This is Adventist sleight-of-hand, not Scripture
Deuteronomy 4:13 explicitly states, “He declared to you his covenant, the Ten Commandments, which he commanded you to follow and wrote on two stone tablets.” The Ten Commandments are the covenant, not a distinct revelation. Exodus 34:28 confirms, “Moses wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant—the Ten Commandments.” Your claim that Moses “spoke” the covenant while God wrote the Law is nonsense—God spoke the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:1-17), and Moses relayed the broader covenant details (Exodus 24:3-8), but both are part of the same Sinai covenant (Deuteronomy 5:1-3). Your distinction is a fabrication, not a biblical difference.
The tablets’ stone nature (Deuteronomy 10:1-4) signifies their permanence for Israel’s covenant, not an eternal mandate apart from it. Hebrews 8:6-13 declares the Old Covenant obsolete, replaced by the New Covenant in Christ. Jesus fulfills the Law (Matthew 5:17), and Colossians 2:16-17 calls Sabbaths “shadows” of Him. Your obsession with the stone tablets ignores their fulfillment in Christ’s perfect obedience (Romans 10:4).
You imply the Sabbath is eternally binding, but no New Testament verse commands Christians to keep the seventh-day Sabbath. Romans 14:5-6 grants freedom in worship days; Acts 15:28-29 omits Sabbath-keeping for Gentile converts. Early Christians worshipped on Sunday, the Lord’s Day, to honor Christ’s resurrection (Acts 20:7, 1 Corinthians 16:2, Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Magnesians, c. 110 AD, Ch. 9). Your Sabbath fetish is White’s invention, not God’s command.
Next you quote Matthew 15:9, which in typical Adventist fashion is misapplied.
You cite Matthew 15:9—“In vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men”—to accuse Catholics of following “RCC dogma” over God’s commands. This is a brazen misapplication
Context of Matthew 15:9: Jesus rebukes the Pharisees for prioritizing their oral traditions (e.g., Corban rules) over God’s moral law, like honoring parents (15:3-6). The Catholic Church’s teachings—rooted in Scripture and apostolic Tradition (2 Thessalonians 2:15)—don’t nullify God’s commands but fulfill them. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 1965-1974) upholds the moral law (love God and neighbor, Matthew 22:37-40), and Sunday worship honors Christ’s resurrection (CCC 2174-2176), not human whim.
Adventism’s “Commandments of Men”: Your sect’s obsession with Saturday worship and the Investigative Judgment comes from Ellen G. White’s visions, not Scripture. White’s The Great Controversy (p. 605-612) predicts a Sunday law as the mark of the beast—where’s that in the Bible? Her 1844 doctrine (The Great Controversy, p. 421-422) contradicts Hebrews 9:12. You’re the one peddling “commandments of men,” following a false prophetess’s uninspired drivel over God’s Word. Look in the mirror before quoting Matthew 15:9.
Next you quote Matthew 7:23 and Judgment. That judgement is on those who follow the demonic cult of Seventh Day Adventism.
You wield Matthew 7:23—“I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness”—to warn that Catholics face judgment for rejecting the Law. This backfires on Adventism spectacularly:
Who’s Lawless?: In context, Jesus condemns false prophets and those who claim His name but lack true faith (Matthew 7:15-23). Ellen G. White fits this bill—her failed prophecies (1856, 1844, 1845; Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 1, p. 131-132; A Word to the Little Flock, p. 14) mark her as a false prophetess (Deuteronomy 18:22). Her Investigative Judgment denies Christ’s finished work (John 19:30, Hebrews 9:12), and her Sabbath legalism burdens believers (Galatians 5:4). Adventism’s “lawlessness” lies in adding to Scripture (Revelation 22:18-19),
Adventist Judgment: Your sect’s Investigative Judgment, claiming Christ judges believers’ works since 1844 (The Great Controversy, p. 421-422), is a blasphemous denial of the cross’s sufficiency. Matthew 7:23 applies to Adventists who follow White’s lies
I urge you, with urgency and charity, to flee Seventh-day Adventism’s satanic grip. Ellen G. White’s failed prophecies and heretical doctrines are a spiritual poison, leading you away from Christ’s grace. Her 1844 Investigative Judgment denies the cross; her Sabbath legalism burdens your soul.
Read her writings critically (Testimonies, The Great Controversy). Compare her 1844 doctrine to Hebrews 9:12, her Sabbath claims to Colossians 2:16-17. Her failures (1856, 1844, 1845) mark her as a false prophetess (Deuteronomy 18:22). Reject the lies of Seventh Day Adventism.
You will never change Cronos. Your heart is of stone. You hate Ellen White, the Adventists and the Sabbath in general. A saved person has love in their heart and you are lacking this. Please reconsider your position on this. Let Jesus in your heart that you may be saved. 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.
Rather than respond in anger, pray on this matter
——>I urge you, with urgency
Next thing you know he’s going to say that Daniel 9’s 70 week prophecy was revealed to Daniel in a “Linguistic Vision”.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Your response raises important points about Revelation, apostolic teaching, and Old Testament prophecies, but I believe it rests on a flawed dispensationalist framework that misinterprets key texts and ignores the apostolic and patristic witness.
you feel I’m dismissing clear biblical evidence for a literal 1,000-year Jewish kingdom and clinging to a “cultic” Catholic view. Let’s carefully examine your cited texts (Revelation 2:26–27, 20:6–15, 1 Corinthians 6:3) and your broader claims about Ezekiel, Zechariah, and the Church, using Scripture, the Early Church Fathers, history, and linguistics to clarify the Catholic position and address the errors in your interpretation.
1. Revelation
You argue that Revelation, written by the Apostle John, provides apostolic evidence for a literal 1,000-year Jewish kingdom, and you accuse me of “spiritualizing” it away. Let’s clarify Revelation’s nature and your cited passages.
- Apocalyptic Genre: Revelation is apocalyptic literature, characterized by symbolic imagery and numbers (e.g., 7 seals, 12 tribes, 144,000 in Revelation 7:4). The “thousand years” (Revelation 20:4–6) is not a literal timeline but a symbol of completeness, as in Psalm 90:4: “A thousand years in your sight are but as yesterday.” The early Church Fathers, like Origen (On First Principles 2.11.2) and Augustine (City of God 20.7–9), interpreted this as the Church age, where Christ reigns through His saints (the “beheaded,” Revelation 20:4) until His second coming. The Catechism affirms this amillennial view: “The Church… will not be perfected until the final victory of Christ” (CCC 676).
- Revelation 2:26–27: You cite, “He that overcometh… to him will I give power over the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron” (cf. Psalm 2:8–9). This refers to Christ’s authority, shared with believers, not a Jewish-led millennium. The “rod of iron” echoes Psalm 2, fulfilled in Christ’s exaltation (Acts 2:33; Ephesians 1:20–22). The “nations” are subject to Christ’s spiritual reign through the Church’s mission (Matthew 28:19), not a future geopolitical kingdom. Linguistically, “rule” (Greek poimainō) means to shepherd, not govern a Jewish state, as seen in John 21:16. Irenaeus (Against Heresies 5.34) applies this to the Church’s present victory, not a literal millennium
- Revelation 20:6–15: You quote this to show a literal “first resurrection” and saints reigning for 1,000 years, followed by a final judgment. The “first resurrection” is spiritual—believers’ new life in Christ (John 5:24: “He who hears my word… has passed from death to life”). The “reign” is the Church’s present participation in Christ’s kingship (Ephesians 2:6: “Seated us with Him in the heavenly places”). The Great White Throne judgment (Revelation 20:11–15) follows the millennium, ushering in the eternal new heaven and new earth (Revelation 21:1–4), not a Jewish kingdom. Augustine notes that the “thousand years” is the Church’s time of witness, not a literal reign (City of God 20.9).
Your literalist reading ignores Revelation’s symbolic nature. You claim I “spiritualize” it away, but the New Testament itself uses allegory—Paul interprets Hagar and Sarah as covenants (Galatians 4:24–31). Your dispensationalist insistence on a Jewish millennium adds a geopolitical layer absent from John’s text.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.