IAUA End Time Ministry
Preparing for the End of Time
The Lord is Coming! Are you ready?
|
|
IAUA End Time Ministry |
|
Preparing for the End of Time | |
|
The Lord is Coming! Are you ready? | |
| Home / Archives | |
|
Dear Brothers and Sisters in
IAUA (ee-ah-oo-ah) our Father,
Greetings on this day of preparation for the weekly Sabbath. I pray this newsletter finds you in good health and happy in the service of IAUA. This is the 16th day of the 11th month of God's Sacred Calendar in the estimated year 6018 Anno Mundi. God's New Year begins with the Spring Sabbaths in 8 weeks and one day with the first Sabbath of Unleavened Bread, the 15th day of the 1st month (Sunday, April 5th on the 2015, Gregorian Calendar, at sunset Saturday, April 4th). On God's Calendar the Sacred month begins on the world day after lunar conjunction and the sacred year begins with the Spring Passover Rule dates for determining the Gregorian Calendar dates of God's Sacred Calendar. The Millerite Calendar (Spring New Moon Rule) is the same this year. The Calculated Rabbinical Calendar is one day early. A newsletter reader who has recently become informed on the subject of Torah (Law of Moses) Observance by some Seventh-day Adventists continues to question why the belief is valid. The primary focus is on the observance of the seven yearly Sabbaths that are a key part of the Law of Moses. After hearing the evidence from both Ellen White and the Bible including both the Old and New Testaments, the dispute centers on the typical "straw man" arguments against the Law of Moses. Wkipedia says: "A straw man is a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of an opponent's argument. To be successful, a straw man argument requires that the audience be ignorant or uninformed of the original argument. "The so-called typical "attacking a straw man" argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and then to refute or defeat that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the original proposition. "This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged emotional issues where a fiery, entertaining "battle" and the defeat of an "enemy" may be more valued than critical thinking or understanding both sides of the issue." Many times the use of the "straw man" fallacy is not intended but results from a lack of study or willingness to accept a socially or personally difficult proposition. This is enforced when your peer group presents "straw man" arguments that you accept and repeat because on the surface they seem logical. The first type of the "straw man" argument against the Law of Moses is to create an artificial significance for a real difference between what you agree with and what you do not agree with. Then you assert this proves one is to be accepted and the other is not. The fact is that the difference does not have the significance that is stated. An example of this argument. The "Ten Statements" is presented as separate from the Law of Moses when it is actually the introduction, summary, and part of the Law of Moses. I speak of this in the 2009-07-03 Ten? Commandments newsletter. The real difference of being spoken by the voice of God, included in tablets of stone, and being inside the ark is not a distinction that allows us to accept one and dismiss the other. I have no doubt God would have spoken them all directly to His people, if they were willing. Exodus 20:19 And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die. A second type of the "straw man" argument against the Law of Moses is to fragment the crucial guidance of the prophecy of Malachi 4 into pieces, separating the last days context of verses 1-3 from the crucial command of God in the 4th verse, so it can be dismissed as no longer applicable. Malachi 4:4 Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments. The argument also separates verses 5 and 6 from the 4th to isolate it completely and ease dismissing it, even though these verses also have a last days context. The argument I heard was that there was no last days context in those verses. This is clearly untrue but is not obvious without deep study. Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: Elijah comes at the end of time. I have presented an analysis of the detailed evidence in the ministry books and other newsletters. Our Savior indicated a future application of the Elijah prophecy. Matthew 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. When is "the great and dreadful day of the LORD"? Rev 15:1 And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God. Restating and amplifying verse 6 to clarify the last days context. Those who know their Bible well know that it was not until the Great Apostasy that obedience by faith in our Savior was nearly lost. Malachi 4:6 He will restore the obedient heart of the patriarch fathers in the children, and return the attitude of the heart of the children to that of their fathers, because I am coming to destroy the earth with a curse. A third type of the "straw man" argument against the Law of Moses is to combine something objectionable, the animal sacrifices, which the Bible clearly says is completed, with the seven yearly Sabbaths to justify dismissing them and by extension the Law of Moses. There were animal sacrifices performed on the weekly Sabbath also. We have no problem separating them from the weekly Sabbath we accept but refuse to separate them from the yearly Sabbaths we reject. God does not change. His Word and His Law do not change. I am a fully Torah Observant Seventh-day Adventist. Isaiah 8:20 To the law (H8451 Torah) and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. According to the IAUA transliteration described on my websites, the best spelling and accurate pronunciation of the modern Hebrew word Torah, in the Biblical Hebrew, is ThURA (th-oo-rah). Do you see the Bible and therefore, the God of the Bible, as changing, fragmented, inconsistent, and contradictory or is the Bible the eternal unified Word of God? I pray we may all continue to seek love, peace, and unity in truth preparing for the soon coming of IAUShUO (ee-ah-oo-shoo-oh) Messiah, the Son of God.
Frank T. Clark Next: 2015-02-13 Sound the Alarm! |
|
Revised 2015-02-13 |