So why do people fall for people like Ernie Knoll

[JawgeFromJawja]

Which orofice......

You misspelled orifice. 's all right. Have you ever read the journal of Meriwether Lewis of the Lewis and Clark Expedition?

He spelled the same word up to six different ways on the same page. His mentor, President Jefferson, is said to have opined that only an ignorant individual cannot spell a word more than one way.

Ah'm thuh pot callin' thuh kittle black. Of all academic endeavors, spellin' is the lowest of mah priorities. Too restrictive and anti-creative.

Jawge

[JawgeFromJawja]

Originally Posted By: njk

The Biblical fact of the matter is that if Ernie Knoll is as false as most here believe, then people here have the obligation to “help him”..

"the people here" have absolutely no obligation whatsoever to "help" Ernie Knoll... the onus is on him to satisfactorily prove his claims...

he has not done that, imo...

Furthermore, the blog to which you keep referring, is painfully verbose and, for the most part, unintelligible...ergo, it is not (imo) a commendable piece of writing, nor does it provide any conclusive evidence for the claims of Ernie Knoll. It is not for the reader to decipher the blog...if the writer of the blog wishes readers to understand, it is incumbent upon him to write in such a manner that it is understandable....suppositories, notwithstanding...

Originally Posted By: njk

...your spiritual void and incorrect, “assuming” claims on Biblical issues...

And sir, just who are you to judge my spirituality or my knowledge on Biblical issues? I suppose I ought to let the leaders of the SDA church be aware that you consider me to be spiritually "void"... I'm sure they'd find that to be a very .... interesting .... notion arising from the "accuser of the brethren"...

RudyWolfs, yer post reminded me of the ole doctah joke:

Doctah: Mrs. Jones, yer too fat.

Mrs. Jones: I wanna 'nother opinion.

Doctah: Aw'right - yer ugly.

So, RW, you gave NJK's writing a buncha opinions:

Obtuse, boring, convoluted,wordy,dense, etc, etc.

Please understand this, NJK - for the most part, your critics are correct about your writing.

If you have not studied it already, consider a small classical book on writing, one every writer should have read and kept: Strunk and White, Elements of Style. It can be found used in good condition on abebooks.com for under $5.00 including shipping. This suggestion is made with sincere good will, not only for you, but for anybody who frequently writes anything. (E-Mail, snail mail, reports, and creative writing).

Agape

[Bravus]

Strunk and White: look it up in your Funk and Wagnalls.

[NJK Project]

[Must be faithful to Pro 26:4-5]... so...where was I before I was so non-judiciously/mindlessly/vexatiously “interrupted” for the past ca. 60 days for, actually/really: not, also mindlessly playing along with the patent/normative spiritually vacuous and ditsy games of this “SDA club”... Seriously.... a ‘needed vacation’...

[NJK Project]

Honestly a little lightheartedness is an amazing tool for discovering truths. To quote one of my hero's "This stuff is way to important to take to seriously".

[NJK Project]

Originally Posted By: NJK Project

I would not be at all surprise that SDA think very highly of you, as similarly seen in simply this thread’s discussion. Can’t expect anything else from demonstrably ‘blind guides of the blind’. Indeed so “blind” you cannot even find anything that is Biblical to validate your views/opinions.

This might surprise you; but there are some of us here who "think highly of you too;" and infact, we are praying for you as you explore the truths of God's Word with us online. Be it known my friend: "The joy of the Lord SHALL BE YOUR STRENGTH." (Neh 8:10) see also Psalms 28:7-8, Isa 12:1-3. May you "with joy" "draw water out of the wells of salvation."

[NJK Project]

Originally Posted By: rudywoofs

njk, you're probably very nice in person...

the internet has a way of depersonalizing individuals to the point where most anything in which one feels adamantly "right," can cloud the very fact that it is to other fellow human beings that one is addressing..

I apologize if you feel my having a bit of fun with you was hurtful...

I'm quite sure you feel correct in your assertions of others. That is your right. But, you know, "sometimes one can be so 'right'...that he is wrong..." ~ Dr. Clarence Schilt

I am refraining from further posting in this thread..

nice

adjective

1 have a nice time: enjoyable, pleasant, agreeable, good, satisfying, gratifying, delightful, marvelous; entertaining, amusing, diverting, lovely, great. ANTONYMS unpleasant.

2 a nice landlord: pleasant, likable, agreeable, personable, congenial, amiable, affable, genial, friendly, charming, delightful, engaging; sympathetic, simpatico, compassionate, good. ANTONYMS nasty.

3 nice manners: polite, courteous, civil, refined, polished, genteel, elegant. ANTONYMS unrefined, rough.

4 that's a rather nice distinction: subtle, fine, delicate, minute, precise, strict, close; careful, meticulous, scrupulous. ANTONYMS approximate, rough.

5 it's a nice day: fine, pleasant, agreeable; dry, sunny, warm, mild. ANTONYMS stormy, nasty.

Hmmm.....well....you sure about that apology? Very nice of you Rudy anyway!!

It actually can be “enablingly” wrong to be “nice” in certain/every situation.

[NJK Project]

Originally Posted By: NJK Project

I actually have a different view of the internet and do see it as the best way to discuss matters of truth. Most people try to treat/use it as normal face-to-face conversation and so believe that quick, reactionary responses should be given in order to maintain an air of validity. But I see the internet best allows for someone to take however much time they need to carefully research an answer before posting it. So it is just a matter of properly using it. It is just a matter of properly taken advantage of such a beneficial opportunity

I am singing this song tonight, with you in mind...

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/1v_ywCX0TIo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[NJK Project]

Jehovah thy God is in the midst of thee, a mighty one who will save; he will rejoice over thee with joy; he will rest in his love; he will joy over thee with singing.

Zephaniah 3:17 ASV

God blesses!

Again, context is key (Zeph 3:1-16, 18-20 NASB) and that contextual key is: is one here part of that ‘righteous remnant’ or acting the part of the ‘flippant unjust who know no shame’ (vs. 5b).

[NJK Project]

I find NKJ's writing style intriguing!

[NJK Project]

NJK, you are Slash off of Guns n Roses

[NJK Project]

So, RW, you gave NJK's writing a buncha opinions:

Obtuse, boring, convoluted,wordy,dense, etc, etc.

Please understand this, NJK - for the most part, your critics are correct about your writing.

[LifeHiscost]

yes, I do...but it's quite obvious you don't understand the power of Satan..

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

as it also, and explicitly so, involves communicating and receiving messages from the dead.

Matter of opinion. I didn't get anything like that out of her statements. What you call "explicit" is largely "in my opinion".

God blesses!

[NJK Project]

Not wanting to speak for njk, the bible is pretty clear if one pays attention to what it says and is willing to accept it.

"Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:"1 Peter 5:8 KJV

[NJK Project]

Quote:

as it also, and explicitly so, involves communicating and receiving messages from the dead.

Matter of opinion. I didn't get anything like that out of her statements. What you call "explicit" is largely "in my opinion".

God blesses!

[jasd]

>>I understand all of them are dead now, notwithstanding that some believe you go alive, straight to heaven when you die.<<

Re “some believe” – how serendipitous that I find myself mentioned in your post, as I am definitely one of those “some” who “believe”. So, why wouldn’t I believe the Red Letter words of Jesus Christ Himself, to wit:

Jn 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

Jn 11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

Umm, “whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die”. Lest one should misunderstand Him – He spoke in the emphatic using the double negative – “shall not never die”.

Surely one would not suggest that Jesus Christ was simply shucking and jiving with His audience!? Moreover, one takes note that:

Those who presently live and believe (from the point in time where the humanity of Gd and His blood sacrifice for our redemption were met) “shall not never die”.

Believest thou this?

Besides, should His words have proved wrong – who then are those who ‘sleep in Jesus’ that God brings with Him in the Parousia?

1 Thess 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

Of course, ‘sleep’ being but a euphemism for the believing Xtian.

[LifeHiscost]

Clearly James White was never resurrected, ergo this was EGW talking to a dead person in a dream, and also heeding what was counselled to here, all along the lines of what she had already most strongly proscribed in e.g., 1SG 173-179 (1858): “Spiritualism”; cf. GC 551-562 (1888/1911): “Can Our Dead Speak to Us?”

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

Of course, ‘sleep’ being but a euphemism for the believing Xtian.

Of course sometimes we can make assumptions of the platform of the faith of others.

"...not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another— He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation."

Hebrews 9:25-28 NKJV

And I would suppose that as one waits it is not while alive as some others might suppose. And I do wonder what would be the reasoning behind "raising one up", if they were already up.

"For it is my Father’s will that all who see his Son and believe in him should have eternal life. I will raise them up at the last day.”"John 6:40 NLT

God blesses!

[NJK Project]

>>I understand all of them are dead now, notwithstanding that some believe you go alive, straight to heaven when you die.<<

Re “some believe” – how serendipitous that I find myself mentioned in your post, as I am definitely one of those “some” who “believe”. So, why wouldn’t I believe the Red Letter words of Jesus Christ Himself, to wit:

Jn 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

Jn 11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

Umm, “whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die”. Lest one should misunderstand Him – He spoke in the emphatic using the double negative – “shall not never die”.

Surely one would not suggest that Jesus Christ was simply shucking and jiving with His audience!? Moreover, one takes note that:

Those who presently live and believe (from the point in time where the humanity of Gd and His blood sacrifice for our redemption were met) “shall not never die”.

Believest thou this?

Besides, should His words have proved wrong – who then are those who ‘sleep in Jesus’ that God brings with Him in the Parousia?

1 Thess 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

Of course, ‘sleep’ being but a euphemism for the believing Xtian.

jasd, succinctly said here in regards to your texts & claims:

John 11:25 of course is saying ‘though some may die, they will later on live’ and then

John 11:26 says, as it was exegetically pointed out here: ‘will not die forever’. For some strange reason “forever” was left untranslated in many Bible versions.

And 1 Thess 4:14 is exegetically explained in this post section

So these verses also do not support a view that ‘some people (which would have to be all Christians) do not die but go straight to heaven.’

By the way, as discussed here, I actually see that the Bible and SOP, including that dream of EGW in RY 161 show that the martyred dead are raised up some time later and taken to heaven. As also related in here, I see that my father, in 1970, had a vision from God which involves that post death development for some qualifying ones.

[NJK Project]

I would hazard a guess that satan did a miserable job on the particular person of Ellen Gould Harmon White as it was her vision, being led of the Lord, that was largely responsible for those statistics.

Alright LHC... so I more accurately gather that you actually believe that EGW was only momentarily deceived by Satan in the RY 161.1-163.2. As that compromising notion was completely illogical for me given that EGW fully knew that Satan would work like that, combined with the fact that it was being counselled to miss a Battle Creek meeting, and also that EGW made this dream and her heeding of it public, she manifestly held that such “revelations for the dead” to be from God to the very end of her life/ministry.

So the sequitur issues then are:

-when else then would she have been similarly deceived, and even, how much more may have been done without such “drawing back” and further deceiving snare as Satan indeed wants to do for SDAs (=EW 56.1)

-and/or, as many point out in her writings to say she was a false prophet,

-and/or were all her unrealized and unfulfilled claims and expectation that the Second Coming would occur in her lifetime all from that same deceiving source??

Saying that this was indeed a heeded dream from Satan is not the correct solution. I see that, for the reasons stated here, the understanding that the literally or effectively martyred are later taken to heaven, Biblically, perfectly explains this.

[jasd]

>>Of course sometimes we can make assumptions of the platform of the faith of others.

"...not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another— He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation."

Hebrews 9:25-28 NKJV<<

Umm, should one care to interpret the above as determining vis-à-vis the red letter words of Jesus Christ – I suggest that it is not Jesus Christ who has to be parsed; rather, it is the unknown author of the book of Hebrews upon whom the onus lies… for Jesus Christ’s words are painfully clear.

>>And I would suppose that as one waits it is not while alive as some others might suppose.<<

Then one is in direct opposition to the words of Jesus Christ as expressed to Martha.

However, I suppose there are those dogmas which dilute the very words of Jesus Christ superceding them with questionable exposition. As you’ve stated, to effect: there is and there ain not assumptions…

Hey, not to deride the delineated accomplishments of the .Org listed several posts above, but, though noteworthy, the legs on that argument seem rather in need of vita D, as those who bruit the numbers of the .Org seem to forget that they’ve also vigorously opined against

Babylon, the Church of the Antichrist – which has accomplished far more – even considering the time element.

[NJK Project]

jasd, see my above posting for what Jesus had actually said in John 11:25-26 and also what 1 Thess 4:14 is actually saying.

There is no theological/doctrinal contradiction on that issue in the Bible, just inaccurate translating by modern translators. (2 Tim 3:16; 2 Pet 1:20; John 10:35b)

[LifeHiscost]

There are so many places in the Word that flatout state that we may know something, it seems inane to think that no one is able to tell for sure what God is trying to get across to human kind, especially since God has the ability to create, to think He then is unable to find a way to communicate with those who place Him first in their lives, is unreasonable to assume.

If we cannot be sure we can "know" anything for sure that an all-wise God is trying to tell us, we live in constant probability of falling for one of the enemy of soul's lies intimated in a demand, assuming that God might not be Who He says He is.

"During that time the devil came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become loaves of bread.”"Matthew 4:3 NLT

God blesses!

[jasd]

>>John 11:25 of course is saying ‘though some may die, they will later on live’ and then

John 11:26 says, as it was exegetically pointed out here: ‘will not die forever’. For some strange reason “forever” was left untranslated in many Bible versions.<<

The above link yielded this: “Indeed none of the major English version (NASB, NKJV, KJV, RSV/NRSV, NIV) have including this key “forever” (or literally “into the age”) in their translation. Simply unbelievable!!! If that’s not doctrinal bias....”

I did not follow-through entirely, but both the Concordant Literal New Testament and Jay Green’s Interlinear prefer and translate ‘EON” as ‘age’. The phrase in John 11:26 transliterated reads: “ou me (not never) eis (preposition governing the Accusative, and denoting entrance into, or direction and limit: into, to, towards, for, among,) aion (1) for ever, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity 2) the worlds, universe 3) period of time, age) apothn&#275;sk&#333; (die).

Almost the entirety of our Bible Translations translate the passage “shall never die”, which, though not a literal transliteration – is nonetheless – a correct translation, as the denotation of eis is already incorporated into the phrase “shall never die” – for eis]/b], as used here, is a delimiting term.

>>And 1 Thess 4:14 is exegetically explained in this post section

So these verses also do not support a view that ‘some people (which would have to be all Christians) do not die but go straight to heaven.’<<

Perhaps I read the link too fleetingly; however, the link seems to agree with my hypothesis – in contradistinction to the immediately above “these verses also do not support a view that ‘some people’ … do not die but go straight to heaven”. [ed.jasd]