How much of Scripture is inspired?

[wayfinder]

Welcome Steve, it is good to have you join in on our discussion.

Daniel 8:14 (NAS) He said to me, "For 2,300 * * evenings and mornings; then the holy place will be properly restored."

vlvw ~ypla rqb br[ d[ yla rmayw ? vdq qdcnw twam

Properly restored is one of the meanings of this word and is the one chosen by the translators of the NAS.

The idea that the woman of Rev. 12 is the church is common but seldom proven. The male child, who is her firstborn, can only be the Son of God (caught up to God and to His throne). No mention is made of further offspring until the woman comes out of the wilderness and just prior to the war the dragon is preparing to wage against these offspring. The fact is clear, that only a righteous woman would give birth to the Son of God and the last of her offspring would be righteous also, they are brothers and sisters of Jesus Christ. We are told in Revelation 14:5 that one of the qualities of the 144,000 is that there is no lie in their mouth, they are blameless. The church cannot qualify in any of these instances. First one must make the case of what church. There are many churches/denominations functioning today, but the oldest "Christian" church would be the Universal Christian Church (Catholic). There was no "church" that would qualify as giving birth to the Son of God and if the church gives birth to the remnant and the remnant is the church (members) than what is the woman if not the members?

Jesus said to Nicodemus, except a man is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Except he be born of the water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. The woman of Revelation 12 is the Spirit of God who gives rebirth to those who enter the kingdom of God. Christ did not say- this gospel of the church shall be preached... He said, "this gospel of the kingdom...".

[Guest]

Mr. Strong says it means cleanse, and I don't see restore as one of the meanings.

H6663

tsâdaq

tsaw-dak'

A primitive root; to be (causatively make) right (in a moral or forensic sense): - cleanse, clear self, (be, do) just (-ice, -ify, -ify self), (be, turn to) righteous (-ness).

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: Steve Billiter

Hi wayfinder,

The 2300 eve/mornings ended in 1844AD, we are told, in prophecy, that when that time came the temple of God in heaven would be restored. The only way it could be restored is if it had ceased to function at some time.

This is incorrect. nothing is said about the temple being "restored." What Bible version are you using?

Dan 8:14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

Here are several sources online for the significance of the word "tsadaq" as it occurs in Daniel 8: 14--

6663 tsadaq tsaw-dak' a primitive root; to be (causatively, make) right (in a moral or forensic sense):--cleanse, clear self, (be, do) just(-ice, -ify, -ify self), (be turn to) righteous(-ness).

-----------------

tsadaq

Pronunciation

tsä·dak' (Key)

Part of Speech

verb

Root Word (Etymology)

A primitive root

TWOT Reference

1879

Outline of Biblical Usage

1) to be just, be righteous

a) (Qal)

1) to have a just cause, be in the right

2) to be justified

3) to be just (of God)

4) to be just, be righteous (in conduct and character)

(Niphal) to be put or made right, be justified

c) (Piel) justify, make to appear righteous, make someone righteous

d) (Hiphil)

1) to do or bring justice (in administering law)

2) to declare righteous, justify

3) to justify, vindicate the cause of, save

4) to make righteous, turn to righteousness

e) (Hithpael) to justify oneself

-------------------------

The Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon

Strong's Number: 6663 qdc

Original Word Word Origin

qdc a primitive root

Transliterated Word Phonetic Spelling

Tsadaq tsaw-dak'

Parts of Speech TWOT

Verb 1879

....

Translated Words

KJV (41) - cleansed, 1; clear ourselves, 1; just, 3; justice, 2; justify, 23; righteous, 10; righteousness, 1;

NAS (41) - acquit, 1; acquitted, 1; declare you right, 1; do justice, 1; give him justice, 1; just, 2; justified, 5; justifies, 1; justify, 5; justifying, 2; lead the to righteousness, 1; made your appear righteous, 2; properly restored, 1; proved right, 1; proved...righteous, 1; right, 4; righteous, 9; vindicated, 1; vindicates, 1;

-----------------------

Conclusion:

SDA theology in regard to the translation of Daniel 8: 14 accepts any of the following:

1. Be cleansed 2. Be vindicated 3. Be put right 4) Be put in a rightful condition 5) Be justified 6) Be declared right

See SDA Bible Commentary on Daniel 8: 14.

Here's some more. I see restore but it's certainly not the only meaning.

[wayfinder]

NAS (41) - acquit, 1; acquitted, 1; declare you right, 1; do justice, 1; give him justice, 1; just, 2; justified, 5; justifies, 1; justify, 5; justifying, 2; lead the to righteousness, 1; made your appear righteous, 2; properly restored, 1; proved right, 1; proved...righteous, 1; right, 4; righteous, 9; vindicated, 1; vindicates, 1;

[Guest]

DEPARTING FROM THE WORD

PART VI

Adventism for a New Generation – Perception or Deception?

Objective. In this section we shall draw out the implications of our discussion in the previous sections of this lengthy chapter, examining a recent proposal for an "Adventism for a New Generation."

Key Issue. What do the new approaches to Scripture imply for the life, mission, and identity of the church? What kind of Adventism do the new approaches to Scripture produce? How does this relate to the perceived polarization between "the church of the West" and "the rest of the church"? Is the reading of Scripture through higher-critical lenses evidence of true insight and clear perception or an omen of blindness and deception?

Introduction. Because many Bible scholars in Seventh-day Adventist institutions around the world are still faithfully employing traditional Adventism's plain reading of Scripture, they continue to uphold the biblical doctrines and practices of our faith.

However, since at least in first-world countries a significant majority have embraced aspects of the higher-critical method, we need to know the destination of that approach to Scriptures. This chapter was designed to illustrate the need to "examine the full consequences of our theological method lest we prove more than we intend."

In the course of our investigation, we have shown how wrong assumptions regarding the inspiration, trustworthiness, and the sole authority of Scripture result in departing from the Word and consequently from our distinctive Bible doctrines (e.g., the Sabbath, the sanctuary,

atonement of Christ, second coming, spirit of prophecy, remnant, etc.).

They also affect our views on issues of Christian lifestyle: abortion, polygamy, women's ordination, homosexuality, dress, clean food, jewelry, use of alcoholic beverages, war, etc. What does this new trend mean for the identity and mission of the church? Will such published calls as we have examined here from various thought-leaders bring about a

reformation in the church? Or do they lead away from what we have always known as the Seventh-day Adventist faith? What kind of Adventism is being created for our new generation?

[Guest]

The Need for Revival and Reformation.

Many earnest Seventh-day Adventists, especially young people who have grown up in the church, feel increasingly disenchanted and disillusioned. They have observed that while we rightly affirm "the Bible and the Bible only," many of us do not have a living experience with the Bible's divine Author. Baptism seems more a graduation ceremony rather than the start of a new life in Christ. Our identity as God's

"remnant" church makes us complacent instead of inspiring us to fulfill our divine mission to the world. We assert repeatedly that "we have the truth," but very often the truth does not have us.

Our preaching, teaching, and evangelism may cram the mind with information but seldom bring about the deep soul searching and humility of heart that results in transforming the character. Our ethical positions on social issues eflect pragmatic concerns rather than

fidelity to Scripture. And instead of our worship being reverently vibrant, it tends to be either dull and sterile or emotional and superficial.

The church's condition has led today's generation of Adventists to renew the call for a revival of primitive godliness. But while both mainstream and liberal Adventism correctly recognize this need for revival and reformation, the two theological camps offer totally different solutions to the problem.

Mainstream, Bible-believing Adventists hold that wherever the Word of God has been faithfully received, interpreted, and proclaimed, the Spirit of God has convicted men and women of their sin and led them to accept the Lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world. Those who repented and believed were baptized, "and rose to walk in newness of

life--new creatures in Christ Jesus; not to fashion themselves according to the former lusts, but by the faith of the Son of God to follow in His steps, to reflect His character, and to purify themselves even as He is pure. The things they once hated they now loved, and the things they once loved they hated. The proud and self-assertive became meek and lowly of heart.

The vain and supercilious became serious and unobtrusive. The profane became reverent, the drunken sober, and the profligate pure. The vain fashions of the world were laid aside. Christians sought not the

'outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of

putting on of apparel; but . . . the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.' 1 Peter 3:3, 4" (The Great Controversy, pp. 461, 462).

But liberal Adventism offers another kind of reformation, based on a skeptical view of Scripture and a reinterpretation of our biblical doctrine and lifestyle along the lines of contemporary higher criticism. Tragically, this theological experiment is being offered to our young

people and other Adventists of our generation as the answer to their spiritual needs and concerns. Is this version of Adventism genuine or counterfeit?

[Guest]

Adventism for a New Generation?

The analysis in the various parts of this chapter has highlighted how a growing body of our influential authors seeks to make Adventism

"relevant" to this generation. One scholar and church administrator represents this new trend of scholarship when he calls for a "fresh

approach" to the historic Adventist understanding of end-time events so that the church will be more "open to emphasizing the common bond with other Christians," and in this way make Adventism "more relevant to this generation." Such calls for "relevance" (some would say

"liberation," "renewal" or even "reformation" within Adventism) have not gone unheeded.

An influential Adventist university chaplain and teacher has taken up this challenge and developed it in a well-crafted book, Adventism for a New Generation. Endorsed by prominent church administrators and educators, this work deserves some attention. It may represent the

kind of Adventism toward which the liberal left seeks to move mainstream Adventism.

[Guest]

New Generation Adventism? The book's author rejects historic Adventism's self-understanding as God's end-time remnant and its Bible-based lifestyle and morality, dismissing these beliefs and practices as culturally conditioned to the nineteenth-century Victorian age of Ellen G. White.

Believing that "our eschatology [our unique beliefs about last day events] has been built on an unsound foundation, and that it has ultimately done us more arm than good," he writes: "We must open ourselves to the possibility of new and different eschatological scenarios so that we do not enter the twenty-first century with a nineteenth-century view of prophecy." He asks: "Why has the [Adventist] church rigidly clung to an outmoded view of eschatology which has focused on Sunday laws and Catholics rather then [sic] applying Christ-centered eschatological principles to our world today?" He maintains that the church has too often "overstated" its claims to remnant status. "Such claims, past and present, are unfortunate evidence of unhealthy and dysfunctional religion in Adventism."

[Kevin H]

Richard, while I'd like for you to continue to present your conserns here, be specific with your target. There are more than 2 sides to this topic and I worry that you are falling into the hole of seeing only 2 sides here and that either we accept your view or else we are wholely in the other camp.

Our pioneers came from a wide variety of background, some very conservative and churches that eventually became strict fundametalists, others from churches that were liberal (and some liberal churches, such as Washington NH, just accepted Millerism, in a way the conservatives didn't) and these views affected our pioneers where they formed a church that held a few pillers and beyond that allowed for worshiping God according to the dictates of our conscience.

Also, it is interesteing how there are some leaders who are so anti-Historical Critical Method when it comes to the Bible; however when it comes to defending Mrs. White from say Walter Rea's attack, Rea uses Fundamentalism and these same anti-Historical Critical method leaders freely use the Historical Critical method for defending Ellen White. It is also interesting that Ford tended to be more fundamentalist, but from a Evangelical background rather than "Historic Adventist" background (different proof texts), and the church became more open to the Historical Critical method in showing that he is wrong, but after the Ford and Rea issue was no longer center stage, they returned to a more conservative approach to scripture and a more anti-Historical Critical method. I've always found it interesting Dr. Hasel on the one hand wrote that there is evidence of sources in the formation of the Bible (the historical critical method) that we are not to try to look into them but just study the finished product as if it was written streight out.

Now granted there are many who were ignorant of the Historical Critical method, go away to different schools where they learn about it in a very negative "the Bible is a purely human work" environment and have only learned how to misues it and end up being very mixed up and confused. But just because someone can go into a car and drive through a crowed and run over people does not mean that we should be in opposition to people learning how to drive.

From what I can see about Elder Daily; while he makes some good points, he seems to be listening to discussions within Adventism without going for an exegesis but following more his emotions and is a bit too agreeable with ideas where-- while I believe that all beauty is a making one of opposits; sometimes there are ideas that are mutually exclusive, like trying to ride two horses going in two directions. Some times he presents ideas from different camps where the presupositons of both camps are in complete contradiction to each other. And while I may be wrong, I also get the impression that if he had a chance to attend two programs; and have one being lead by say Jim Fleming or Carol Meyer (people from the not too long past history; William Foxwell Albright; Abraham Joshua Heshel; etc.) or a more lively evangelical meeting that he would probably go more towards the second. He has a good mind, brings up some good ideas, but could have a bit of a stronger Biblical foundation and needs to think out some of the presuppositions of some of the sub groups in Adventism.

So again share you conserns, but be sure to target who you are opposing instead of picking an enemy, taking careful aim and shooting with a shotgun thinking you are hitting everyone else out there in your aiming at one consern. (and also be careful not to misrepresent those you are attacking. Sometimes you end up making a cartoon of the view you are attacking and attacking the exgergration of the cartoon features instead of the actual idea itself. Remain credible.)

[Guest]

As you already know, (or should) this is not my view. It is a book by Samuel Koranteng Pipim called "Recieving The Word"

[Woody]

Quote:

It is a book by Samuel Koranteng Pipim called "Recieving The Word"

And ANYthing that man writes should be avoided.

[Guest]

And it usually is avoided by those who cannot stomach the straight testimony, such as yourself.

[Woody]

This is what our prophet had to say ...

"The religious services, the prayers, the praise, the penitent confession of sin ascend from true believers as incense to the heavenly sanctuary, but passing through the corrupt channels of humanity, they are so defiled that unless purified by blood, they can never be of value with God. They ascend not in spotless purity, and unless the Intercessor, who is at God's right hand, presents and purifies all by His righteousness, it is not acceptable to God. All incense from earthly tabernacles must be moist with the cleansing drops of the blood of Christ. He holds before the Father the censer of His own merits, in which there is no taint of earthly corruption. He gathers into this censer the prayers, the praise, and the confessions of His people, and with these He puts His own spotless righteousness. Then, perfumed with the merits of Christ's propitiation, the incense comes up before God wholly and entirely acceptable. Then gracious answers are returned." {1SM 344.2}

[Guest]

Looks like the work of Jesus wasn't finished at the cross after all, huh?

[Kevin H]

As you already know, (or should) this is not my view. It is a book by Samuel Koranteng Pipim called "Recieving The Word"

I understand, but be careful, Pipim himself has appologized to at least one of those who he has criticized saying that he did not want to say those things but due to some church politics he had to say it or not get his book published, and some of his students I've met say he is more liberal and open minded in person than he is in that book, and like I said before, I'd love to have a couple of months to just meet with him for an hour once or twice a week and, in a relaxed manner, discuss some of these things.

[Kevin H]

Looks like the work of Jesus wasn't finished at the cross after all, huh?

Of course not, God is not static.

[Guest]

A New Lifestyle. The author of Adventism for a New Generation also challenges the church "to uplift and glorify Christ by calling all people to worship Him, and internalize the principles of His kingdom." He envisions an Adventism that is emptied of its Bible-based lifestyle: "As I have taught, counseled, and listened to Adventist young people over the last seventeen years and as I reflect on my own experience in our church's schools, it is clear to me that we must give up our preoccupation with externals and our obsession with control. It is

not the business of the church to prescribe for its members how they should behave on Sabbath, what foods they should eat, in what forms of recreation or entertainment they may participate, what books they can read, how they should dress, if they can wear jewelry, or how they should think."

Note that the new lifestyle was not developed from Scripture, but rather from empirical data (listening to "young people") and a reflection on "my own experience." The author rejects conservative Adventism because "such religion is known for its 'prooftext' approach to Scripture, and its uncompromising emphasis on 'correct doctrine' or

'objective truth'." Believing that the Bible "contains certain discrepancies in different ways" and "theological errors," he seeks a "dynamic" revelation of truth that is consistent with a

"developmental process behind the doctrinal truths which unfold in the Bible" and which "account for theological contradictions in the Bible."

[Dr. Rich]

Good post Richard. Isn't this what the Pope did with the fourth commandment?

[John317]

Looks like the work of Jesus wasn't finished at the cross after all, huh?

What was finished at the cross was Christ's sacrifice of atonement. That is unrepeatable. But there are other aspects of the atonement, which includes Christ's work as the High Priest in the sanctuary in heaven. His work there is as essential to our salvation as was His work in being crucified on the cross. The Bible is very plain that if all Christ did was die on the cross, we would be lost. His resurrection and ascension as our High Priest is absolutely essential to our salvation. See 1 Cor. 15: 14-18.

[Guest]

A New Morality.

On premarital sex and masturbation, this author wants to free the new generation of Adventists from "our Victorian heritage, which has been well preserved through the work of Ellen White. Most Adventists are not aware of what bizarre and extreme views of sexuality were commonly held by our nineteenth century ancestors. Books like Messages to Young People have served to perpetuate such baggage throughout much of the twentieth century as well. . . . I had a senior Bible teacher in academy in the 1970s who held similar

views, teaching us (much to our amusement) that any physical contact with the opposite sex before marriage was wrong. Our Victorian heritage may be greater than we think."

He continues: "Many Adventists have a 'masturbation-phobia' as a result of Ellen White's extreme pronouncements about the practice. Her teaching on this topic was rooted in a nineteenth century 'vital force' physiology which has no credibility in the medical community

today, and stands in stark contrast to the Bible's silence concerning masturbation. A balanced Christian approach to sexual self-stimulation sees it as a potentially healthy form of sexual

discovery, exploration and awareness. It can even be a healthy equalizing force in marriages where partners have significantly different amounts of sex drive."

"Finally," he concludes, "the question of premarital sex is an important one. The biblical principle that sexual intercourse be reserved for a monogamous marital relationship (Gen. 2:24) is increasingly being viewed as obsolete or impractical by young Christians. One reason for this has been the church's tendency to address this issue in an 'all or nothing' context. Sexuality, like spirituality, communication, or any other aspect of a relationship, must develop and mature over time. Christian couples who have dated for a significant period need to honestly discuss their convictions and sexual boundaries. Sexual exploration and experimentation before marriage should respect these boundaries; we should never put a

partner in the position of feeling guilty or sinful. We need to remember that God created sex to be an enjoyable, pleasurable activity."

Young unmarried Christians must set their own boundaries in their sexual conduct. "In cases where [unmarried] couples do have intercourse before marriage, and wish to break this behavior pattern, I often recommend an exercise called 'sexual pleasuring' that is commonly prescribed in sexual therapy for impotence and premature ejaculation. These [unmarried] couples need to realize that there is a wide range of sexual activities that can be tremendously pleasurable and satisfying that do not involve sexual intercourse, and its accompanying risks.

Christian young people in general need to know their individual boundaries . . . from their own study of scripture, and truly enjoy themselves in a guilt-free, balanced manner within those boundaries. Those who criticize such young people for not living up to their standards have no scriptural basis for their criticisms and no right to make themselves moral policemen for other Christians."

[Dr. Rich]

"What was finished at the cross was Christ's sacrifice of atonement." John317--this was not the atonement. Jesus' death was just as He said it was--it was as the Passover Lamb--where Jesus' blood paid for a host for the Kingdom of Heaven-as bondservants. The 'atonement' process must be fully understood to understand the huge difference. It appears that this might be the big stumbling block that causes people to believe that Jesus' death "did it all". If you believe this, then it may not be apparent what duties the bondservants must perform

[John317]

"What was finished at the cross was Christ's sacrifice of atonement." John317--this was not the atonement. Jesus' death was just as He said it was--it was as the Passover Lamb--where Jesus' blood paid for a host for the Kingdom of Heaven-as bondservants.

See Is. 53: 10-12. Christ's soul was an offering for sin, which atones for sin. Christ was the antitype of the type that is described in Lev. 5: 15, 16. Of course Christ was also the fulfillment of the Passover lamb. As John the Baptizer said, Christ was the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world.

[Guest]

That's right Rich.

[John317]

"What was finished at the cross was Christ's sacrifice of atonement." John317--this was not the atonement.

What does "atonement" mean? In what way was Christ's death NOT the sacrifice of atonement?

[Gerr]

Hey, Richard, who is the author of this book you are quoting from? Or rather, who is Sam Koranteng quoting in this book?