BobRyan Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 Here is the thing: Even IF the shout said the groom was coming-it was at midnight when there was no warning to the Kingdom of Heaven, not to mention to the rest of the world. Please tell me what it was that caused ALL of those in the kingdom of heaven to be sleeping but for the few found in Rev. 3:4? And who was it that gave the cry if was not the Groom, bride or KOH? The midnight cry ended in 1844. It was midway between the 1843 first angel and the Oct 22, 1844 3rd angel. The bridegroom came to the Daniel 7 "Ancient of Days" and those who followed with Him were "awake" while the others "slept". in Christ, Bob Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators John317 Posted July 10, 2009 Moderators Share Posted July 10, 2009 Here is what I have for verse 6 of Matthew 25 New American Standard- "But at midnight, there was a shout, Behold, the bridegroom! Come out to meet him." Amplified Bible- But at midnight there was a shout, "Behold, the bridegroom! Go out to meet him." There is more, but you get the picture. The NASB and Amplified Bible are literal translations of the Critical Text, which is simply, "Lo, the Bridegroom" [idou ho numphios]. The Majority Text, and Textus Receptus (KJV), also has the word "is coming" [erchetai]. Robert Young's Literal: "Lo, the bridegroom doth come." Compare other uses of "idou" [behold, lo, look, or see] in the NT: Mr 14:42 Rise up, let us go; lo, he that betrayeth me is at hand. Mt 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. Re 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. Re 22:12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. Conclusion: The use of "behold" or "lo," in Matt. 25: 6 doesn't mean that the bridegroom had already come. When verse 10 is taken into account, it shows that it means the bridegroom could arrive at any moment. He evidently came a few minutes later while the foolish virgins were on their way to buy oil. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayfinder Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 One problem with that understanding is that all ten bridesmaids were awakened at the same time, so all ten were awake at the time the Bridegroom came. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators John317 Posted July 10, 2009 Moderators Share Posted July 10, 2009 As for verse 10, this was only for the five foolish who missed out on the wedding feast because they thought faith was enough for them. All 10 virgins claimed to be waiting for the bridegroom. That means all of them claimed to believe [or have faith] that he was coming. But only the wise virgins had true faith. This difference between true faith and a mere claim to faith goes to the main point about having Christ's character reproduced in His people. In Matt. 25: 10, the bridegroom arrives while the foolish virgins were off buying oil. They all have the lamp of God's word. But not all of them have enough oil. The oil, of course, represents the Holy Spirit. Zech. 4: 1-14; COL 407. So the foolish virgins represent Christians who have the word and talk about faith but they lack the Holy Spirit in their lives. The Holy Spirit convicts them of sin but their lives aren't controlled by the Spirit. It's the difference between Romans 8 and the man of Romans 7 who lacks the Spirit. As Gail pointed out in her earlier post, it's only through the Holy Spirit that Christ's character can be reproduced. His character in us is the result of the new birth, having God's seed, or nature, planted within us through His Spirit. It's impossible for this change to occur as a result of our human will or desire. John 1: 12, 13; 1 John 3: 9. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Rich Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Ok John, if the Holy Spirit gives us unity, then tell me which one of us is not being led by the Holy Spirit? Which leads me to my next question, how do you measure faith? Didn't the five foolish have more faith? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayfinder Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Christ's character is righteousness, Christ's words the truth. Seek ye first His (God) Kingdom and His righteousness... (Matthew 6:33). Seeking the kingdom of God and the righteousness of God should be our first priorty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators John317 Posted July 10, 2009 Moderators Share Posted July 10, 2009 Wouldn't you say that the difference between the foolish and the wise virgins is that the foolish ones don't have the Holy Spirit in their lives? In Adventist terminology, they haven't used the time of the Early Rain to prepare for the coming of the Bridegroom. It will be too late to prepare for Christ's coming if we wait until just before He appears to have oil [the Spirit] in our lives. I think your point about the five foolish virgins having "more faith"-- or at least seeming to-- is well taken. But what they had was really a false faith. It was presumption. They may have believed it was enough merely to say they had faith, but they didn't allow the Holy Spirit to mould their characters. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Rich Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 John317 wrote: "they haven't used the time of the Early Rain to prepare for the coming of the Bridegroom." You know, I have heard the term 'Early Rain' and 'Later Rain' before and am wondering where this term or idea came from. I did a short study on it and couldn't find it in what Jesus said. If you could, please help me out on this. About faith--couldn't you answer the question on how to know the right amount of faith one needs for salvation? Is there a standard or template to use for this? And if so, is this what we are measured against for the judgment found in Rev. 11:1 and 2? Ok, I will agree that false faith is presumption, but then how can one tell the difference? And what in the world is 'false faith'? What makes the difference between false faith and true faith? (If there is such a thing) Jesus made a statement about faith as little as a mustard seed could move mountians. So there truely is something about faith--but then when I looked up the word in strongs it also could be 'trust'. Would anyone trust someone without knowing something about them? Would not you build your trust by getting to know more about someone perhaps by living with them as the disciples? (Just thinking) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators John317 Posted July 10, 2009 Moderators Share Posted July 10, 2009 John317 wrote: "they haven't used the time of the Early Rain to prepare for the coming of the Bridegroom." You know, I have heard the term 'Early Rain' and 'Later Rain' before and am wondering where this term or idea came from. I did a short study on it and couldn't find it in what Jesus said. If you could, please help me out on this. Actually these concepts deal directly with the topic at hand, having to do with the reproduction of Christ's character in our lives and the question of why Jesus Christ hasn't yet come. As you know, it's a concept found in the Hebrew prophets. "He will cause to come down for you the rain, the former rain, and the latter rain." In the East the former rain falls at the sowing time. It is necessary in order that the seed may germinate. Under the influence of the fertilizing showers the tender shoot springs up. The latter rain, falling near the close of the season, ripens the grain and prepares it for the sickle. The Lord employs these operations of nature to represent the work of the Holy Spirit. [sEE ZECHARIAH 10:1; HOSEA 6:3; JOEL 2:23, 28.] {LDE 183.1} As the dew and the rain are given first to cause the seed to germinate, and then to ripen the harvest, so the Holy Spirit is given to carry forward, from one stage to another, the process of spiritual growth. The ripening of the grain represents the completion of the work of God's grace in the soul. By the power of the Holy Spirit the moral image of God is to be perfected in the character. We are to be wholly transformed into the likeness of Christ. {LDE 183.2} The latter rain, ripening earth's harvest, represents the spiritual grace that prepares the church for the coming of the Son of man. But unless the former rain has fallen, there will be no life; the green blade will not spring up. Unless the early showers have done their work, the latter rain can bring no seed to perfection.--TM 506 (1897). {LDE 183.3} Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators John317 Posted July 10, 2009 Moderators Share Posted July 10, 2009 Jesus made a statement about faith as little as a mustard seed could move mountians. So there truely is something about faith--but then when I looked up the word in strongs it also could be 'trust'. Yes, the Greek word pistis can be translated as "belief, trust, faith, confidence, reliance, conviction." Check out Matt. 23: 23 and Hebrews 11. In Gen. 15: 6, the word for faith in Hebrew (Strongs #539, Aman) is translated "believe." It is the same idea and concept as faith. It's believing what God says, putting our total reliance/trust in Him and in His promises. This is not an intellectual belief as it is with the Greeks. With the Hebrews, the idea is that one trusts with one's whole being, not merely with the mind. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators John317 Posted July 10, 2009 Moderators Share Posted July 10, 2009 About faith--couldn't you answer the question on how to know the right amount of faith one needs for salvation? I don't think it's a matter of measuring out the faith in order to see whether one has enough of it to be saved. What makes the difference is the object of our faith and the sincerity with which we hold the faith. Because of people's lack of faith or trust in Him, Jesus was unable to do for people what He wanted to do; not because they didn't have enough faith, but because they didn't have any true faith. We begin with a small amount of faith, and as we use that faith day by day, it will grow, just as, the more we exercise a muscle, the more it grows stronger and larger. So the question is do we trust Christ enough to obey Him? Do we trust Him enough to put our hand in His and let Him lead us? If I hear Him speaking to me and telling me something I ought to do, or maybe that I ought not to do, am I willing to trust Him enough to do what He says? Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators John317 Posted July 10, 2009 Moderators Share Posted July 10, 2009 It's not so much about which day, but which way we observe the Sabbath. I think that both the right day and the right attitude and motivation are important. Adam and Eve might also have thought it's not so much about which tree but which way they obey the command. After all, every one of the trees were basically the same in terms of the quality of the fruit. The difference was not in the fruit itself. Similarly the days of the week are all 24 hour periods. The only difference was God's command, just as the only difference between the days of the week to keep as His Sabbath is His command. If we keep the Sabbath for the wrong reason, it's legalism and actually does us more harm than good because obedience for the wrong reason can keep us from realizing our desperate need of God's mercy and forgiveness. But if we keep it with the right attitude and for the right reason, God uses it to reproduce Christ's character in us. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobRyan Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Ok John, if the Holy Spirit gives us unity, then tell me which one of us is not being led by the Holy Spirit? hmm let me think.... It will come to me in a minute... The one rejecting the text of scripture written by the Apostle Paul? "ALL scripture is given by inspiration from God". 2Tim 3:16 "Holy men of old moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from GOD" 2Pet 1:21. in Christ, Bob Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobRyan Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore It's not so much about which day, but which way we observe the Sabbath. I think that both the right day and the right attitude and motivation are important. Adam and Eve might also have thought it's not so much about which tree but which way they obey the command. Good point. It could also be argued that Cain makes the case - when he argues that Able is giving the "BEST that HE has" as a shepherd so in keeping with "principle" but not the "letter of the law" Cain should bring his best FRUIT since he is a gardner. Funny how that "spin God's law to your own good-sounding preference" did not pan out. in Christ, Bob Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musicman1228 Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Bob, The text in 2 Tim 3:16 could not have been talking about anything that Paul wrote because the New Testament had not yet been compiled by the Catholic church. That would not happen for approx. 300 years. So Paul in that text was speaking about the documents of the Old Testament. It is the same with the text in 2Peter 1:21 where the unknown writer of 1st and 2nd Peter speaks about holy men of God being moved by the Holy Spirit. That is true. You have assumed that these writers were including the documents of the New Testament, which is a common mistake. A bondservant of Jesus Christ, Musicman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators John317 Posted July 10, 2009 Moderators Share Posted July 10, 2009 The church councils didn't decide which books the church believed was Scripture. This from wikipedia-- The process of canonization was complex and lengthy. It was characterized by a compilation of books that the apostolic tradition considered authoritative in worship and teaching, relevant to the historical situations in which they lived, and consonant with the Old Testament. Contrary to popular misconception, the New Testament canon was not summarily decided in large, bureaucratic Church council meetings, but rather developed over many centuries. Thus, McDonald states: Although a number of Christians have thought that church councils determined what books were to be included in the biblical canons, a more accurate reflection of the matter is that the councils recognized or acknowledged those books that had already obtained prominence from usage among the various early Christian communities. Similarly, from Patzia: It appears that the books that finally were canonized are those that enjoyed a special status and were utilized both frequently and universally by the church. However, this is not to say that no councils touched the issue of the canon. Some of these include the Council of Trent (also called the Tridentine Council) of 1546 for Roman Catholicism (by vote: 24 yea, 15 nay, 16 abstain), the Thirty-Nine Articles of 1563 for the Church of England, the Westminster Confession of Faith of 1647 for Calvinism, and the Synod of Jerusalem of 1672 for Eastern Orthodoxy. Although these councils did include statements about the canon, they were only reaffirming the existing canon which was reached by mutual agreement over many centuries—they were just making it official. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Rich Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 John317, Many thanks for your great posts. You are truely a student of the bible! I have no arguement with what you wrote. My arguement is with people who claim to have faith when they only have presumption because when I question them, they have no idea what is really written in the bible. It reminds me of 'JayWalk' when Jay Leno would question people on the street and the answers he would receive were off the wall. Do you get the picture? Anyway, your post about the tree being like the rest in the garden was wonderful. Many forget that obediance is how we show love and respect to God. Speaking of 'JayWalk', it is a little like BobR's post on 2nd Tim. 3:16. The new testament did not exist when this was written! Sorry about that Bob. But then isn't Christ's words enough for salvation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Tom Wetmore Posted July 11, 2009 Administrators Share Posted July 11, 2009 By Jove, Tom- I think you've GOT IT!!! God is interested in our hearts, the work that has to be done is heart work. There is no way we can do that for ourselves. Originally Posted By: Gail Quote: It's not so much about which day, but which way we observe the Sabbath. And what the motivation is. I'm so thankful for words that touch the heart and give hope in God! Thanks for sharing, Tom. I'm so glad you've brought blessing to us muchly today! ...glad you caught it before it was rapidly buried under an avalanche of obfuscatory words... Quote "Absurdity reigns and confusion makes it look good." "Sinless perfection is such a shallow goal." "I love God only as much as the person I love the least." *Forgiveness is always good news. And that is the gospel truth. (And finally, the ideas expressed above are solely my person views and not that of any organization with which I am associated.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lineman Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 Quote: There are voices in our church that call the above words, "Heresy," and "error," and who say that no one can keep the commandments of God even with the Holy Spirit in the life. There is outright rebellion in the church against the Spirit of Prophecy, just as the children of Israel were in rebellion against God and His prophet Moses while on the borders of the Promised Land, causing them to have to delay going across the Jordan. It seems to me that as a church we're doing the same thing that those people did back then. We're expecting God to take across but we're unwilling to fulfill the conditions. It seems that we also need to be reminded that the people of Israel (all 2,000,000+ of them) were “perfect” when they eventually went into the Promised Land. Does that mean that they did not sin anymore? I don't think so, it just means that they had all confessed their sins and allowed them to be taken away. Next thought: Quote: … the question is do we trust Christ enough to obey Him? Do we trust Him enough to put our hand in His and let Him lead us? If I hear Him speaking to me and telling me something I ought to do, or maybe that I ought not to do, am I willing to trust Him enough to do what He says? I hear some people here claiming that “doing what God asks” is legalism, but if we do it because we love Him it’s not even close. In fact, if we refuse to do what He asks us to do we are refusing His love and the sacrifices He for us, and isn't that legalism in that we are wanting to do things our own way? Quote Visit and Share the BibleTimelines.com URL ! (Explain the Gospel in just a few minutes, or maybe even seconds.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobRyan Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 Bob,The text in 2 Tim 3:16 could not have been talking about anything that Paul wrote because the New Testament had not yet been compiled by the Catholic church. That would not happen for approx. 300 years. So Paul in that text was speaking about the documents of the Old Testament. It is the same with the text in 2Peter 1:21 where the unknown writer of 1st and 2nd Peter speaks about holy men of God being moved by the Holy Spirit. That is true. Agreed. However they tell us how scripture is created and they warn us away from the "slice and dice" of the bible practiced by those who want to carve up the 66 books of scripture that we now have today. The first inspired book written in the New Testament is the letter to the Galatians by Paul. The Gospels actually came later. No Gospel writer, no NT author ever denied that. in Christ, Bob Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 I hear some people here claiming that “doing what God asks” is legalism... God ask us to "remain in Him".....Any fruit that comes from that relationship will be genuine. God doesn't ask us to obey....That's OC....However, God will use the OC to open the eyes of the self-righteous. Again, context, context, context.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musicman1228 Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 John317, Wikipedia would be my first choice of a source for accurate info on the subject of the canonization of Scripture, only if I wanted to get it wrong. They don't even seem to know that the word 'canon' refers to the operating procedures and laws of the Catholic church and does not refer at all the the actual books of the New Testament. There is lots of history that whoever it was that posted the content that you site on Wikipedia did not research and does not know. Please do your own research. When you find out what the words 'homologumena' and 'antilogumena' mean you will be in the right spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobRyan Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 I hear some people here claiming that “doing what God asks” is legalism, but if we do it because we love Him it’s not even close. In fact, if we refuse to do what He asks us to do we are refusing His love and the sacrifices He for us, and isn't that legalism in that we are wanting to do things our own way? Hmmm "If you love Me KEEP My Commandments" John 14:15 (So that would be the pre-cross commandments even). And then of course "but what matters is KEEPING the commandments of God" 1Cor 7:19. Yep - you have a good Bible based point their my friend. Nice going! in Christ, Bob Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobRyan Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 Contrary to popular misconception, the New Testament canon was not summarily decided in large, bureaucratic Church council meetings, but rather developed over many centuries. Thus, McDonald states: Although a number of Christians have thought that church councils determined what books were to be included in the biblical canons, a more accurate reflection of the matter is that the councils recognized or acknowledged those books that had already obtained prominence from usage among the various early Christian communities. Excellent point. It is true that the NT saints of the first century did not decide to "wait for 200 years before agreeing to read the letters of John and Matthew and Paul". They already had them. They were alreadying reading them long before the council of Trent. in Christ, Bob Quote John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 Hmmm "If you love Me KEEP My Commandments" John 14:15 (So that would be the pre-cross commandments even). I've gone over this before....The context isn't about the Ten Commandments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.