Needed: your opinions about Science-fiction?

[teresaq]

i said it somewhere else, but if you dont mind ill tack it on here too.

steve, you are very much wanted but your behavior is not!

[abelisle]

Originally Posted By: Steve Billiter

His other son, Graham Maxwell, teaches some perverted doctrines.

Anyone tell you are rude and lack social skills?

I do not agree with some of what he says, but to call them perverted is tacky.

Ah, human frailty! "They will know that you are my disciples by the way you love one another"

Isn't it ironic that this incident happened in a thread about science fiction? Scientific discoveries are growing in leaps and bounds but our sinful nature is leading us down an opposite path.

I don't know you Steve, and I may not agree with you but I love you anyway

" . . . and the greatest of all these things is LOVE."

Alex (am still learning to love everyday - it ain't easy)

[Outta Here]

Regarding: In this parable Christ was meeting the people on their own ground. The doctrine of a conscious state of existence between death and the resurrection was held by many of those who were listening to Christ's words. The Saviour knew of their ideas, and He framed His parable so as to inculcate important truths through these preconceived opinions. He held up before His hearers a mirror wherein they might see themselves in their true relation to God. He used the prevailing opinion to convey the idea He wished to make prominent to all--that no man is valued for his possessions; for all he has belongs to him only as lent by the Lord. A misuse of these gifts will place him below the poorest and most afflicted man who loves God and trusts in Him. {COL 263.2}

Christ used a fictional setting to "inculcate important truths." In some senses, it could also be regarded as fantasy. My thought is that if Christ saw a use for fiction/fantasy in His teachings, then it is not the media itself that is flawed. What is more important is the message. There are many good messages that can be gleaned from the reading of science fiction.

[Outta Here]

Are you saying that Lazarus and the rich man were real people--one of whom died and then was able to speak to the other one from beyond the grave?

I understand that Jesus did not use science fiction as a medium, but He did use a fictional settting to illustrate the principle of living not for one's own financial gains. To some reading the story, such a fictional setting might even be considered "fantasy" (i.e., the fantasy of being able to speak to loved ones who've passed away).

[teresaq]

Are you saying that Lazarus and the rich man were real people-

[SivartM]

So it was like historical fiction?

[Outta Here]

Originally Posted By: Aubrey

Are you saying that Lazarus and the rich man were real people-

yes.

Quote:

-one of whom died and then was able to speak to the other one from beyond the grave?

both of whom died, and no. they were just used as an example.

Jesus used situations the people knew of and "took liberties" to make a point, is how i understand it.

Both were dead in the parable? I must have forgotten the parable. Honestly I thought Lazarus was supposed to have been alive still--so that he could go back and warn the rich man's relatives.

At any rate, you are saying that Jesus "took liberties" and used a fictional setting to get his message across--yes?

[Steve Billiter]

Ellen White clearly gives understanding in "a Great Gulf Fixed" in COL.

"In this parable Christ was meeting the people on their own ground. The doctrine of a conscious state of existence between death and the resurrection was held by many of those who were listening to Christ's words. The Saviour knew of their ideas, and He framed His parable so as to inculcate important truths through these preconceived opinions. He held up before His hearers a mirror wherein they might see themselves in their true relation to God. He used the prevailing opinion to convey the idea He wished to make prominent to all--that no man is valued for his possessions; for all he has belongs to him only as lent by the Lord. A misuse of these gifts will place him below the poorest and most afflicted man who loves God and trusts in Him." {COL 263.2}

Christ desires His hearers to understand that it is impossible for men to secure the salvation of the soul after death. "Son," Abraham is represented as answering, "remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed; so that they which would pass from hence to you can not; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence." Thus Christ represented the hopelessness of looking for a second probation. This life is the only time given to man in which to prepare for eternity." {COL 263.3}

Luk 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

This is a reference to the real Lazarus Jesus resurrected.

If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." These words were proved true in the history of the Jewish nation. Christ's last and crowning miracle was the raising of Lazarus of Bethany, after he had been dead four days. The Jews were given this wonderful evidence of the Saviour's divinity, but they rejected it. Lazarus rose from the dead and bore his testimony before them, but they hardened their hearts against all evidence, and even sought to take his life. (John 12:9-11.) {COL 265.1}

Luk 16:20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, who was laid at his gate, full of sores,

This Lazarus and the rich man were not real persons.

[Steve Billiter]

Originally Posted By: Steve Billiter

His other son, Graham Maxwell, teaches some perverted doctrines.

Anyone tell you are rude and lack social skills?

I do not agree with some of what he says, but to call them perverted is tacky.

How does accusing me make you any better than you say I am?

His doctrines are a perversion of the truth, period.

No longer consent to listen without protest to the perversion of truth (Selected

Messages, vol. 1, p. 196).

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I may be wrong, but I think one of the Rules of the Forum is not to argue with the Administrator.

[Woody]

Quote:

I don't know you Steve, and I may not agree with you but I love you anyway

Sorry ... but love just don't cut it.

You love and they abuse.

At some point the abuse has to stop.

I appreciate Stan's comments and would encourage more of them.

[Steve Billiter]

I may be wrong, but I think one of the Rules of the Forum is not to argue with the Administrator.

I think you are mistaken. That is not what this is about. If Stan thinks he can abuse his status as site owner and call me names, when what I did was call certain doctrines perverted that someone teaches without calling that person preverted, then he can delete my account effective immediately.

Topics - Adventist of Tomorrow

Discussions on this "forum" are open and free....but vulgarity (unlike the vulgarity allowed on "Club Adventist," owned by a Seventh-day Adventist ... http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/board-topics.html

It seems this forum site already has a reputation for abuse. It is to see why, it comes from the top down.

Mat 7:16 You shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

Mat 7:17 Even so every good tree brings forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit.

[Gail]

I think you are mistaken. That is not what this is about. If Stan thinks he can abuse his status as site owner and call me names, when what I did was call certain doctrines perverted that someone teaches without calling that person preverted, then he can delete my account effective immediately.

I will do the honour if this doesn't stop.

If it is your wish I can do that now.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Originally Posted By: rudywoofs

I may be wrong, but I think one of the Rules of the Forum is not to argue with the Administrator.

I think you are mistaken. That is not what this is about. If Stan thinks he can abuse his status as site owner and call me names, when what I did was call certain doctrines perverted that someone teaches without calling that person preverted, then he can delete my account effective immediately.

Please don't leave.

ntmomitf

[teresaq]

This Lazarus and the rich man were not real persons.

Although Lazarus was in so deplorable and mean a condition, he had true faith, true moral worth, which God saw, and which He considered of so great value that He took this poor, despised sufferer and placed him in the most exalted position, while the honored and ease-loving man of wealth was thrust out from the presence of God and plunged into misery and woe unutterable. God did not value the riches of this wealthy man, because he had not true moral worth. His character was worthless. His riches did not recommend him to God nor have any influence to secure His favor. {1T 539.2}

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: Steve Billiter

His other son, Graham Maxwell, teaches some perverted doctrines.

Anyone tell you are rude and lack social skills?

I do not agree with some of what he says, but to call them perverted is tacky.

Good Point Stan. Thank you for speaking up. We could turn this forum into childish banter. Tit for tat. We could say ... Billiter teaches a perverted doctrine. No ... Stan teaches a perverted doctrine. Yada Yada Yada.

Instead of slandering someone's views ... why not just list the issues and discuss them instead of cutting someone's views down .

I have to admit that I participate in the tit for tat. I think that unless we show the abusers what he is doing ... they will not learn. Showing kindness towards the abuser only encourages more.

So ... here goes. I will do just what I am saying we should not do. Billiter ... YOU teach a perverted doctrine.

(Tell us how that feels now Steve. And do we really want to resort to this kind of behaviour?)

[teresaq]

His other son, Graham Maxwell, teaches some perverted doctrines.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Originally Posted By: Stan Jensen

Anyone tell you are rude and lack social skills?

I do not agree with some of what he says, but to call them perverted is tacky.

Good Point Stan. Thank you for speaking up. We could turn this forum into childish banter. Tit for tat. We could say ... Billiter teaches a perverted doctrine. No ... Stan teaches a perverted doctrine. Yada Yada Yada.

Instead of slandering someone's views ... why not just list the issues and discuss them instead of cutting someone's views down .

I have to admit that I participate in the tit for tat. I think that unless we show the abusers what he is doing ... they will not learn. Showing kindness towards the abuser only encourages more.

So ... here goes. I will do just what I am saying we should not do. Billiter ... YOU teach a perverted doctrine.

(Tell us how that feels now Steve. And do we really want to resort to this kind of behaviour?)

I think that was unnecessary.

[Woody]

One would hope this would be unnecessary. I agree with you Pam. But, I suspect that in order to get through to this poster ... it is indeed needed. Sad but true. How else is he going to see what he did as wrong. He has already rejected common sense and is defending his actions.

Shall we all just love him? Do you think he will then amend his ways?

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

ntmomitf

[Woody]

Quote:

I think you are mistaken. That is not what this is about. If Stan thinks he can abuse his status as site owner and call me names, when what I did was call certain doctrines perverted that someone teaches without calling that person preverted, then he can delete my account effective immediately.

Topics - Adventist of Tomorrow

Discussions on this "forum" are open and free....but vulgarity (unlike the vulgarity allowed on "Club Adventist," owned by a Seventh-day Adventist ... http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/board-topics.html

It seems this forum site already has a reputation for abuse. It is to see why, it comes from the top down.

Mat 7:16 You shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

Mat 7:17 Even so every good tree brings forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit.

Give someone an inch ... they will take a mile. Steve ... your comments are out of line.

[SivartM]

Shall we all just love him? Do you think he will then amend his ways?

What I don't like about the "if you break the rules we ban you" idea is that there is no room for healing. Sure, the offender won't be able to break the rules anymore... at least not on the websites where he/she is banned.

Steve has done nothing more offensive here, that I know of, than being, as someone put it, rude and lacking social skills (which, by the way, I thought was rather rude, but please don't ban me for saying that). And many might not think he is a very pleasant person, but the fact remains that none of us are perfect. He has not really broken the rules (again, as far as I know) any more than some of us have at one time or another. He hasn't been swearing, posting inappropriate pictures, or hunted anyone down and killed them. That's pretty good as far as the internet goes.

The usual attitude in these situations is "Well, we loved so-and-so, but they are just too rude, so bye-bye!" I think that means that there was never much love going toward the person at all. How can people know the love of God if we don't show Him to them? What if, in the end, rejecting someone influenced them to turn against God? We can't know until it's too late!

My point is, should our attitude be conditional on whether or not we expect a person to amend their ways? God loves even those whom He KNOWS will never love Him... while we are more than happy to ban people because we doubt that they will amend their ways.

Whether or not he "amends his ways" (and there is no way of knowing for sure), I think we should all just love him. So I say... give him a chance.

[Woody]

Did I miss something? Where was banning him discussed?

[SivartM]

Originally Posted By: Steve Billiter

I think you are mistaken. That is not what this is about. If Stan thinks he can abuse his status as site owner and call me names, when what I did was call certain doctrines perverted that someone teaches without calling that person preverted, then he can delete my account effective immediately.

I will do the honour if this doesn't stop.

If it is your wish I can do that now.

[Gail]

Hey... He offered!