Leaderboard

You can LIKE posts!

Hey look!! I'm back!! Go me.

From the highest levels of the denomination, a call for unity comes. Is this agreement on doctrine? Is it an agreement of purpose. What does it mean to be unified? In the various discussions of the theological differences that exist within the Adventist Church, Ellen white is often cited, often in an attempt to silence someone else. My thanks to J. David Newman for the following quotation from EGW to consider: Well, I guess I do not know how to copy & paste in this new forum. See: EGW MS Release # 892 as found in Vol. II pp 261-269. In the section that Newman cited EGW clearly states that unity in not found in agreement by everyone on what a Scriptural passage says.

Leave your car behind and discover the delights of fall and early winter as you journey from inn to inn by bike, foot, horse, skis, or snowshoes. After an invigorating day in the crisp air, arrive at a charming little inn where your bags await and someone else has prepared a hearty meal. Gracious innkeepers send you off the next morning with a fond farewell and a bagged lunch, wherever you may be: among fall foliage in Vermont, in the wine country of Italy, or between volcanoes in Ecuador. http://www.smartertravel.com/photo-galleries/editorial/explore-the-outdoors-by-hopping-from-inn-to-inn.html?id=839&all=1

is this the quote? “One man may be conversant with the Scriptures, and some particular portion of the Scripture may be especially appreciated by him; another sees another portion as very important, and thus one may present one point, and another, another point, and both may be of highest value. This is all in the order of God. But if a man makes a mistake in his interpretation of some portion of the Scripture, shall this cause diversity and disunion? God forbid. We cannot then take a position that the unity of the church consists of viewing every text of Scripture in the very same light. The church may pass resolution upon resolution to put down all disagreement of opinions, but we cannot force the mind and will, and thus root out disagreement. These resolutions may conceal the discord, but they cannot quench it and establish perfect agreement.” (“Love, the Need of the Church,” Manuscript 24, 1892; published as Manuscript Release #898 in Manuscript Releases, Vol. 11. 1981. White Estate: Washington, D.C., p. 266.)

I once read a book called "Don't Sell Your Soul to Rock and Roll". I think it was by John Osbourn. I didn't care for the message - being a contemporary worship leader that loves drums and electric guitar. I believe there is no such thing as evil music. Some of our favorite hymns use melodies from drinking songs. There are, however, evil lyrics. Sometimes I think that putting evil words to music allows some of those words to bypass conscious logic and travel directly to your subconscious brain. Of course, the same thing happens with uplifting lyrics. For example, I'm listening to "Oceans" by United right now. It takes me to my happy place every time I hear it.

Christian Berdahl is not the first person I heard speaking about the evils of music and syncopation. About 7-8 years ago, Ivor Myers spoke about "The Beast from the Abyss" and Brian Neumann (a South African musician) joined the chorus. I agree with what rudywoofs said. Sometimes the best thing to do is not to fight them but leave them in God's hands. It's His church so He will weed the people out. He will also show you how true your beliefs are, who is right or wrong. My advice to you is be a conscientious objector but don't allow your vehemence and disdain for their teaching to get personal. That puts people off and closes them up more than anything else. Why not encourage them to study the matter for themselves? Truth will triumph in the end.

Thank-you for saying that - I definitly needed to hear that.

this is one of my favorite versions of How Great Thou Art. Obviously, it would not pass muster with Mr. Berdahl.

Rivkah went to her doctor for a check up. Afterwards, the doctor said to her, "I am sorry to inform you that you have a fissure in your uterus, and if you ever have a baby it would be a miracle." As soon as she got home, Rivkah said to her husband, "You vouldn't belief it. I vent to the doctah and he told me - 'You haf a fish in your uterus and if you haf a baby it vill be a mackerel'"

yay!!!

Also, (((Gail)))! Thanks for helping me, girl!

Pat, pat, pat!! Aw, what the heck - (((Stan)))

The Beast of Rev. 13:1-8 is a composite. It has characteristics of the three beasts who preceded it in Daniel 7 - lion/bear/leopard. It has swallowed up those other beasts. I'm thinking United Nations type one world government, with other nations submitting. Satan (the dragon) empowers this Beast (v. 2). V. 11 "THEN I saw ANOTHER beast" - lamb like - but spoke "like a dragon". So this Beast is channeled by Satan. This lamb-like Beast 1. "causes the earth and those who dwell in it to worship (serve) the first beast" 2. He performs great signs by which "he deceives those who dwell on the earth" "telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast" This "image" would be an act of service to the first beast. 3. He is granted power to give breath to the image of the beast 4. He causes "as many as would not worship the image of the beast to be killed - THAT's ENFORCEMENT. 5. He causes everyone to "receive a mark" with the name of the Beast (the first one) This lamb-like beast is definitely the enforcer. The question is whether he is the prophet (spokesman) for the first Beast. He DOES seem to be "telling those who dwell on the earth" to cooperate with the Beast. He is speaking FOR the first beast, bringing everyone into line - either by deception or by force. I would say the description of "prophet" (one who speaks for another) FITS. The lamb-like beast performs "great signs by which he deceives those who dwell on the earth" "telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast" and the false prophet "performed the signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast (Rev 19:20 NAS) Seems to me that the description of the lamb-like beast FITS with the description of the "false prophet". Who is the lamb-like Beast? Who is THE first Beast? We just don't KNOW yet, because they have not come to their fullness so they can be easily recognized. The Pope of Rome COULD be the lamb-like beast. Just don't know yet.

I think the answer to that may have a lot to do with a correct understanding of perfection. Jesus suggests "perfection" at each stage of growth and maturity. We can look at a perfect baby and recognize it has a lot of maturing before it can do many things we take for granted. I think we will be restored to our unblemished selves, but I think that which will be changed in us will be the removal of sin defects and scars. But I doubt we will be infused with all knowledge and all skills. I have often thought that learning new things and skills unecomberred by the burdens of life as we know it now will be such a tremendous joy. Learning for the joy of it! So I think we won't all be instant geniuses or masters of every endeavor or skill. We will have unecomberred opportunity to learn and master what is of interests us. And Imwould expect with an eternity ahead of us those intents will change over time. I think we will be more human, not superhuman. And on the original topic, humor is very much a human attribute. I do think it is hard to imagine humor scrubbed of the sin factor, just as it is hard to imagine life without sin, since sin has permeated everything in life as we know it.

I believe that the people of God will suffer "tribulation" - terrible persecution for 1260 days, leading up to the Second Coming. The trumpets judgments will be falling, but not yet the 7 last plagues. So it's NOT a pre-tribulation rapture. I DO BELIEVE it will be a pre-7 last plagues "rapture" - if that's the word you want to use to describe our being "caught up to meet Him in the air". I believe the people of God will be removed from this earth BEFORE the final "wrath of God" is poured out. There would be no point in them being present for the last plagues. No one will repent. There will be no one to preach to. Lot was removed from Sodom BEFORE the fireballs fell from heaven. The Second Coming "will be as in the days of Lot". I believe Lot's wife represents those who formerly WERE in Covenant with the LORD, who "look back" to the world, and are "left behind" to destruction - (NOT to a second chance). Did I answer that clearly enough?

The little horn will subdue three kings. The three kings will be the THREE that were already highlighted in the text - the lion, the bear, the leopard. Later - in Rev. 13, when we see the beast fully developed, it has incorporated characteristics of the three first beasts - BECAUSE it subdued them.