Leaderboard

There's a naive view that tends to peddle the idea of "stupid politicians" who don't know what they are doing and don't understand the implications. Quite the opposite is generally true. The people in charge are more informed about the consequences of either course, and they do understand the cost... and I highly doubt that (most of them) are doing it with eyes shut when it comes to potential casualties. Predictive modeling intelligence these days is able to play out scenarios on massive scales to calculate the odds and implications, so it's not merely about going in there for oil. It's never really been so. These days it's about maintaining economic balance. The question really should be whether you are willing to face the consequences of making the morally right choices if it will cost you a great deal of discomfort, and with understanding that your current comfort is largely due to the artificial global economic imbalance created by US foreign policy since 1947 (since Bretton Woods, and subsequent formation of CIA as means of maintaining external economic hegemony of a fiat currency) . Notice that State of Israel was formed the following year, and Iranian coup and meddling in Egypt shortly after. So, the irony is that... YES war is a racket... BUT ... it's a racket on your behalf (if you live in developed world that is) . Essentially this war is against the countries that are resisting integration into the global magical casino economy, in which speculation is manipulated and house always wins... and the immediate environment of the house gets the crumbs of the benefit. So, the question would be, if you were to make a moral choice at the expense of your own comfort security... what choice would you make?

The Searcher: A. G. Daniels and Mrs. White were expecting it to just take a short time so that they could ordain that specific woman. She has now been long dead. It's been about 100 years and in the last few decades we have had archaeological discoveries that shows that the Bible supports Women's Ordination. When does it move from giving a little bit of time to teach the church because it's not ready and when the church is just dragging it's feet?

Posted on Facebook: If you need materials to present to open minded people feel free to visit the www.nadordination.com site. The full NAD TOSC report is available there as well as a downloadable pamphlet. If you would like free hard copies of the pamphet they are available from the NAD Secretariat's office. Contact Mellisa Gottlieb by phone 301-680-6408 or email her at melissa.gottlieb@nad.adventist.org.

Coconut Cream Pie....Awesome!!!!! Okay, back to topic.

As I understand (and was taught) Revelation 4 and 5 is a picture of God's throne with symbols of the trinity. Around the throne are the 24 elders. There are apparently at least 3 concepts in the 24 elders. One that I have heard about in passing in a Sabbath School study tape by Jim Ayers, but not have heard the presentation is something to do with Passover. Anyway, the other two parts are: 2. the Sanhedrin could have a quorum of only 24 of the 70 elders. 23 plus the high priest. In the days of Jesus, 23 Sadducees and the high priest would often meet with no Pharisees, form a group of 24 elders and have a Kangaroo Court. Frequently to stop someone who they saw as growing too popular with the people. While they could not crucify people for political crimes, they could stone people to death for certain religious crimes. They worked with the governor. If they thought they had a better chance at convicting the person on civil law the Governor would take the case. If they thought it would be better to bring it on religious law the 24 elders would take the case. Now if the person was too popular they would not stone them to death but turn them over to the governor to be crucified. The popular understanding of "Cursed is anyone who dies on a tree" was that only God's enemies would ever die on a tree and they could ruin a reputation by having them hang on a tree just as surly as rumors about people having affairs can ruin reputations today. The trial of Jesus was probably among the 24 Sadducee elders with no Pharisees present. John saw those 24 elders give a false witness of Jesus. Now John sees their heavenly counterparts giving a true witness for Jesus. 3. The 24 elders represent the testimony of the 12 tribes and 12 apostles, or the Old and New Testament. The 4 living beasts come from the Pentateuch. They were the animals represented by the four sides of the Hebrews in the wilderness traveling to the promised land. Thus they represent the church traveling through the wilderness of life on earth to go to the promised land. So we have a picture of God communicating through the Bible to the church while we are on exodus towards the promised land. However, due to the sin problem, creatures were broken from the life giver. Some in rebellion, others in observation as to whether or not God can be trusted, a probation that did not close until the cross. Had Jesus failed, it would have proved the God was unworthy of our trust. It would have resulted in life in the universe coming to an end. I understand the scroll to be the history of the world from the cross on. History would have ended there if there was not someone worthy to have history continue, I. e. open the seals and unroll the scroll. Because Jesus was faithful and died the unfallen knew that God was indeed trustworthy and that they did not trust him in vain. And taking the results of sin for the rebels opens up salvation for those who choose to repent. Therefore the lamb is worthy to have history continue.

John 20:29 "Jesus said to him, “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

I don't know how many sermons I heard as a kid based on this story: http://site.starfish-project.com/the-parable/ Seems like the same sort of logic applies to this. Also, Voltaire might argue that great power implies great responsibility. That said, there are a lot of children being persecuted around the world, but we only ever seem to go to war for the ones where the United States stands to gain some economic or political benefit as well. It seems to me that the humanitarian angle we're discussing here is used primarily as propaganda, and not as a real motivation behind any military involvement.

Something to think about when in a discussion on any topic. Constant harping closes the intended mind. The TRUTH, as it might understood, when used as a bludgeon can be comapred to using a large sword for a scalple. It just makes a mess of things and does not cure what might be ailing the other that another is trying to deliver from what is percive to be anothers UNtruth/ ailment............>>>> is not GOD about LOVE.

This is scary! http://www.wired.com/2014/09/r0-ebola/

1) the SDA church manual states: Quote: Grounds for Divorce -Scripture recognizes adultery and/or fornication (Matt. 5:32) as well as abandonment by an unbelieving partner (1 Cor. 7:10-15) as grounds for divorce. 2) the SDA church manual does not list OT Mosaic words as a description of those who have grounds for, and go through with, divorce... Quote: Unfaithfulness to the marriage vow has generally been seen to mean adultery [meaning extramarital sex] and/or fornication. However, the New Testament word for fornication includes certain other sexual irregularities. (1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Tim. 1:9, 10; Rom. 1:24-27.) Therefore, sexual perversions, including incest, child sexual abuse, and homosexual practices, are also recognized as a misuse of sexual powers and a violation of the divine intention in marriage. As such they are just cause for separation or divorce. 3) I'm not sure I understand your question, " Is there a distinct separate line of SDA doctrinal treatment between divorce & adultery?" There are some here at C/A who are on their 3rd marriages. Many more who are on their 2nd. I'm of the opinion that any effort to stigmatize someone who has divorced his/her spouse is nothing but gossip. No one except those persons involved know the extent and circumstances of the divorce. While, of course, marriage is meant to be permanent, even the SDA church understands that circumstances exist where, for the mental health and safety of the spouse, separation and/or divorce must occur. I'm reminded of the status of women in the 1800's and earlier. They were considered as chattel of their husbands, having virtually no rights and no voice in the courts. Husbands could violently abuse their wives, and the law (and religion) looked the other way. It was seldom (but did occur) that wives divorced their husbands. Men, as well, are sometimes subjected to abusive wives. Again, I do not believe God would have someone, man or woman, remain in a marriage where the spouse is continually abusive, physically, emotionally, or mentally. That includes adultery and abandonment. And abandonment can include a myriad of circumstances. That's my 2¢.....

there were occasions when e white used the substances to help her when her system needed it. i dont think it is a black and white thing. health reform is something progressive, and e. white took a long time to stop using meat, and said excessive sugar was more harmful them eating meat. we may not have meat at potlucks, but we do have generous pies, cookies and cakes. sin is whatever you know the Lord is asking you to do, and you do not do it. if he has not spoken to you about the Sabbath for you Sabbath breaking is not sin. when we are in ignorance God winks. also God is leading us step by step, if we take steps apart from him we fall into self righteousness, and that is tougher to deal with then whether we drink tea or coffee. our conscience does not live on the dry pages of a book, it is in our heart.