Leaderboard

Yes. I can say that because that is how it happened with me. I had no idea of right and wrong and had to learn through God's word. His people were patient with me as I learned and am still learning. The sins that are seen are the ones that people notice first. But God is concerned with the heart. But it is the revelation of His love that gives me the courage to seek Him and ask for power. If I relied only on condemnation I would shrink away and probably not even try.

Even though there are some anomalies I wish it did not have, there are so many great things about my Church, the Seventh-day Adventist Church that I love with passion. I enjoy spending time with our GC President as I did last week in China. I am thrilled by how our Church in China is moving forward, including broadcasting the Chinese Hope Channel all over China. I recall when the Yugoslavian Civil War came to an end, and how that battered yet great city of Sarajevo decided to spend the first Saturday celebrating and giving thanks to the Seventh-day Adventist Church, they were going to have a celebration of the "war is Over' and postponed that a week, to thank our Church for what they did. That list goes on and on. JOINING it was one of the best things I have done in my life.

You've shifted your ground. It would not be necessary to insist on an identity if others spent less time negating it. I'm certain our LGBTIQ brothers and sisters would love nothing more than simply to be people among people and believers among believers, if others would simply allow them to do so.

Ah to be a Seventh-day Adventist Christian. See one, like one, be one

And that's what scares me about the lack of spiritual discernment that is so prevalent in our age. When the Bible is so clear that it cannot be misunderstood and to find that it is being completely misunderstood to the determent of my children. Luk_18:8 "I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?" Christian regards

Jude first mentions fornication, and then mentions strange flesh. "Fornication" would cover "broadly sexual perversion," I would think, and thus the going after strange flesh should be something else. The Greek word for "strange" is heteros, which means other of a different kind. So the flesh it is speaking of should be something different than the normal. I don't see any conflict whatsoever between Ezekiel and Jude, since it is Ezekiel's sins that lead to what Genesis and Jude refer to. Any culture that is short on food and pride, and must spend much of their day just surviving, won't be indulging in such perversions. Jude was just as inspired as Ezekiel, and so we can take the words of both as being of equal authority.

"And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things. Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God." (Rev. 22:8,9) " I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star." (Rev.22:16) It was an ANGEL that was telling John not to worship it; not Jesus. The angel was showing John a vision of Jesus. "But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him." (Mark 5:6) "And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean." (Matt. 8:2) "And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him." (Matt. 28:9) These and many, MANY other verses show that Jesus accepted worship while He was here on earth. Jesus is God. Read John Chapter 1 if you haven't read it 100 times before. Genesis 1:1 says that God created the heavens and the earth. John 1 and Hebrews say explicitly that all things were created by and through Jesus. Therefore, Jesus = God. Denying that Jesus is God sounds like something a JW would say. Not saying you are one; just saying that you sound like one.

Dogmatic reliance on Sister White is what will set even Adventists themselves up for this deception. When things do turn out in many ways to be very different from how she thought they would, most Adventists (sadly) will lose all confidence in her, except for the few who have learned to understand her in view of a much larger testimony.

Revelation 17:3 So he carried me away in the Spirit into the wilderness. And I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast which was full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. The great harlot sits ON many waters (Rev. 17:1). The "waters" are "peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues" (17:15). She commits fornication with the kings of the earth - 7 of them - (Rev. 17:2) so much so that the people on earth became drunk with the wine resulting from this fornication. She had already committed fornication with 5 kings (in John's day) was committing fornication with a 6th in John's time, and would (future) commit fornication with a 7th before being destroyed (17:9). The harlot's name is Babylon the Great (Rev. 17:5). The woman was drunk with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus (Rev. 17:6). John was absolutely amazed when he saw her (Rev. 17:6). The harlot sits ON 7 hills (Rev 17:9). The harlot sits ON the Beast (17:3). The harlot is the "great city" which rules over the kings of the earth (17:15). So the harlot is a "great city" that sits on 7 hills, and she rules over kings, and she commits fornication with kings. Hmmmmm. Did not the King of Jerusalem (rather than submitting to Yahweh) enter into treaties with (paying tribute to) several foreign nations? Egypt, Babylon, and Rome come immediately to mind, but I'm thinking there were others.

LoL! I can agree with only because of the Word. …7The end of all things is near; therefore, be of sound judgment and sober spirit for the purpose of prayer. 8Above all, keep fervent in your love for one another, because love covers a multitude of sins.....1 Peter 51But let me reveal to you a wonderful secret. We will not all die, but we will all be transformed! 52It will happen in a moment, in the blink of an eye, when the last trumpet is blown. For when the trumpet sounds, those who have died will be raised to live forever. And we who are living will also be transformed. 53For our dying bodies must be transformed into bodies that will never die; our mortal bodies must be transformed into immortal bodies. 54Then, when our dying bodies have been transformed into bodies that will never die,j this Scripture will be fulfilled: “Death is swallowed up in victory.k 55O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?l” 56For sin is the sting that results in death, and the law gives sin its power. 57But thank God! He gives us victory over sin and death through our Lord Jesus Christ. 58So, my dear brothers and sisters, be strong and immovable. Always work enthusiastically for the Lord, for you know that nothing you do for the Lord is ever useless......! Corinthians 15 God is Love!~Jesus saves!

So every straight man will eventually commit adultery? I don't believe so. I never have. Yet I find many women other than my wife attractive and desirable.

If the deception comes after the plagues have begun to fall, it will be like the antediluvians outside of the ark being convinced that Noah was right. Too late.Too late.Too late!

Japanese student Kango Suzuki made a clock that writes the time every minute. He created the "Plock" for his senior thesis project.

Thanks Gail....tis enjoyable to hear a person speak without fear. I believe that the thought expressed is exactly the one that Christ came and spent the majority of His time on earth trying to get others to see.

In the wilderness temptation: Luke 4:5-6 "Then the devil, taking Him up on a high mountain, showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. And the devil said to Him, "All this authority I will give You, and their glory; for this has been delivered to me, and I give it to whomever I wish." (NKJ) The "kingdoms of the world" would therefore BE Satan's dominion. Satan gives this rule to the fourth - terrible beast of Daniel Cpt 7. The fourth - terrible beast of Daniel Cpt 7 will rule over "all the kingdoms of the world". It will "devour the whole earth". Daniel 7:23 "Thus he said:`The fourth beast shall be a fourth kingdom on earth, Which shall be different from all other kingdoms, And shall devour the whole earth, Trample it and break it in pieces." Hmmmmm. Maybe dividing it into 10 regions, ruled by 10 "kings" who rule for "the Beast". THEN - the 8th horn comes up, and rules over all the other "horns". The 8th horn persecutes the saints for 3.5 years, after it is empowered by "the beast from the land". The lamb-like beast from "the land" (also known as the false prophet who does "wonders") AND the first beast - the terrible beast of Revelation 13 (that rules the whole world), are the ONLY TWO thrown into the "lake of fire" at the Second Coming. This is Satan's dominion - destroyed!!!

It reminds me of my dog, who won't go to bed at night without a shirt of Mommy or Daddy's to bury her nose in. It comforts her

MCBGM, No matter the origin, the Bible is PERFECTLY clear that Jesus is God, no matter what early SDAs, Mormons, JWs, or any other denomination might say. I may not be EGW's biggest fan; but I would have to see some quotes by her that say Jesus is NOT God. To my knowledge (which is limited) she never said any such thing. Some offshoot SDAs might claim that, but it isn't part of the official SDA doctrine. Jesus IS God; and saying otherwise is grieving HIs Spirit. Jesus - as our creator - is the only Entity in the universe qualified to pay the penalty for man's sin. Any other being is not qualified to represent and redeem all of humanity.

The Pope has been trying to achieve ecumenism, for many years. Popes have sought to bring all religions together - in the name of peace. It is an easy "leap" to see the Pope setting up his "throne" at Jerusalem, as the "false prophet" to bring together all religions to an international "house of prayer". It begins by bringing the Protestants under her ecumenical "roof". The Papacy already has strong ties as the "mediator" between Muslims and Jews. I can see the Pope as the "false prophet". I can see the Pope as "the AntiChrist", although I lean more to the being who gloriously appears as the universal Messiah. The one who does "wonders" and "makes fire come down from heaven in the sight of men" is the "lamb-like beast", which arises from "the land" - (probably standing in a rebuilt Temple). A lamb is an animal - a beast. So is the Vatican the SAME AS the "lamb-like beast"? Don't know..... OR Is Israel the "lamb-like beast"? Don't know..... The BEAST (with all its heads and horns), and the FALSE PROPHET are "thrown into the lake of fire" at the Second Coming. The DRAGON is not! Ergo - the Dragon (Satan himself) is not the Beast kingdom. Just a note: The BEAST (encompassing millions of the enemies of Christ) and the FALSE PROPHET are "thrown into the lake of fire" (which is the second death) AT the Second Coming. This supports my view that the rebellious informed wicked are destroyed forever at the Second Coming (which agrees with Daniel 12:2-3). They are everlastingly condemned. There is no need to resurrect them AGAIN, to execute them AGAIN, after another 1000 years. The people to be dealt with AFTER the 7t millennium, as "the rest of the dead" are all of those who lived and died in ignorance of Yahweh. They deserve the opportunity to CHOOSE the Lord if they so desire, after being informed (by the "priests of God and of Christ).

Daniel 7:24 "The ten horns are ten kings Who shall arise from this kingdom. And another shall rise after them; He shall be different from the first ones, And shall subdue three kings." In Daniel 7, the "terrible beast" is said to be a "kingdom". That would be one ruled over by a king. The "little horn" is an 8th "king". He plucks up (pulls up) 3 kingdoms. We really have no idea who these 10 kings are, because they do not "rule with the Beast" until the very END TIME. So how can we know who "the 8th king" - "little horn" IS? SDA escatology has equated the "little horn", with the "harlot" - with the Catholic Church/Papacy. How can this be? How can the "horn" (a nation) BE the "harlot" (one who violates her marriage covenant with the LORD)? I do agree that Vatican City is an independent "nation" - the Pope being her "king" (as it were). So she could be a "horn" - a "kingdom", but how is she ALSO "the harlot". NOTE: The LORD was never "married" to the Catholic Church, any more than He was "married" to Protestantism. The 10 kings (all 10 not just 7 kings) destroy the Harlot and burn her with fire. The 10 "kings" are attached to, and grow out of "the Beast". The "harlot" RIDES on the Beast. Jerusalem is a recently appeared "nation". Jerusalem - her capitol - was termed a "harlot" by the LORD's prophets. She also "sits on 7 hills".

Revelation 17:12 "The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, (so they were NOT ruling in John's day) but they receive (future) authority for one hour as kings with the beast (NKJ). The 10 kings will ENFORCE the agenda of "the terrible beast" of Revelation 13, in the very last days. I'm presently thinking these will be UN Security Council nations, or some other UN like body council, which can use the power of collected nations to ENFORCE an agenda. The Beast of Revelation 13 is a composite beast, because it takes over the other prominent nations (lion, bear, leopard). We know this because those other nations re-emerge AFTER the Beast is destroyed. So they CANNOT be ancient Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Rome.

I was speaking of the OTHER "beast" - the one that comes out of "the land". This is the beast that is empowered to resurrect the "first beast" - (the one with 7 heads, that was wounded) - , to speak through an 8th head. I if the other beast (the lamb-like beast) comes out of Israel, this may FIT, because Israel longs for peace, is willing to compromise - to be "politically correct" - in order to get it. It FITS with my scenario of the Temple being made into a "house of prayer for all peoples" - regardless of "religion".

LifeHisCost gets it. We choose whether or not God is our Father. He is Father to all who love and accept Him as their Lord and Savior. To all others, He is not called their father. Remember Adam? The Bible says he was "the son of God" (possible "type" here of Christ as well). But when Adam had a son, the son was specifically declared to have been in Adam's image, as opposed to God's like Adam had been made. Do we all worship God? the same God? Is He "God" for everyone? In a sense, of course, He is--for He is ultimately the one in charge of everything and the owner of all. However, the Bible is clear that there are other gods, and that our God does not claim all people as His own (see Hosea 1:9-10). Gregory has a way with words that appeals to human reasoning and emotion. However, God's truths are dependent on principles that have nothing to do with these natural traits of the human heart. As we grow in Christ, we must learn to walk by faith; not by sight, not by emotion, not by a "burning in the bosom," nor by any appeal to education, custom, culture, tradition, or popularity in this world. These aspects of the human condition serve as inferior foundations of theology for many, including their concepts of right and wrong, good and evil. Homosexuality is judged by the heart instead of by the Word of God in a world today that edges ever nearer to the eternal abyss. It seems that God should accept everyone. It seems that since "God is love," and since He has promised, by His ultimate sacrifice, to forgive, that God must bear with us in our sins and tolerate them--finding some way to save everyone in the end. Nevertheless, the Bible plainly disabuses us of such an erroneous view. Satan has tried to package sin in an attractive manner, whispering many lies about it to catch us off-guard. Among his favorite lies are these: 1) there's still time to change the road you're on; 2) God will overlook minor matters; 3) God loves people too much to destroy anyone; 4) sinners can never be perfect anyway, so God will save them in their sins; 5) if God made you that way, He would be a hypocrite to require something else--don't worry about it; and 6) being no longer under the law, but under grace, the commandments have all been done away. There are other lies, of course, to catch sinners from other angles: 1) you're too wicked and God doesn't love you; 2) you can never hope to be saved anyhow, why not just live it up for the moment?; and 3) God is cruel--why desire to spend an eternity with such a being? I see many of these lies bandied about in discussions on homosexuality. Frequently, well-meaning persons take up such lies and reframe them in pleasing ways such that they feel better when others have agreed with them. Is popularity any evidence of truthfulness? Am I more correct if others agree? Jesus said the broad way went to destruction, not to life. Popularity is something to be distrustful of; smooth words can come from Satan's own mouth. Either we base our doctrines on a clear "thus saith the LORD," or we follow the deceitfulness of human wisdom. The Bible is plain on the question of homosexuality. It is too explicitly clear in the examples that it gives to be excusably misunderstood. All of us will stand before God to answer for ourselves one day. What excuse will we make then?

1869 ~ a Native American overlooks the newly completed transcontinental railroad

I'm not sure whether that comment is for me or The Wanderer. Since his claim mischaracterises my views, I'll let it go through to the catcher either way.

I don't think so. I am, rather, *not* simply assuming that it's adequate. I'm inquiring into whether or not it is. One of the huge challenges with translation is that words do not only have denotations (their dictionary meanings) they have connotations (the associations, images and metaphors that arise around them). What 'natural' means in a strict sense is less broad than the set of associations that we - as individuals or as a culture - have with it. Similarly for what 'phooskos' means. So translation is as much art as science, and understanding the meaning of the term in the language in which it was written is also going to be both more accurate and richer than relying on a single English translation.

Perhaps the emphasis in teaching our people should be the other way around? Grace first?

that's how I feel now, but I sure didn't when I was growing up... the PK's generally got the good jobs at summer camps and academy... it was all in "who you were" and "who you knew".... hopefully, that's changed...

I have a dilemma. Stan posted this topic in the World Affairs forum. Clearly not intended as a political topic... But as so often happens some single minded folk just cannot help themselves and turn anything and everything into an opportunity for a partisan food fight and derails the topic. You know who you are. SO my dilemma is do I ironically stifle what some think is their right to free speech to say anything, anytime and anywhere they please by editing out the political poo to try to salvage the original topic of the OP? Or do I just concede that it is irretrievably turned into a political food fight and move the whole topic over to the Political forum? Let me think about that a minute... I haven't the time to mess with it... Obviously nobody quite got it to begin with, Stan... Sorry. I apologize to Stan because I am going to move it, but some of you also owe him an apology for messing up his topic.

Show me the scripture where it says the papacy is Babylon. An EGW quote won't cut it. If "MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT" is written on the woman's forehead, wouldn't that be her name rather than the name of the beast?

Well, we are somewhat better off with technology. My grandma's been alive for the past 30 years because of advances in technology. My husband didn't die as an infant; neither did I--all because of technological advances. So...in some ways, IMO, we are better off.