Leaderboard

I think the confusion comes in part because the word translated "judgment" or "judge" can mean EITHER the hearing of the facts to determine reward or punishment, OR the actual execution of the punishment. The "Day of Judgment" is the day when judgment is executed. In Rev. 14 - "the hour of His judgment has come" - I agree - seems more like a hearing of the facts, because specific actions are commanded of men, to follow this "hour". If it were the day of execution, there would be no time for such actions. In Rev 14:7, "has come" is in the aorist tense of the Greek, which is not quite the same as present tense. It's more like a sure process has begun. It's like beginning to begin, or beginning. That actually would allow for actions to take place by persons on earth - as it were - just in time. Jesus said, "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life." (John 5:24 NKJ) Not myself believing in "once saved - always saved" - at least in the Baptist sense, I would say the one who believes and continues in that faith until death - he will "not come into judgment". Jesus said, "I know My sheep." I can't imagine that has changed since He spoke those words. If Jesus says, "That one is mine. I claim her for myself." I believe that's the end of it. As a child I used to live in FEAR, thinking that my name could come up for judgment at any moment. In Sabbath School the teacher would talk about being "weighed in the balances". I do not believe that Jesus wanted me to have nightmares thinking I might be lost, and be thrown into fire. That's not TRUST relationship.

The following is not intended to be a knock on HCH, whose contributions to this thread I have tremendously appreciated. IQ does not correlate with wisdom (and wisdom is hard to measure). I'd put my IQ up against just about anybody's, and the Lord knows I've said, done and believed loads of foolish things. Ayn Rand had a sky-high IQ; Karl Marx was brilliant as well. Both were spectacularly wrong in their analysis of economics, politics and human nature. Among recent politicians, Ted Cruz has genius-level IQ, so does Bill Clinton. High IQ is not a guarantee of being correct in matters of politics, philosophy or religion. In fact, high IQ currently correlates with atheism and unbelief.

Another thing to consider - as a statistician, one has to realize that correlation does not necessarily imply causation. For example, one can correlate the occurrence of a full moon 100% to a 28.5 day cycle. However, the 28.5 day cycle does not "cause" the occurrence full moon; its orbit causes the occurrence of a full moon.

EGW referred to herself as a messenger of God, if I'm not mistaken. To assume that one must be without fault in order to be used and believed by and for God's purposes is slighting God, not the tool He chooses to use. Never have I regretted following His instruction to her, for the benefit of the remnant body of Christ, in the 50 years I've place confidence in her instructions for His bride. God is Love!~Jesus saves!

This is exactly what they said about the Republican Party 8 years ago! Its funny but many of the news articles that talk about the Demos today, they were saying about the Repubs 8 years ago! The way things are going these past months, it seems will being changing again in 4 years!

But he is not the last president!! Right now Trump is!! And should/if he gets impeached than Pence will become the POTUS!! So that will be 2 past Obama!! Not sure how you can still say Obama is the last president??

Thanks Jackson. I agree that the confessed sins of Israel (which includes all grafted in Gentile believers) were confessed over the head of the scapegoat. One is not "forgiven" because one has Hebrew DNA. Also included were sins of unintentional ignorance. These sins were not confessed because they were not "known" to the one who sinned. Rachel answers: One would think that after observing the selfishness, and outright evil behavior of humans for some 6000 years (with the resulting destruction/pain) the super-intelligent unfallen beings would UNDERSTAND WHY most of them need to die. What they don't understand is why ANY of them should live. WHY preserve any of them for eternal life? I think this is more likely a judgment for or against Christ's desire to preserve part of humanity, rather than allowing them to go down to oblivion. Has Christ demonstrated that He can rehabilitate humankind to the point where they will not rebel again, bringing further pain and chaos? Those individuals who surrender fully to Christ, and walk with Him through testing and trial, demonstrate to unfallen beings that Christ CAN do it, therefore it is safe to resurrect those who only began the process.

I found out about this on FB via David McQueen (former member here) who was in Westminster when it happened.

Hey Dude, Even though I may not believe as you do, I really appreciate the thought and insight that you bring to your posts. I also appreciate that you never seem to make it "personal". Blessings to you.

Well, today we have one functioning washbasin and WC, plus the washing machine. So, progress is being made. Later today, all should be functional again. The next step will be to have the repairs pass inspection, for which the inspector must be able to view the repairs. That will then be followed by dry wall repairs, texturing and painting. So, hopefully, sometime next week we will be back to operation again.

If that is correct then it can work the other way too....presumably in areas wider than physical abuse.

Many years ago, one of the ordained ministers in our congregation who was also a Ph.D. in Clinical Counseling, gave a Sabbath school lesson series on divorce and remarriage. One of his important points which has stuck with me for all those years since that time is that ADULTERY IS NOT A PHYSICAL ACT. It is ANYthing which comes to interfere in the intimacy of the partners. And just as there must be social intimacy before there can be physical intimacy, so there is sometimes a break in the social intimacy without any break in the physical intimacy. But that still constitutes adultery. Human beings being what they are, it usually follows that broken physical intimacy follows broken social intimacy -- but not always. [This law of human behavior was put to the test several times in my law practice, when good, upstanding Adventist members would come to me seeking to file for a divorce, even though their partner had never "slept" with anybody else. I often referred the client to this Adventist clinical counselor, and he helped them see what had actually happened in their marriage.] --Actually, a dear friend of mine, a man [this was 40 years ago or so] even went to the conference president and asked him to send somebody to spy on my friend's ex-wife (up in Northern California), so my friend could get PERMISSION to go abroad as an Adventist missionary and be remarried first! [I was not the potential new wife, BTW!] I was aghast when he did that, but I didn't get involved. This topic has caused many heartaches over the years. I believe God sees our hearts, and He knows each one of us. We needn't worry ourselves sick about whether we'll go to heaven when Jesus comes. He loves us! I fully believe He will save every person who does not actively resist.

JoeMo wrote: As has been stated over and over again, much of the viewpoints and beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist church were developed out of groups of Bible students seriously studying Scripture. This includes many of the end time events. Hence, the invitation to study the writings of Uriah Smith and other writers for additional insights into Biblical understanding. There is a considerable wealth of writers in Bible topics other than Ellen White. And again, Ellen White did not invent the Seventh-day Adventist church. She was one of many founders, albeit an important one. JoeMo wrote: This doesn't make sense. You seem to be suggesting that God chose Ellen White, gave her visions, and allowed them to be misinterpreted. Since you seem to be implying that someone with gifts of interpretation and discernment should have been revealing the meanings of her visions, who should have been the interpeter of her visions? JoeMo wrote: What make sense to one, may not make sense to another. Generally, when I find criticism and/or putdowns of Ellen White, I no longer find any reason to keep listening to them. (This is usually more of a real life situation where you can sense the hostility towards Ellen White as you then have the additional ability to make use of non-verbal input. Online, it takes a more strident black & white writing that leaves no room for any other understanding.) And, it does become easy to find holes in these alternative views where they misinterpret Scripture. Sometimes, they even lose any realistic logic.

Ellen White transitioned from anti-trinitarian, like her husband James (who called it a "Romish doctrine") to belief in a divine "third person" about the year 1895. This under the influence of Herbert Lacey, a Trinitarian who came into Adventism from the Church of England. There is no denying the transition. Her earlier statements credit ONLY the Father and the Son for creation, and redemption. I no longer look to Ellen White for personal direction concerning doctrinal beliefs. For me, it is Sola Scriptura.