Leaderboard

Regarding the 18lb. Bible- J. N. Loughborough wrote in his book "The Great Second Advent movement"of the holding up of this Bible. What we have missed about this story is that it was an attempt by "unbelievers" Robbins and Sargent to prove that Sister Ellen's visions were of the devil. The belief at the time was that placing a Bible on someone in a vision from the devil would break the spell. I photographed the pages rather than typing them all out. The visions were also discussed: https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/652.86 And were part of this book: https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/652/info A Youtube video also dramatizes the event: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_CAQD11kBk

It does not add up as we understand it. I can refer you to 5SDABC, 1980 edition, pages 248 through 251, which provides an extensive discussion of this issue. I Do not think that I could give a good summation of what it says there in a post here.

Without getting into a discussion of the actual year that Christ died, there are two issues: 1) In the time of Christ, the Passover was celebrated on a couple of different dates by the different Jewish sects. I think. I should probably look more into this. 2) Hebrew culture in that time considered the phrase "three days and three nights" to fit the Friday to Sunday schedule. It is the same type of thing as if I were to say: It has been raining cats and dogs. Few would misunderstand me.

If we lose our free will, we will cease to be the sentient divine imagers that we were created to be. Without our free will, we are simply robots fueled by vegeburger and broccoli. If we are "programmed" to love, trust and obey, are we really voluntarily following God?

Quote: In the spring of A. D. 31, Christ the true sacrifice was offered on Calvary. {DA 233.2} Quote: “And in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease.” In A. D. 31, three and a half years after his baptism, our Lord was crucified. With the great sacrifice offered upon Calvary, ended that system of offerings which for four thousand years had pointed forward to the Lamb of God. Type had met antitype, and all the sacrifices and oblations of the ceremonial system were there to cease. {GC88 327.3} And this would have been the year based on the 2300 day and 70 week prophesy. As to the reckoning of time, Christ was taken into captivity on what we call Thursday evening, and raised from the dead Sunday, 6th day evening and morning, 7th day evening and morning, 1st day evening, raised early morning, 3 days and 3 nights.

Seventh-day Adventist scholars have generally believed that the exact date for the crucifixion of Christ can not be absolutely determined. * They have ruled out a date founded in ancient tradition of 29 CE (AD) * They have generally held that the crucifixion probably occurred during either 30 CE, or 31 CE or 33 CE. * As early as the 13th century, the crucifixion was thought to have occurred in 33 CE. Today, this is a minority view. The evidence is considered strong for a rejection of this view. Part of the reason for the rejection of this is that it was based upon what we now believe to be a faulty understanding of the Jewish calendar. There are also other reasons for rejecting t his date. * CE 30 has probably been the most common current belief as to the crucifixion. But, this date is based upon some assumptions that are rejected by some scholars. * CE 31 has more generally been accepted as the date for the crucifixion by SDA scholars. * However, the data is not conclusive. The actual date can not be established from what we know about the lunar-calendar system of the Jews. My personal position is: 1) We do not conclusively know. 2) I am comfortable with and date in the 30 - 33 range. 3) This is not an important issue that matters. 4) In my personal ministry I lean toward the 31 date.

I read the stuff you sent me; and it was very helpful. I will pass it on to the person who confronted me with this. I personally now have no doubt that Jesus was crucified on a Friday and rose on Sunday.

I have attended the same non-denominational community church for 29 years with some extended absences when my work took me away to areas where there was no church. The current pastor is "law free" and declines to discuss the Bible with me or to answer my emailed questions regarding how he reconciles his beliefs with various Bible passages. I'd guess from his responses that I'm not paying him to not hurt my feelings. Because his "law free" teachings tend to be self-contradictory even within the same sermon, those sermons have not been very convincing even to those who have never been SDA. Some of his other sermons are very good, especially when he upholds the Old Testament teachings of Jesus. I am far more aware of how the term "law" is used in the New Testament than you give me credit for. In one passage in Romans Paul uses the term in at least four different ways, possibly six. But I wasn't quoting from Romans. Yes, it does. And the context in Acts 24:14 is one of the times when "the Law" and "the Prophets" refer to the main sections of the Old Testament. Paul was speaking in Israel within the Jewish culture so we would need to find out what those terms mean in that culture rather than project our own modern Christian interpretations anachronistically back onto what Paul stated.

If it was "well known that Paul was teaching a law free gospel" how effective would it be for him to go up to the temple to convince the Jews that he was law observant? That wouldn't have worked any better than if you went up to the Temple to try to convince the Jews that you are law observant. Were the Jewish followers of Jesus at that time all simpletons that could easily be fooled? Probably not. They had already been persecuted for their beliefs. They also knew that a few years earlier people had dropped dead for trying to fool the leaders of the Jerusalem congregation, so that isn't something that Paul or others would attempt lightly. The most likely reason that Paul went up to the Temple at Jerusalem was because in Acts 18:18 he had started a vow, which many commentators identify as a Nazarene vow (from Numbers 6). The Nazarene vow required the person to complete the vow by offering sacrifices at the Temple, so Paul was probably already intending to go to the Temple long before he arrived in Jerusalem. Of course, you don't know what I've read or what sources I rely on. If you were actually trying to teach truth, I don't see the point of trying to belittle those who disagree with yourself. It appears that you attempting to distract from the fact that you haven't even attempted to effectively respond to several of the issues that have been raised in this thread regarding your "law free" interpretations of Scripture.

Recently, I was sent a link to a video tha suggest that Christ was actually a Buddhist and asked to comment on it. In response to that person, I made the following comments: I have reviewed that video that you sent me. My comments below are unorganized. · * There is a central issue here that is foundational to Christianity. That issue is a fundamental belief that in order to restore a relationship between humanity and God, God had to take on the nature of humanity and live and die in that human form. · * Jesus Christ was exactly that, God living the life and death of humanity. · * If That is not what God did, Christianity is a failed, false system of religion. · * As I review the video, I am reminded of Islam, which teaches that Isa was a human Jesus. I was not aware that Buddhism also taught such. · * The above is only one example of teachings related to Buddhism that are also found in other religions. · * The name Jesus is a Latin word related to the Hebrew word Joshua. As such is was a somewhat common name in the time of Christ. There a number of burial boxes have been discovered that contained the bones of a Hebrew with a form of the name in Hebrew of Jesus. · * This is why in the Bible Jesus is often called Jesus Christ, to distinguish from the others. · * John 19:14 relates how a Roman guard rammed a spear into the chest of Jesus on the cross in order to make certain that Jesus was really died and this resulted in a great loss of blood. This negates the idea that Jesus could have survived the cross. · * A Christian understanding of the “wise men” who visited at the birth of Christ is that they were philosophers who had studied the Hebrew Scriptures . I tend to agree with this position. · * If I were to agree with the idea of the video that they were not such, I would wonder if perhaps they were followers of Zoroastrianism, rather than Buddhism. However, I do not know enough about this to clearly state such. · * Islam (Quran) and some Christians (Bible) believe that the written revelation of God came in a dictated from. Therefore, any error in what we have today demonstrates the falsity of the idea of a divine origin of that revelation. · * I do not accept this idea. Rather I believe that there is clearly a human element in what I understand to be the Bible. This human element is shown by some of the differences that we have in the accounts of the death and resurrection of Christ. In actuality, the video picked and chose from the accounts what it wanted without discussing some of the other variations. · * There are stories of the so-called Lost Tribes of Israel. The video seems to reflect some of this. Those stories seem to be a mixture of truth and fable. · * There are many stories of the life of Christ in his early years, w hen he was living in Egypt and other such. Again, those stories can not be substantiated. They are probably mostly false. · * The religious sites in Jerusalem may not always be what they are claimed to be. · * The Knights Templar legends are a mixture of truth and fable. · * Christ was buried in a grave. · * The mixture of stuff brought to embalm Christ was designed in part to cover the smell of a dead body. · * The Roman guards at the grave would have been executed if they had allowed anyone to remove the body of Christ. The followers of Christ could not have done so. · * Yes, normally, a person on the cross, lived for longer than Christ is said to have lived. Normal life always has exceptions. · * The idea that God could mate with humanity and produce children is simply a violation of basic Christianity and can only be beloved by those who believe that Christ was only human. · * In brief, while I find the video to be interesting, I am not convinced. .

? Heareth my sayings ? Luk 6:47 Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like:

5 Things You Didn't Know About Marilyn Monroe_2 On June 1, 1926, Marilyn Monroe was born. She eventually grew up to become one of the most iconic sex symbols in America. Here are 5 things you probably didn’t know about the girl who went from working in a radio plane factory during the war to being one of America’s best-known actresses... Her Breathy Voice Was Due to a Speech Impediment Monroe stuttered when she was young, particularly if she was nervous or excited. She went to a speech therapist, who helped her overcome her stuttering by adopting her famous airy voice. While she was making her last movie, Something’s Got to Give, her stutter returned. Her First Marriage Had Been Arranged Monroe was still going by the name Norma Jean Baker at age 15 and was living with Grace Goddard, a family friend. However, Goddard moved and Monroe would have been forced to go to an orphanage or another foster home, so she decided to marry instead. She married at age 16 to the neighbor next door, James Dougherty, but the marriage only lasted a little over four years. Monroe Changed Her Name a Number of Times Monroe’s birth name was Norma Jeane Mortensen, and she was born in Los Angeles to Gladys Pearl Baker. When she was in her 20s, she did modeling using the names Mona Monroe and Jean Norman, then changed her name to Jean Adair when she started acting. She used the name Marilyn Monroe from 1946 on, but it was 10 years before she legally changed her name. Monroe Was Far From Being the Stereotyped Dumb Blonde Monroe may have sounded like a dumb blonde on screen, but she was the opposite. She enjoyed being around intelligent people and was an avid reader with a collection of more than 400 books. She was a shrewd businesswoman who headed a production company and was attracted to intelligent men such as her third husband, playwright Arthur Miller. She Had an Unusual Diet Monroe was known to have an odd but healthy diet that was heavy in protein. In the mornings, she would take warm milk and whip two raw eggs in it and drink it. She ate broiled lamb chops or steak for dinner as well as a number of raw carrots. However, she did occasionally indulge herself by going to an ice cream parlor to enjoy a hot fudge sundae.

Of course your analysis is correct. Jesus would die for the sins of mankind, regardless. Nevertheless, Stephen, when on trial before the Sanhedrin, the representatives of the Jewish nation, called them the "betrayers and murderers" of "the Just One." What's sad is not the outcome, but the rebellion and murder that was in their hearts. Stephen was, of course, pointing it out for a good purpose, in order to bring them to repentance. We are ALL guilty of the blood of Christ. There is absolutely no ground for looking down on the Jewish nation, who are prophesied to eventually repent as a people. That's more than can be said for many who judge and look down upon others.

Lou: Related to the previous chapter on the emergency measures, a questioner writes, “I was disappointed that you used Galatians 3:19-25 as referring to the Ten Commandments, whereas I think Paul was concerned about the doctrine of circumcision. The entire book of Galatians was an endeavor to change the church’s view of the ‘ceremonial’ law. […] The post Questions and Answers (12:14) appeared first on Jon Paulien's Blog. View the full article

The Wanderer and I communicate off this site. He has left Adventistan. But he sent this message: "I should have mentioned that the reason I have left the forum is not because I was asked to, its just something I felt I needed to do. Although I have had a number of unpleasant experiences there which were already making me rethink what I do online, I felt I needed to devote more time & energy to my studies in Linux certification, web design & photography. You can keep an eye on my developing web site skills at https://lightintheclouds.ca/

? Healed them all ? Mat 12:15 But when Jesus knew it, he withdrew himself from thence: and great multitudes followed him, and he healed them all;

We are all responsible individually for how we relate to God. It is not the responsibility of a denomination to instruct us how to do so. It's obvious to me that different people and cultures relate to scripture differently. If this were not so, there would not be thousands of Christian denominations. For me, Adventism come closest to how I want to relate to God. For my siblings, it is still Catholicism. For my daughter and her husband, it's Calvary Chapel. Although I won't say a rosary, I have no problem otherwise worshiping with any of them. I would continue to attend an SDA Church even if I was disfellowshipped.