Leaderboard

There is no Biblical prohibition against second cousin marriages or first cousin marriages either. Some people just get squeamish about those things all the while forgetting we are all descendants of brother-sister marriages! There is no evidence that the Lord is going to curse someone who marries a 2nd cousin. There are no prohibitions regarding 2nd cousin marriages or even 1st cousin marriages within the church that I am aware of. https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qa/qa-archives/question/what-does-the-bible-say-about-marrying-your-first-cousin/ I would venture a guess that the some of the Biblically prohibited marriages were solely for the purpose of not doubling up on bad genes. There were quite a number of rules regarding health practices in the Torah. If it was a first cousin, the pastors may have been on to something depending on where the parties lived. Some states prohibit it and some are OK with it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage_law_in_the_United_States However, if you have solved the problems of Biblical approvals and/or legal implications, the parties to be married should thoroughly vet themselves regarding the genetic issues. Genetic testing and a review of family health history for genetic disorders is a moral obligation to not give to any offspring, if potential offspring were part of the picture, a condition which would give them a less than satisfactory life. So, genetic counseling would be highly recommended. All that said, unrelated people with a personal or family history of genetic disorders frequently marry without giving the same due diligence to the health and welfare of future children. The rights of children are seldom thought of either pre-birth or even after birth as parents marry-divorce-remarry without a thought of the child's welfare. The children are just a caboose on this sad train of human failures.

I would disagree with you on this one. However, I have decided to no longer comment on this topic of the sanctuary in this forum. There are a couple of other topics that I choose not to be part of the discussion because they just get too inflammatory for the sacredness of the topic. I have for some time been doing my own independent study of the sanctuary and have read thru quite a number of books on the topic with more to go. Leslie Hardinge's "With Jesus in His Sanctuary" is next on my list. I am purposefully not reading EGW on this topic until the very last. The early pioneers worked beliefs out thru careful Bible study and when they had, EGW would often have a confirmatory vision regarding their conclusions. EGW was not the source of Adventist beliefs. You can duplicate this experiment over and over again within Adventist circles. Ask a group of Adventists when they last heard a sermon on the sanctuary and no one will be able to remember when that might have been. Why this concerns me is that I have a growing appreciation of the sanctuary in the desert as one highly symbolic physical parable of the entire plan of salvation. Now do you see why it is seldom preached?! People will go on and on how we are saved by the Cross. However, the part of the Cross in the desert sanctuary was represented by the alter of burnt offerings outside the sanctuary. You could erase the sanctuary itself and have the plan of salvation as believed by most Christians. But what was the meaning of everything inside of the sanctuary? For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. Romans 5:10 The Cross only reconciled us to God and the entire human family has been reconciled by the Cross. But we are saved by the life of Jesus. So, short "drive-by" potshots at comments do not do this topic justice.

I read many of the articles. It was a great issue. I agree that the denomination needs to change with the times; but we must be careful. Many denominations that have embraced change to accommodate current society and younger people have also embraced - even celebrate - non-biblical principles - like certain sexual deviancies, one-world religion, and abortion. I'm not going to get any more explicit than that. Young people in general are fleeing organized religion - especially Christianity.

So the term "be perfect even as our Father in heaven is perfect" may have been written only once in the New Testament, but references to be perfect occur frequently. So, score one "gotcha" point for you! Not sure what poisonous snake and moving mountains has to do with this discussion, but Paul actually did have an encounter with a poisonous snake. People in the New Testament also spoke in tongues. People today speak in tongues just as the apostles did. I have heard quite a number of stories of missionaries preaching to an audience and those who did not know the language of the speaker understood him perfectly. Moving mountains is quite the illustration. If one under the direction of God were to order a mountain to be moved as Jesus described, it would be done. Because it has never been known to happen does not invalidate it. Again God (Jesus) does not waste words. I tend to think that a point to be made from this illustration is that one who has the mind of Christ will only ask for things that Christ would want and then anything will be done if asked.

I think I get it now! An individual is free to believe and advocate what they think is right as long as they don't disturb the official Church worship on the Sabbath or on another day that the Church meets officially for something. An individual who disagrees with the Trinity doctrine can do so after and outside of Church but that same individual can't show up Saturday with 30 quotes from Ellen White that are irreconcilable with the Trinity Doctrine and attempt to get traction for his view inside the Church or at an official Church gathering . This is very much like Judaism at the time of Christ.