Robert Posted April 20, 2008 Posted April 20, 2008 Excellent questions. I think it is disingenuous to quote a person as authority only when she backs up one's position and then reject those that are contrary.Gerry I'm NOT quoting her as an authority....So zip it! Quote
Robert Posted April 20, 2008 Posted April 20, 2008 No author is placed in this position that I know of. Since when is there a rule that states you have to agree 100% with an author in order to quote said author? Never heard of that one .... It's the 11th command....Another rule to keep to enter heaven. Thanks for defending my right to quote her.... Quote
Moderators John317 Posted April 20, 2008 Moderators Posted April 20, 2008 Quote: Excellent questions. I think it is disingenuous to quote a person as authority only when she backs up one's position and then reject those that are contrary. This is simply ridiculous. No one person has ALL the answers nor is one person Perfect. In with the good ... out with the bad. No author is placed in this position that I know of. Since when is there a rule that states you have to agree 100% with an author in order to quote said author? Never heard of that one .... Therefore, the next time Robert and some others quote scripture or Ellen White, I guess it would be OK if I say I don't accept that verse or that statement. because it disagrees with my views. For instance, Robert quotes Ellen White on children without mothers being in heaven, and he wants me to be convinced on that basis about some theological position he's taking. But what if I have the same attitude toward Ellen White that he and some others have? That would mean I accept what I want of the scriptures and of Ellen White, but I simply toss out what I don't like or don't find agreeable to me. So, that being the case, don't quote me Ellen White or certain parts of the Bible that I disagree with. And don't quote Jack Sequeira, because he is not my pope. Does any of this have a familiar ring to it? Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted April 20, 2008 Moderators Posted April 20, 2008 Originally Posted By: John317 Please go back and read ALL of the chapter "The Test of Discipleship" in Steps To Christ. Is there anything in that chapter you disagree with? I would be willing to wager that there is. "We [EGW includes herself] have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those who think that they will never have to give up a cherished view, never have occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed...." [EGW] And, "When the power of God testifies as to what is truth, that truth is to stand forever as the truth" (Counsels To Writers and Editors, p. 31). Now read 1 SM 26, 27, 40-45. What does she say about people who only use her statements to prove a favorite idea, but then jettison her when she doesn't agree with their opinions? Did you know you could also say the same thing about any of the Bible prophets? None of them had all the truth and none of them were infallible. One of the cherished views many in the church had to give up was that Christ was not fully God. A "cherished opinion," yes. We need to be willing to give those up. But something that God has revealed either to the Bible prophets or to Ellen White were not mere opinion. She didn't give her opinion, any more than Paul did, and then send it out as God's word. Her private opinions are different from the things she wrote on the basis of what God had shown her in visions and dreams. Read what she says about the "pillars of our faith" or the "landmarks." These she said are never to be removed or changed. See Counsels To Writers and Editors, pp. 28-54. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Woody Posted April 20, 2008 Posted April 20, 2008 We are all sinners but we are all Predestined to be saved. We can except that or reject it. Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
Robert Posted April 21, 2008 Posted April 21, 2008 John....It is a known fact that Traditional & Historic SDA push Ellen White to the extreme as in except her or else. She is either lifted up to be equal with the Bible or above it. She clearly stated that she had limited light, but folks like yourself refuse to accept this. That's your problem! "We [EGW includes herself] have only the glimmerings of the rays of the light [truth] that is yet to come to us." 1] Define a glimmer: "A faint, unsteady light; feeble, scattered rays of light; also, a gleam." 2] Notice that "that is yet to come" is in the future tense! How do I read her quote? We have only faint, feeble, scattered rays of truth compared to that, which is yet to come to us. Then why do many Adventists make Ellen White the end all be all of human existence? She plainly states she had limited light. Answer: Ego and self-righteousness. We have the truth...we keep the law. We, we, we....Where's the selflessness? Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted April 21, 2008 Moderators Posted April 21, 2008 Quote: Excellent questions. I think it is disingenuous to quote a person as authority only when she backs up one's position and then reject those that are contrary. This is simply ridiculous. No one person has ALL the answers nor is one person Perfect. In with the good ... out with the bad. No author is placed in this position that I know of. Since when is there a rule that states you have to agree 100% with an author in order to quote said author? Never heard of that one .... It is dishonest, my dear Redwood, to quote someone as authority only lifting out those that agree with you and totally disregard those that disproves your ideas on the very same subject. Honesty demands that a searcher for truth takes everything a person has said on the subject before making conclusions as to what that person really said about the subject. Gerry Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted April 21, 2008 Moderators Posted April 21, 2008 Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo And when does justification and reconciliation occur? 2000 yrs ago for me? Ridiculous! I was not there to reject or accept Him! Then you weren't in Adam when He sinned either. Are you from Mars? We are the multiplication of Adam's life after the fall. Hence you were born a sinner...born loving yourself...born selfish. That life came from Adam....You are the same material as Adam, only your life experiences are different. Nevertheless you born a slave to your love of self. Hopefully your are maturing.... Christ rewrote your history and justified you as a free gift. But like any gift you can refuse and play the legalist. Quote: He may start with a lot of warts and sores, but by the process of sanctification.... I'm sorry...did you say something again? Your quote says "ALL THINGS have become new"! Be honest....Warts and such isn't a new creature. Ever hear of the word hyperbole? See Rom 1:8, John 12:19 for examples. Gerry Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted April 21, 2008 Moderators Posted April 21, 2008 John....It is a known fact that Traditional & Historic SDA push Ellen White to the extreme as in except her or else. She is either lifted up to be equal with the Bible or above it. She clearly stated that she had limited light, but folks like yourself refuse to accept this. That's your problem! "We [EGW includes herself] have only the glimmerings of the rays of the light [truth] that is yet to come to us." 1] Define a glimmer: "A faint, unsteady light; feeble, scattered rays of light; also, a gleam." 2] Notice that "that is yet to come" is in the future tense! Has it occurred to you that she made that statement 100 some yrs ago? You don't think any progress has been made since then? Reminds of the story a former editor of the R & H said. He was reading what EGW said which was: "You eat too much." So he cut his food consumption down. The next time he read the satement, it still said, "You eat too much!" How long can he keep reading the same statement and keep cutting his consumption down before he starved to death? Gerry Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted April 21, 2008 Moderators Posted April 21, 2008 Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo Excellent questions. I think it is disingenuous to quote a person as authority only when she backs up one's position and then reject those that are contrary.Gerry I'm NOT quoting her as an authority....So zip it! Then STOP quoting her while disregarding what else she has to say that contradicts your position!!! It is totally dishonest to quote her like she was the pope when it is convenient and then say she's not my pope when she contradicts you!!! Let's stick to the Bible and THE Bible only!!!!!!!!!!! Gerry Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted April 21, 2008 Moderators Posted April 21, 2008 Originally Posted By: Redwood No author is placed in this position that I know of. Since when is there a rule that states you have to agree 100% with an author in order to quote said author? Never heard of that one .... It's the 11th command....Another rule to keep to enter heaven. Thanks for defending my right to quote her.... There is no law against not accepting 100% or even 1% of what anyone says or writes, however, an honest searcher of truth would take into account what that person said or wrote when presenting her position about a subject, not just taking one or two statements and then disregard as irrelevant what else she had to say!!! Gerry Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted April 21, 2008 Moderators Posted April 21, 2008 Has it ever occurred to you that you yourself have cherished opinions that you won't give up even though they are directly contradicted by the Word? Gerry Quote
Robert Posted April 21, 2008 Posted April 21, 2008 Originally Posted By: Robert Then you weren't in Adam when He sinned either. Are you from Mars? We are the multiplication of Adam's life after the fall. Hence you were born a sinner...born loving yourself...born selfish. That life came from Adam....You are the same material as Adam' date=' only your life experiences are different. Nevertheless you born a slave to your love of self. Hopefully your are maturing.... Christ rewrote your history and justified you as a free gift. But like any gift you can refuse and play the legalist. Quote: He may start with a lot of warts and sores, but by the process of sanctification.... I'm sorry...did you say something again? Your quote says "ALL THINGS have become new"! Be honest....Warts and such isn't a new creature. [/quote'][color:blue] Ever hear of the word hyperbole?Gerry Oh stop it! Take it as it reads: "ALL THINGS"! Quote
Robert Posted April 21, 2008 Posted April 21, 2008 Originally Posted By: Robert John....It is a known fact that Traditional & Historic SDA push Ellen White to the extreme as in except her or else. She is either lifted up to be equal with the Bible or above it. She clearly stated that she had limited light, but folks like yourself refuse to accept this. That's your problem! "We [EGW includes herself] have only the glimmerings of the rays of the light [truth] that is yet to come to us." 1] Define a glimmer: "A faint, unsteady light; feeble, scattered rays of light; also, a gleam." 2] Notice that "that is yet to come" is in the future tense! [color:blue] Has it occurred to you that she made that statement 100 some yrs ago? You don't think any progress has been made since then? Not from Ellen White....She died with limited light according to her own quote. Now "yes" progress has been made thanks to folks like Jack Sequeira, Morris Venden, Robert Wieland, etc. Quote
Robert Posted April 21, 2008 Posted April 21, 2008 Has it ever occurred to you that you yourself have cherished opinions that you won't give up even though they are directly contradicted by the Word? Gerry I have limited light too...but I can't say what I state contradicts the Bible. It contradicts your traditional understanding maybe, but that's not my problem. Quote
Robert Posted April 21, 2008 Posted April 21, 2008 ...an honest searcher of truth would take into account what that person said or wrote when presenting her position about a subject, not just taking one or two statements and then disregard as irrelevant what else she had to say!!! Okay, Gerry. Please explain the below, especially those words highlighted in red: -PC- RH -PT- Advent Review and Sabbath Herald -DT- 05-07-01 -AT- The Great Standard of Righteousness -PR- 09 Complete obedience is the only condition that meets the requirement of the law. “God is not a man, that He should lie.” God’s law is the rule of His government. He says, “This do, and thou shalt live.” But to the disobedient He says, “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written in the book of the law to do them.” “The soul that sinneth, it shall die.” God has given the promise that those who obey His law will be rewarded, not only in the present life, but in the life to come. He declares just as decidedly that those who do not obey His requirements shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on them. By lips that never lie the obedient are blessed, and the disobedient are pronounced guilty. Quote
Robert Posted April 21, 2008 Posted April 21, 2008 Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo Then STOP quoting her while disregarding what else she has to say that contradicts your position!!! Not "no"' date=' but heck "no"! Quote: It is totally dishonest to quote her like she was the pope when it is convenient and then say she's not my pope when she contradicts you!!![/quote'] I don't quote her as if she is my pope, you do! Quote
Woody Posted April 21, 2008 Posted April 21, 2008 Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo Has it ever occurred to you that you yourself have cherished opinions that you won't give up even though they are directly contradicted by the Word? Gerry I have limited light too...but I can't say what I state contradicts the Bible. It contradicts your traditional understanding maybe, but that's not my problem. Robert ... I hope to point this out in as a polite way as possible ... but Gerry didn't direct his comment to you. He was talking to John317 if you will notice. He was saying that John317 had some cherished opinions that he wouldn't let go of. Of course you know that you and I would not do that. I am glad that he didn't accuse you or I of this. But I am concerned that he would even direct it towards John317. Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
Moderators John317 Posted April 22, 2008 Moderators Posted April 22, 2008 Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo [color:blue] Has it occurred to you that she made that statement 100 some yrs ago? You don't think any progress has been made since then? Not from Ellen White....She died with limited light according to her own quote. Now "yes" progress has been made thanks to folks like Jack Sequeira, Morris Venden, Robert Wieland, etc. Can you name any of the prophets who did not have "limited light"? Even Jesus Himself said that in his humanity he had limited light. God has never revealed all of the light of truth through or to any single prophet. However, just because they have limited light does not mean we can expect a different prophet of God to come along and say the previous prophet was wrong in what they claimed that God revealed to them. All of the true prophets agree among themselves. Therefore, although Ellen White came after the canon was closed, she was nevertheless as genuine a prophet of God as anyone who lived previously. You can't be half or part prophet. You either are or you aren't. It would be as possible to be half pregnant as to be half a prophet. What makes a person a prophet, typically, is that God sends them dreams and visions and then, if they are a writing prophet, sends the Holy Spirit to guide them in the writing of it. While Ellen White is to be judged by the Bible, and not the Bible by her, if she was a true prophet, she was as truly a prophet as anyone in the Bible. She was only "lesser" because she was born after the canon was closed, and not because she was less inspired. One prophet of God is not less inspired than another genuine prophet. What made her a prophet? Was it because she was superior to others? No, she was a prophetess because of God's selection and because Christ commissioned her as His messenger. Some people talk as if Ellen White was inspired like we say a person is inspired to write a song or like someone is inspired to do any number of things. But in this they mistake what the Bible means when it says prophets or their writings are "inspired." They are God-breathed. As 2 Sam. 23: 2 says, God puts His words in the prophets mouth, etc., so that when the prophet speaks or writes, he or she is giving God's thoughts and words, not their own. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Robert Posted April 22, 2008 Posted April 22, 2008 Can you name any of the prophets who did not have "limited light"? Quote
Robert Posted April 22, 2008 Posted April 22, 2008 Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo ...an honest searcher of truth would take into account what that person said or wrote when presenting her position about a subject, not just taking one or two statements and then disregard as irrelevant what else she had to say!!! Okay, Gerry. Please explain the below, especially those words highlighted in red: -PC- RH -PT- Advent Review and Sabbath Herald -DT- 05-07-01 -AT- The Great Standard of Righteousness -PR- 09 Complete obedience is the only condition that meets the requirement of the law. “God is not a man, that He should lie.” God’s law is the rule of His government. He says, “This do, and thou shalt live.” But to the disobedient He says, “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written in the book of the law to do them.” “The soul that sinneth, it shall die.” God has given the promise that those who obey His law will be rewarded, not only in the present life, but in the life to come. He declares just as decidedly that those who do not obey His requirements shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on them. By lips that never lie the obedient are blessed, and the disobedient are pronounced guilty. I challenge you on this one too, John. Quote
Moderators John317 Posted April 22, 2008 Moderators Posted April 22, 2008 Originally Posted By: John317 Can you name any of the prophets who did not have "limited light"? Trying to bring the Bible writers down to lift up EGW? Shame! EGW White claimed to be the "lesser light". Please remember that. Thanks. It's isn't a matter of bringing Bible writers down; it's a matter of seeing them as the Bible itself does. Does the Bible teach that any of the writers had "unlimited light"? Did Moses have "unlimited light"? How about Isaiah? How about James? Quote: Even Jesus Himself said that in his humanity he had limited light. Quote: Oh boy.... God revealed 100% truth through Him. He said, "I am the truth, the light and the way." End of story. Not so fast, Robert. You yourself have told me that you believe that Jesus only knew what the Father revealed to Him. And Jesus admitted that He did not know everything. He himself said, "Of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone." Therefore it is self-evident that Jesus as a man did not possess unlimited knowledge or light. The point is that every prophet has had "limited light." Therefore the distinction between the Bible prophets and Ellen White is not that the Bible prophets had all the light and Ellen White had limited light. Actually I think it's obvious that there many things revealed to her that the Bible prophets knew nothing about. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted April 22, 2008 Moderators Posted April 22, 2008 Originally Posted By: Robert Okay, Gerry. Please explain the below, especially those words highlighted in red: -PC- RH -PT- Advent Review and Sabbath Herald -DT- 05-07-01 -AT- The Great Standard of Righteousness -PR- 09 Complete obedience is the only condition that meets the requirement of the law. “God is not a man, that He should lie.” God’s law is the rule of His government. He says, “This do, and thou shalt live.” But to the disobedient He says, “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written in the book of the law to do them.” “The soul that sinneth, it shall die.” God has given the promise that those who obey His law will be rewarded, not only in the present life, but in the life to come. He declares just as decidedly that those who do not obey His requirements shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on them. By lips that never lie the obedient are blessed, and the disobedient are pronounced guilty. [/quote'] I challenge you on this one too, John. (1) Did Ellen White preface her statement by saying that she was referring to "complete" or absolute obedience to the law of God? In other words, is she talking about the necessity of being sinless? (2) Is she saying that this is speaking of an attempt to obey the law of God for the purpose of earning righteousness and salvation? (3) Do you believe that any human besides Christ can be said to be "obedient" to God? Can anyone be said to obey God's commandments or His law? Finally, where is the Ellen White quote found in a standard publication? What is PC, PT, DT, AT, and PR? I don't have any publications of hers with these abbreviations. This explains it: Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 372, 373-- The terms of the "old covenant" were, Obey and live: "If a man do, he shall even live in them" (Ezekiel 20:11; Leviticus 18:5); but "cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them." Deuteronomy 27:26. The "new covenant" was established upon "better promises"--the promise of forgiveness of sins and of the grace of God to renew the heart and bring it into harmony with the principles of God's law. "This shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts . . . . I will forgive their iniquity, and will remember their sin no more." Jeremiah 31:33, 34. The same law that was engraved upon the tables of stone is written by the Holy Spirit upon the tables of the heart. Instead of going about to establish our own righteousness we accept the righteousness of Christ. His blood atones for our sins. His obedience is accepted for us. Then the heart renewed by the Holy Spirit will bring forth "the fruits of the Spirit." Through the grace of Christ we shall live in obedience to the law of God written upon our hearts. Having the Spirit of Christ, we shall walk even as He walked. Through the prophet He declared of Himself, "I delight to do Thy will, O My God: yea, Thy law is within My heart." Psalm 40:8. And when among men He said, "The Father hath not left Me alone; for I do always those things that please Him." John 8:29. The apostle Paul clearly presents the relation between faith and the law under the new covenant. He says: "Being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." "Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law." "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh"--it could not justify man, because in his sinful nature he could not keep the law--"God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Romans 5:1, 3:31, 8:3, 4. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Robert Posted April 22, 2008 Posted April 22, 2008 Actually I think it's obvious that there many things revealed to her that the Bible prophets knew nothing about. Supposition....And the way she interpreted those things had to be colored by her religions views of her time. She is not free of error. Christ was.... Quote
Robert Posted April 22, 2008 Posted April 22, 2008 Originally Posted By: Robert I challenge you on this one too, John.[/quote'] Quote: Finally, where is the Ellen White quote found in a standard publication? What is PC, PT, DT, AT, and PR? I don't have any publications of hers with these abbreviations. Ellen White CD. Advent Review and Sabbath Herald Quote: The terms of the "old covenant" were, Obey and live: "If a man do, he shall even live in them" (Ezekiel 20:11; Leviticus 18:5); but "cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them." Deuteronomy 27:26. Okay...now you are getting somewhere! Why would Ellen White give us Old Covenant demands? Compare the red highlighted areas in both my quote and your quote. Tell me why she would give Old Covenant statements? Yes? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.