A much needed letter from David Asscherick

[oldsailor29]

The point is that if we followed the teachings of Jesus, we would study the whole Bible, because He said to. If we only studied Jesus' teachings then we'd have no Daniel or Revelation to show the future, no Historical books to show us how God worked in the past, no epistles to give us guidance, etc.

That's an excellent point for history and prophecy, but I think our understanding of how God works should be left in the "I don't really know" column.   Guidance is another thing.   Jesus guided the disciples and He will guide us, if we read His teachings.

Most people do not realize how much is contained in the quotations of Jesus.   The information there is practically inexhaustible.   And why wouldn't it be infinite wisdom?    It was spoken by God in the flesh.

Oh yes (in the words of Kinky Friedman) "I'm high on Jesus,"  and  "friend, ya just can't keep a good man down."

[SivartM]

That's an excellent point for history and prophecy, but I think our understanding of how God works should be left in the "I don't really know" column.   Guidance is another thing.   Jesus guided the disciples and He will guide us, if we read His teachings.

[oldsailor29]

Originally Posted By: oldsailor29

That's an excellent point for history and prophecy, but I think our understanding of how God works should be left in the "I don't really know" column.   Guidance is another thing.   Jesus guided the disciples and He will guide us, if we read His teachings.

Not "how God works", but "how God has worked in the past", as in, what He has done for His people throughout history. And just because Jesus will guide us does not mean that there is not important guidance elsewhere in the Bible that Jesus did not specifically mention in the gospels. Remember, He said a lot more than was recorded; the gospels contain the main points, but other books contain different applications.

Quote:

Most people do not realize how much is contained in the quotations of Jesus.   The information there is practically inexhaustible.   And why wouldn't it be infinite wisdom?    It was spoken by God in the flesh.

The same could be (and should be) said about the rest of the Bible. The whole Bible contains inexhaustible wisdom from God. Why do you think both Jesus and the Bible are called "the Word"? Instead of limiting our beliefs to only the gospels, we should teach the gospel from all the books of the Bible.

Okay well, when you discover that much like the pharisees, SDA scholars have misinterpreted the rest of the Bible for doctrines, just remember to turn your eyes toward Jesus.   He and He alone will lead us up the straight and narrow path to the holy city.   We have the "midnight cry" illuminating the path from behind, and if we deny that message or do not keep our focus on Jesus on the path ahead, then we will fall by the wayside.   Like Ellen White, all the other divinely inspired writers were lesser lights who lead us to Jesus the greater light.   He said "I am the light of the world."   Jesus taught everything we need to know.   So, just keep the faith in Jesus, and when the time comes to get off the ever narrowing road that leads to nowhere, swing across the abyss to the straight and narrow path on cords which are held by Jesus.

[SivartM]

Okay well, when you discover that much like the pharisees, SDA scholars have misinterpreted the rest of the Bible for doctrines, just remember to turn your eyes toward Jesus.   He and He alone will lead us up the straight and narrow path to the holy city.   We have the "midnight cry" illuminating the path from behind, and if we deny that message or do not keep our focus on Jesus on the path ahead, then we will fall by the wayside.

[Dr. Rich]

Didn't Jesus say that He came to testify to the truth? Didn't He also say His mission to this earth was finished before He died? In John 14:26 Jesus told His desciples (ONLY) that the Holy Spirit would cause them to remember every word He said. John 15 and 17 show us that Jesus told the desciples what His Father told Him to tell them. He also prayed (read it-for it is powerful) for those who would READ the words from the eyewitness ONLY (not from Paul, Luke or the unknown writer of Hebrews and the unknown writer of 1st and 2nd Peter).

Chain of custody in evidence is very important in court. The same is true with this issue. It came from the Father, repeated by His Son, and repeated by the eyewitnesses. The bible was not around when Jesus spoke--only the law and the prophets (Old Testament).

So why is it that when I repeat the words of Jesus from the eyewitnesses, that I am so critized and chastized by my fellow SDA members? No where did Jesus teach salvation by faith and grace!

[SivartM]

Didn't Jesus say that He came to testify to the truth? Didn't He also say His mission to this earth was finished before He died? In John 14:26 Jesus told His desciples (ONLY) that the Holy Spirit would cause them to remember every word He said. John 15 and 17 show us that Jesus told the desciples what His Father told Him to tell them. He also prayed (read it-for it is powerful) for those who would READ the words from the eyewitness ONLY (not from Paul, Luke or the unknown writer of Hebrews and the unknown writer of 1st and 2nd Peter).

[Ted Oplinger]

I must disagree with your assessment there, Old Sailor.

I am quite convinced there is not a single point which Jesus taught upon which cannot be found in the Old Testament. What Christ did was wipe off the rubbish of human speculations and traditions from it all. After all, it was the pre-Incarnate Christ who gave the testimony to the OT writers in the first place.

Furthermore, I have found there isn't a Biblical truth in the New Testament which cannot be traced back to a root teaching in the Old. All the NT fav's - love, grace, justification and righteousness by faith - they're all there.

I cannot limit Christ's presence and words in the Bible to just the 4 Gospels. That He was not yet made incarnate is no justification to dismiss the OT as a testimony of Christ's witness through His prophets an servants. That He is not here on earth now is also no justification to dismiss the NT as a continued testimony of Christ's witness, again, through His servants. It is those principles and words, throughout the Bible, that are the narrow path Christ has called us to travel. That path will take the believer high above the world.

The chain is all too clear to me, and I see it demonstrated in Revelation 1:1,2 - "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John, who testified to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw."

Given to Christ by God; Christ communicates it to His servants, who then testify of what Christ has given them.

It has been the same motif for thousands of years, and was how the OT, the NT, and the Gospels were written. Yes, the Gospels aren't the original published words of Christ as spoken by Him - they were remembered and written down 20-30 years after the fact, through the same format the Law, Prophets, Wisdom, Histories, and Epistles were all written: by the Spirit moving upon His servants to communicate what Christ wants taught to His people.

It is the same motif for Christ's witness through the ministry of E.G. White, who in her writings declared that those who could not confess the light given them on that high road (source of this end-time light is the Bible) fell off that high road into the dark world beneath.

The wrong road, to take the the very path laid down in Life Sketches/Early Writings? Curiouser, and curiouser...

[Ted Oplinger]

Dr. Rich,

Quote:

for those who would READ the words from the eyewitness ONLY (not from Paul, Luke or the unknown writer of Hebrews and the unknown writer of 1st and 2nd Peter)

So you disagree with Christ's testimony through Paul that He is not one whit inferior to the other apostles? That he was taken into heaven to be given his own eyewitness account, since he was the apostle God had in mind to replace Judas? Never mind the fact that Paul was indeed Christ's contemporary, was quite acquainted with the testimony of Christ, and did witenss the resurrection - from the opposition's side...and never mind the fact that Peter's rush to fill the vacancy by casting lots - Matthias - is never heard from again.

Each of the rest of the Disciples has a fate recorded somewhere in Christendom's historical annals. To my knowledge, Matthias does not.

Quote:

The bible was not around when Jesus spoke--only the law and the prophets (Old Testament).

Christ calls the OT the Scriptures in John 10:35, when referencing Psalms 82:6. The OT Scriptures (the Law, the Prophets, the Books of Wisdom, and the Histories) were already canonized by the time Christ was born.

"Bible" is simply short for the Greek "biblion" - a word also used to reference the Scriptures.

One says "Po-tay-to", another says "Po-tah-to".

Scriptures/Bible...both words reference the same collection of writings.

Quote:

No where did Jesus teach salvation by faith and grace!

Hmmm...I seem to remember there's a famous meal Christ reclined at, in the house of one Simon the Pharisee. At this gathering, a rather famous event - the annointing of Christ by a woman of less than noble repute, with some very costly perfume.

After rebuking Judas' self-righteousness, and Simon's cold-hearted selfishness, what does Jesus say about this woman?

One, that her sins were forgiven. Two, that her faith has saved her. Words of Christ, right there.

Sorry, Dr. Rich, it doesn't get much clearer than that.

I will venture further to say that faith is what Christ consistently taught to be the very mechanism through which God achieved His work in man - from healing to casting out of demons to salvation itself.

Granted, this comes from the Gospel of Luke (Luke 7:40-50), whom you've already dismissed as he wasn't an "eye-witness". The truth of the matter is that Luke did get his information from the "eye-witnesses", and penned it under the guidance of the same Holy Spirit which guided both John and Matthew when they penned their Gospels.

I guess the Gospel of Mark is "less dependable" as well, as he wasn't an "eye-witness", either? Even though Peter, whom most scholars now attribute John Mark was writing for, was?

I guess I'm thinking too much is being made of the "original eye-witnesses" point (a Mormon thing, perhaps?), as we are all called to be witnesses of His testimony and power in our lives. We are all called to be ambassadors for Christ.

Whence comes the witness? from an advantageous placement on the time scale? or by the presence of the Spirit, of whom Christ makes this statement in John 15:26,27 -

"When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me, and you will testify also, because you have been with Me from the beginning."

So it is the Spirit who brings the testimony, enabling the receiver to bear that testimony to those God desires us to bring it to.

We can all be testators to the fact we witness Christ's power on a daily basis.

Later and later...

[oldsailor29]

Another thing I learned from a Bible scholar is when I disagree, to just say, "Well, I could be wrong."

Well, I could be wrong.

[Dr. Rich]

Are we to believe everyone who said they received revelations or visions straight from God/Jesus? Didn't Paul and Mohammud both say they received visions from God and were taken to heaven? Didn't EGW and Joseph Smith also say they had visions and visited heaven? How about Benny Hinn? If I told you that Jesus came to me personally and told me what to say and write and then He took me to heaven to look around and meet with people, I am sure you would not believe me and I hope you wouldn't! (This never happend)

Jesus Christ had witnesses that He was the Son of God. The dove came down and people heard God say it and John said it too. So please find me any eyewitnesses who testified that Paul was visited by Jesus? Jesus would have been a liar if He did for He told the deciples that He was going to be with His Father until He returned. This is why Jesus sent and angel to John.

How come God said it was good that a test was given to those who called themselves apostels and they were found to be false? (Rev. 2:2) Please name them and then tell me what the test is?

I am really trying not to be argumentitive here.I am pointing out some things that most will not want to hear. People will say that there is no difference in the gospel of Jesus and Paul, but even Paul said there was a difference. Pick up a few reference books from researchers and you will find there is a big difference. Yes, there is a place for grace and faith, but what I find is that Jesus said it is the truth that will set one free from sin. Happy Sabbath everyone,

Dr. Rich

[Ted Oplinger]

Dr. Rich,

Quote:

Are we to believe everyone who said they received revelations or visions straight from God/Jesus? Didn't Paul and Mohammud both say they received visions from God and were taken to heaven? Didn't EGW and Joseph Smith also say they had visions and visited heaven? How about Benny Hinn? If I told you that Jesus came to me personally and told me what to say and write and then He took me to heaven to look around and meet with people, I am sure you would not believe me and I hope you wouldn't! (This never happend)

First, I Paul and EGW are in a considerably different class than either Mohammed, Joseph Smith, or Benny Hinn.

Second, the Bible does give us ample insight into how to handle these situations. It's not a question of whether or not I believe such a person - it's a question of whether that person's vision - and the message given - are in agreement the testimony laid down through the Scriptures already given by God. With that criteria, I already eliminate the claims by Mohammed, Joseph Smith, and Benny Hinn. Paul and EGW I can give due consideration.

Likewise, should you have up and made such a claim - again, it's not a question of believing your claim, but testing that claim versus the record gone before you. If there is agreement, then your claim is verified...regardless of whether I personally think the claim is beleiveable or not.

In my perspective, there is a remarkable consistency in Bible message throughout history, from Moses to David to Solomon to the Prophets to Christ to Paul to John the Revelator. That is why the Bible books were canonized - and others (like the Apocrypha) were not.

Quote:

Jesus Christ had witnesses that He was the Son of God. The dove came down and people heard God say it and John said it too. So please find me any eyewitnesses who testified that Paul was visited by Jesus? Jesus would have been a liar if He did for He told the deciples that He was going to be with His Father until He returned. This is why Jesus sent and angel to John.

Christ also had His detractors who heard nothing but thunder when God spoke. Should we give those dissenters equal weight as to why Christ is not the Son of God? Call me narrow-minded, but I won't...

As for Paul? Let's see what the Scriptural record says...

Acts 9:1-7,17 - "Now Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest, and asked for letters from him to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, both men and women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. As he was traveling, it happened that he was approaching Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him; and he fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?" And he said, "Who are You, Lord?" And He said, "I am Jesus whom you are persecuting, but get up and enter the city, and it will be told you what you must do." The men who traveled with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one."

17 "So Ananias departed and entered the house, and after laying his hands on him said, "Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road by which you were coming, has sent me so that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit."

So, not only did Paul have eyewitnesses to the event and words, it was later confirmed by vision to a completely unassociated party (contained in verses 8-16).

So, if Ananias confirms to Paul the Lord appeared to him on the Damascus road...it would appear that saying Christ could never personally communicate with a person on earth is a bit premature. Notice, the account confirms it is the Lord, but no bodily presence is indicated.

Quote:

How come God said it was good that a test was given to those who called themselves apostels and they were found to be false? (Rev. 2:2) Please name them and then tell me what the test is?

Yes, it is/was a good thing to test the message of the apostles. Yet, why will you limit apostles to such a small group as the 12? Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 12:27-31 that apostles are but one of the gifts God has given to the church as part of its leadership and function - just like the gift of prophecy. It is one of the greater gifts, and earnestly to be desired, in Paul's words.

If being an apostle was to be strictly limited to Paul and the other 12, why would he mention it as a gift to be desired?

In Paul's case, he was well over 10 years after the other apostles, yet he fervently claimed his ministry was in no wise inferior to the more eminent apostles, even though he claimed he was the least of the apostles because he persecuted the church (2 Corinthians 11:5, 1 Corinthians 15:9, respectively).

Quote:

I am really trying not to be argumentitive here.I am pointing out some things that most will not want to hear. People will say that there is no difference in the gospel of Jesus and Paul, but even Paul said there was a difference. Pick up a few reference books from researchers and you will find there is a big difference. Yes, there is a place for grace and faith, but what I find is that Jesus said it is the truth that will set one free from sin.

I don't take your tone as argumentative. Neither am I trying to pick a fight. While you believe your are pointing out things some people don't want to hear, I find you're saying some things Scripture doesn't back you up on.

With regard to no difference between "Paul's Gospel" and Christ's, it is my humble opinion there should be no differences, else one gets in trouble with the Scriptures pretty quick.

Paul's emphatic declaration to the Galatians is fairly precise and clear:

Galatians 1:8-12

"But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed! For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a bond-servant of Christ. For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ."

First, "Paul's Gospel" took pre-eminence before any other. Even if an angel came down and preached a gospel contrary to what Paul preached, he was to be accursed! If Christ's gospel was different, and was desired to be preached, it would be under the condemnation of Paul!

Second, Paul declares where he got "his" Gospel - by revelation directly from Christ Himself. Are you going to say Christ preached one thing on earth, then told Paul to preach something different? As Christ is always the same, the Gospel He preached on earth will be the same when He re-preaches it to Paul later. Otherwise, we get into that Christ is lying quandry...

Next, some favorite Scriptures to Adventists makes the thought more nonsensical...

Revelation 14:6 "And I saw another angel flying in midheaven, having an eternal gospel to preach to those who live on the earth, and to every nation and tribe and tongue and people;"

Here is what Paul was warning the Galatians about...an angel with a gospel! According to Paul, whose Gospel came straight from the mouth of Christ, this Gospel must agree with that which he preached. Indeed, the word John used to describe the gospel is "eternal" - it is always present, always the same, throughout all time, for it is a timeless message to all people.

As for the researchers you mentioned...if they could not see what I did with just a couple of verses, then perhaps their labor should remain unread by these eyes.

Yes, the truth will set us free. Christ declared the truth when He told a sinful woman her faith had saved her - she took it as Gospel truth and it greatly impacted her.

Truth comes by the grace of God, because without the grace implicit in Christ's statement in John 15:1-5...

"I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit. You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me. I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing."

...would mean nothing. Apart from Him, apart from His grace, we can do nothing - not even accept the truth which makes us free.

[Richard Holbrook]

I would like to see or hear some proof of this. (not disputing your word Beryl)

[BobRyan]

Are we to believe everyone who said they received revelations or visions straight from God/Jesus? Didn't Paul and Mohammud both say they received visions from God and were taken to heaven? Didn't EGW and Joseph Smith also say they had visions and visited heaven? How about Benny Hinn? If I told you that Jesus came to me personally and told me what to say and write and then He took me to heaven to look around and meet with people, I am sure you would not believe me and I hope you wouldn't! (This never happend)

Jesus Christ had witnesses that He was the Son of God. The dove came down and people heard God say it and John said it too. So please find me any eyewitnesses who testified that Paul was visited by Jesus?

Let me guess - this "David Ascherick letter" thread topic is yet another subject thread being hijacked over the to the topic "Why does Rich throw scripture under the bus and treat the Apostle Paul the same way Muslims treat Paul"??

I find it hard to believe that that subject never "gets old".

Wake me when its over.

in Christ,

Bob

[Richard Holbrook]

HE WON'T STOP UNTIL HE'S CONVINCED YOU BOB RYAN.

[BobRyan]

On the off chance that the actual subject title of this thread is still of interest. I notice that the challenge went out on the first two pages for the GC president to address the topic -- and so he did.

But the real issue is for the Pacific UNION president (The guy that actually owns the problem) to address it with La Sierra.

I wonder if that will ever happen.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

HE WON'T STOP UNTIL HE'S CONVINCED YOU BOB RYAN.

Well -- he and about 1 Billion Muslims all hold to that "Paul is no good" view of scripture. Not sure why "every topic" has to be derailed to his "I reject scripture" topic. It is bad enough that he has taken that wrong turn - why does he insist on remind us of it??

He needs to start a "Why Rich rejects the Bible thread" then we can go there and ask him how he proves the 28 FB "sola scriptura" with his shredded and super-downsized Bible.

in Christ,

Bob

[Richard Holbrook]

The President of the Seventh-day Adventist Michigan Conference, Jay Gallimore, just released his perspective on the issue surrounding La Sierra University today.(August 1, 2009).

Jay Gallimore

[Richard Holbrook]

I don't think he believes all 28