"Released from the Law"

[Guest]

Amen

[Musicman1228]

I don't just 'toss out' Scripture. If it is actually Scripture then I don't toss it out. If what you wrote, Richard, went over my head then I too know the feeling of writing something and having is misunderstood, discounted or go over someones head as well. I would never discount anything anyone says on this forum. I enjoy the interaction. It is very difficult expressing an exactness necessary to convey true meaning when most of us don't speak the same spiritual language. Again, I'm sorry for any confusion that I have caused.

The bottom line for me personally is that I don't feel the need for any other information source than Jesus Christ and His words, the words of God in the Old Testament and the prophecies in Daniel and Revelation. I take those sources seriously and do everything my feeble mind can do to understand what Jesus was trying to say. I am sorry if my not using untrustworthy sources (my term) is upsetting to some of you, but that is just the way it is. That is my perspective, and mine alone.

[Guest]

To toss out any of the scriptures is to openly say "I don't trust you God".

Lutz has a testamony a couple of pages back about going down a similar road as you.

[LifeHiscost]

Originally Posted By: LifeHiscost

My reliance___

"But He answered and said, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.’"Matthew 4:4 NKJV

"For no prophecy ever originated because some man willed it [to do so--it never came by human impulse], but men spoke from God who were borne along (moved and impelled) by the Holy Spirit."2 Peter 1:21 AMP brackets parenthesis theirs

Regards!

Amen :-)

How is it that men think that they can discover more light by constantly throwing light out?

It is wearisome to see, again and again, these attempts to reduce and minimise inspiration.

Mark

[Guest]

And again I say: Amen

[LifeHiscost]

The content of some scriptures do contain errors, which gives detractors reasons to reject those scriptures. I say the claim of inerrant scriptures is Satanic in origin because it promotes rejection of any scripture in which an error can be shown. Although SDAs and several other Christian church members are mostly Fundamentalists, and do believe the scriptures are inerrant, I think we should not be in a big hurry to reject scriptures which are shown to contain errors.

Sounds like Holy Spirit led guidance. Purposeful errancy is wrong, but then so was King David on occasion. I notice God didn't throw him out of the record He wished to use to reveal Himself. Maybe that's a clue as to how we should view our brothers and sisters in the body of Christ, not discounting the fact that there are truly wolves among the flock wishing they could destroy it.

"Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves."Acts 20:28-30 NKJV

Blessings!

[LifeHiscost]

The truth is that as soon as we start asking questions about who wrote what, we have to admit that we take the entire NT on faith. We don't just take the Epistles of Paul or James or Peter by faith but all of the Gospels, including John. And there are many scholars who don't accept very much of those books.

"But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.

"Hebrews 11:6 NKJV

"Jesus said to him, “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”"John 20:29 NKJV

We all have the right to believe or not. If we choose to continue sniping at the Word in order to get out from under its' injunctions that make us uncomfortable, rather than depending upon God to give us power which He promises for the fulfilling of the same, it will be to our eternal loss, not to mention the possible loss of the very ones we would like to influence toward the kingdom.

"Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness, considering yourself lest you also be tempted. Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. " Gal 6:1,2 NKJV

Blessings!

[LifeHiscost]

"...infallible revelation of His will".

sky

I'm still of the opinion that the Holy Word is a revelation of His infallible will, not an infallible revelation of His will.

"For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known."1 Corinthians 13:12 KJV

Blessings!

[LifeHiscost]

[oldsailor29]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

These statements get traction only because of the misguided fundamentalist idea that scripture and inspiration are inerrant.

oldsailor, could you elaborate on this phrase? thank u

The idea that scripture is inerrant is a very old idea, and was even embraced by some Biblical people. The label, "Fundamentalist," is a fairly recent name applied to 19th and early 20th century people who published religious books, "The Fundamentals." People who adopted their tenets became known as Fundamentalists. One of the major tenets of Fundamentalism is inerrancy of scriptures.

The content of some scriptures do contain errors, which gives detractors reasons to reject those scriptures. I say the claim of inerrant scriptures is Satanic in origin because it promotes rejection of any scripture in which an error can be shown. Although SDAs and several other Christian church members are mostly Fundamentalists, and do believe the scriptures are inerrant, I think we should not be in a big hurry to reject scriptures which are shown to contain errors.

[Musicman1228]

I appreciate what you just said, oldsailor. It is very well put. Inspiration must have a base from which to operate, and unless and until God's people come to some consensus as to how inspiration functions we will just be guessing as to how Scripture and prophecy should be understood.

[Lutz13]

I don't just 'toss out' Scripture. If it is actually Scripture then I don't toss it out. If what you wrote, Richard, went over my head then I too know the feeling of writing something and having is misunderstood, discounted or go over someones head as well. I would never discount anything anyone says on this forum. I enjoy the interaction. It is very difficult expressing an exactness necessary to convey true meaning when most of us don't speak the same spiritual language. Again, I'm sorry for any confusion that I have caused.

The bottom line for me personally is that I don't feel the need for any other information source than Jesus Christ and His words, the words of God in the Old Testament and the prophecies in Daniel and Revelation. I take those sources seriously and do everything my feeble mind can do to understand what Jesus was trying to say. I am sorry if my not using untrustworthy sources (my term) is upsetting to some of you, but that is just the way it is. That is my perspective, and mine alone.

Right, and when we quote something from Paul or Luke in our theology you quickly jump in to tell us we can't do so because they are Satan's minions. Let me ask you...

Do you trust that God can keep the bible trustworthy?

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Musicman1228

I don't just 'toss out' Scripture. If it is actually Scripture then I don't toss it out. If what you wrote, Richard, went over my head then I too know the feeling of writing something and having is misunderstood, discounted or go over someones head as well. I would never discount anything anyone says on this forum. I enjoy the interaction. It is very difficult expressing an exactness necessary to convey true meaning when most of us don't speak the same spiritual language. Again, I'm sorry for any confusion that I have caused.

The bottom line for me personally is that I don't feel the need for any other information source than Jesus Christ and His words, the words of God in the Old Testament and the prophecies in Daniel and Revelation. I take those sources seriously and do everything my feeble mind can do to understand what Jesus was trying to say. I am sorry if my not using untrustworthy sources (my term) is upsetting to some of you, but that is just the way it is. That is my perspective, and mine alone.

Right, and when we quote something from Paul or Luke in our theology you quickly jump in to tell us we can't do so because they are Satan's minions. Let me ask you...

Do you trust that God can keep the bible trustworthy?

Let us consider some "movements" that have used similar "criticism's" of the inspiration of the bible:

Islam

Jehovah's Witnesses

Mormons

Islam specifically claim the bible is "wrong" and needed a new one.

Is not the issue here exactly the same?

Some sections are inspired and some not, being no different to the Islamic position when you think about it.

The question I have is:

Is there an "angel" involved in this idea that certain parts of scripture are not inspired, any "appearances" or "apparitions" to provide "inspiration" amongst this group that is trying to push this teaching on this board?

That is the common theme in the "movements" above.

Mark

[Musicman1228]

Originally Posted By: Lutz13

Right, and when we quote something from Paul or Luke in our theology you quickly jump in to tell us we can't do so because they are Satan's minions. Let me ask you...

Do you trust that God can keep the bible trustworthy? [/quote']

Let us consider some "movements" that have used similar "criticism's" of the inspiration of the bible:

Islam

Jehovah's Witnesses

Mormons

Islam specifically claim the bible is "wrong" and needed a new one.

Is not the issue here exactly the same?

Some sections are inspired and some not, being no different to the Islamic position when you think about it.

The question I have is:

Is there an "angel" involved in this idea that certain parts of scripture are not inspired, any "appearances" or "apparitions" to provide "inspiration" amongst this group that is trying to push this teaching on this board?

That is the common theme in the "movements" above.

Mark

So Jesus said to them, “The light is among you for a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you. The one who walks in the darkness does not know where he is going. While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light.” John 12:35-36.

Jesus is the light, He is the truth. By His definition if you walk in darkness it is because you are not using Jesus as the light. Anyone other than Jesus will cause you to walk in darkness, stumble and fall.

The following is not true, and did not happen. It is an illustration of the choice to walk in the light or in the darkness:

I was sitting at my kitchen table with my family this morning eating my Wheaties when suddenly a bright light shown around me. The light was so bright that I went blind and could not see. A voice spoke out of the light and said, "My son, there is a lot of confusion about the validity of the Bible and I have come to you to clear up the confusion. Take what I say to you to the world."

Needless to say I was stunned, I was also concerned because I was blind and could not see who was speaking to me. I said, "Who are you that is speaking to me?"

Just then my son said, "Dad, no one is speaking to you, why are you staring off into space, what is going on?"

Then the being that blinded me whom I could not see said*, "I am Jesus Christ, and I have come to you in vision to say that the Bible does not wholly contain my words and the words of My Father. There are some lies in the New Testament that you should be concerned about so as not to be fooled. Beware of Paul and my brothers James and Jude. I don't know how they got there but they did so just watch out. Go and tell this to the world."

*[Or insert this text instead: Then the being said to me, "I am Jesus Christ. I tell you now that the Bible is the wholly inerrant, inspired word of God from cover to cover. You have my word on it. Go and tell this to the world."]

I then awoke from my vision, still sitting at the table, and my sight was restored. I asked my family what they had seen and they said that they saw and heard nothing; all I did for two minutes was stare off into space, then I came back.

I related my vision to them and said that I must tell the world about my vision so as to proclaim the word of the Lord in the land. They all looked at me as if I was nuts and said, "Don't tell anyone, if you do they will think you are crazy."

But I could not go against the will of Jesus so I am telling you of my vision, because the vision and the words are true."

end

If I came to you with this story in reality would you believe me? Would you believe me even though NO ONE saw or heard what I saw and heard? Would you believe either outcome given to me by this 'Jesus' as to the whether the Bible was completely valid or not? If what this 'Jesus' said to me fit the picture you have about the Bible (either way) would you be tempted to believe it so as to support your position?

I think not. Yet you believe exactly the same way for the same reasons about Paul and his visions, and EGW and her visions. You believe because the outcome of the visions fits your paradigm, fits the way you want to think about truth, fits what you have been taught from childhood.

If you support Paul in this way why would you not support me if I came to you with that story? In my view they are the same. I would not expect you to accept my story about my vision without solid proof, that is why I cannot accept Paul and EGW because of the lack of that same proof.

So NO, there are no 'angels', or 'apparitions', or 'visions', or special 'inspirations' involved in my understanding of what I consider to be truth, just good solid hard evidence from the words and teachings of Jesus Christ is what I rely on to lead me to truth.

This is not to say you cannot and should not believe what you will. I am only telling you why I believe as I do.

[Guest]

If the being of light tells you something that goes against scripture it is the devil.

And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. 2Cr 11:14

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 1Jo 4:1

To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. Isa 8:20

EGW did not go against scripture, neither did Paul.

[Guest]

That's why paul said what he said, because he knew that not only could they (demons) personate an angel of light, but that they actually are from heaven. So of course it's not hard for them. That's why we need to be grounded in scripture.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

So Jesus said to them, “The light is among you for a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you. The one who walks in the darkness does not know where he is going. While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light.” John 12:35-36.

Jesus is the light, He is the truth. By His definition if you walk in darkness it is because you are not using Jesus as the light. Anyone other than Jesus will cause you to walk in darkness, stumble and fall.

The following is not true, and did not happen. It is an illustration of the choice to walk in the light or in the darkness:

I was sitting at my kitchen table with my family this morning eating my Wheaties when suddenly a bright light shown around me. The light was so bright that I went blind and could not see. A voice spoke out of the light and said, "My son, there is a lot of confusion about the validity of the Bible and I have come to you to clear up the confusion. Take what I say to you to the world."

Needless to say I was stunned, I was also concerned because I was blind and could not see who was speaking to me. I said, "Who are you that is speaking to me?"

Just then my son said, "Dad, no one is speaking to you, why are you staring off into space, what is going on?"

Then the being that blinded me whom I could not see said*, "I am Jesus Christ, and I have come to you in vision to say that the Bible does not wholly contain my words and the words of My Father. There are some lies in the New Testament that you should be concerned about so as not to be fooled. Beware of Paul and my brothers James and Jude. I don't know how they got there but they did so just watch out. Go and tell this to the world."

*[Or insert this text instead: Then the being said to me, "I am Jesus Christ. I tell you now that the Bible is the wholly inerrant, inspired word of God from cover to cover. You have my word on it. Go and tell this to the world."]

I then awoke from my vision, still sitting at the table, and my sight was restored. I asked my family what they had seen and they said that they saw and heard nothing; all I did for two minutes was stare off into space, then I came back.

I related my vision to them and said that I must tell the world about my vision so as to proclaim the word of the Lord in the land. They all looked at me as if I was nuts and said, "Don't tell anyone, if you do they will think you are crazy."

But I could not go against the will of Jesus so I am telling you of my vision, because the vision and the words are true."

end

If I came to you with this story in reality would you believe me? Would you believe me even though NO ONE saw or heard what I saw and heard? Would you believe either outcome given to me by this 'Jesus' as to the whether the Bible was completely valid or not? If what this 'Jesus' said to me fit the picture you have about the Bible (either way) would you be tempted to believe it so as to support your position?

I think not. Yet you believe exactly the same way for the same reasons about Paul and his visions, and EGW and her visions. You believe because the outcome of the visions fits your paradigm, fits the way you want to think about truth, fits what you have been taught from childhood.

If you support Paul in this way why would you not support me if I came to you with that story? In my view they are the same. I would not expect you to accept my story about my vision without solid proof, that is why I cannot accept Paul and EGW because of the lack of that same proof.

So NO, there are no 'angels', or 'apparitions', or 'visions', or special 'inspirations' involved in my understanding of what I consider to be truth, just good solid hard evidence from the words and teachings of Jesus Christ is what I rely on to lead me to truth.

This is not to say you cannot and should not believe what you will. I am only telling you why I believe as I do.

I think not. Yet you believe exactly the same way for the same reasons about Paul and his visions, and EGW and her visions.

That is not the case MM. :-)

I believe Paul and EGW, because the teaching they present is in total harmony with what has gone before in scripture.

What you and your friends are teaching, is not in harmony at all.

If that were the case, I would have to throw out the old testament as it is not a "direct witness".

Yet I am to accept those books on the principle of spiritual harmony, but I am not allowed to do the same for the new testament?

The only difference between the old and new is "time", not the method of inspiration.

For this, I reject your teaching, it is error because it attacks the very harmony of inspiration.

In love,

Mark

[Twilight]

If the being of light tells you something that goes against scripture it is the devil.

And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. 2Cr 11:14

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 1Jo 4:1

To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. Isa 8:20

EGW did not go against scripture, neither did Paul.

Amen :-)

Consider this Richard, if only first person witnesses are "permitted", then we would need to throw out the Old Testament, (as per my other post).

[Twilight]

MM, do you accept the OT and if so why?

The reasons you reject a vaste swathe of the NT should also mean you reject the OT in its entirety.

[skyblue888]

When the Lord began the work of The Reformation, especially when Luther came upon the scence, the enemy raised someone on the ground teaching that they no longer needed the Scriptures since they had received the Holy Spirit. Munzer was the leader of this fanatical group but it wasn't long before that movement dissipated like the morning dew before the sun.

The Lord is working to resurrect the 1888 message. So we should expect to hear many voices claiming they have the truth for this time so as to distract us from the true message. What MM and cie are teaching is nothing but a mere attempt to distract, a crying baby to draw the attention of the people away from the true light. Whether they are conscious of doing this or not is another matter.

sky

[Guest]

He does believe the OT, because Jesus did.

[Twilight]

He does believe the OT, because Jesus did.

Well how does he know that Jesus did not believe the New Testament?

:-)

[Guest]

It wasn't written yet.

[Musicman1228]

You guys are really stretching the point. This all or nothing attitude of yours about me is neither logical nor rational. If you have read anything of mine related to the Old Testament (and actually heard what I said) then you know that I have stated that the Old Testament is of God. The bottom line reason is that Jesus used the O.T. Scripture to defeat Satan and the Pharisees in the battle for interpretive rights. If it is good enough for Jesus it is good enough for me. Why you would make the leap that if I reject someone in the New Testament (or outside of Scripture for that matter) because I truly believe that they are not of God means that I must reject everything else in the bible is beyond me.

I am not and have not tried to convince any of you that you are wrong and I am right in this or anything. The ONLY thing I have done is tell you why I believe as I do. This is like saying to your wife, "Honey, don't feel that way." The only thing that does is discount her feelings and make her feel worse, especially toward you. The way that I feel about Paul will not change just because you say that I must change the way I feel about Paul. My previous illustration about "my vision" is a perfect case in point. I did that to let you know my reasons behind my belief - that I don't find Paul's conversion on the road to Damascus credible. That got me started in looking at what he taught and I discovered glaring discrepancies between him and the teaching of Jesus Christ. There is nothing personal in this between me and Paul or me and you.

Richard Holbrook cited:

To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. Isa 8:20

What is your definition of "this word"? I daresay most of you believe it to be the entire Bible. But I challenge you that when this passage was written THERE WAS NO NEW TESTAMENT. Therefore this passage cannot be speaking of the entire Bible, only that part that was in use at the time of Isaiah, i.e. The Old Testament. It is the same for 2Tim.3:16.

When Jesus quoted Scripture is was only out of the Old Testament, so if it is good enough for Him it is certainly good enough for me. And since Jesus is the Son of God I believe His words are from God also. So why am I castigated for going directly to the source for truth as found in Jesus Christ and in the O.T. instead of someone that I (of my own free will) consider not to be a reliable source.

[Guest]

That's what I said Musicman: "He does believe the OT, because Jesus did."

I really wish you wouldn't feel this way.