"Released from the Law"

[LifeHiscost]

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.

One major difference between your scenario and Paul's proclamation is that numbers of people over the past(close) two thousand years have been motivated by Paul's writings,( believe you included Luke in this also) to yield their lives to Jesus Christ and have been a telling force for advancing the gospel of Jesus Christ to the benefit of multitudes who now walk in the Light just as they walked in the Light.

And we still have promises that will come to pass no matter whether we believe them or not.

"When they heard this, they were furious and wanted to put them to death. But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, who was honored by all the people, stood up in the Sanhedrin and ordered that the men be put outside for a little while.

Then he addressed them: "Men of Israel, consider carefully what you intend to do to these men. Some time ago Theudas appeared, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing. After him, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered.

Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God." " Acts 5:33-39 NIV

"And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy disciples.

And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out. "Luke 19:39-41 NIV

"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come." Matthew 24:14 KJV

Is there some argument more important or stronger than this?

Blessings!

[oldsailor29]

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.

Musicman - that sounds very good, but no truth is determined by consensus. The main consensus in the SDA church now is that God gave His Bible makers the words to write, and some of them were writing to us or for our benefit. Well, that is only a few steps away from the truth. I think the best way to understand the Bible is through moderate or conservative historical/critical studies.

[Guest]

Excellent point.

Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God." " Acts 5:33-39 NIV

[LifeHiscost]

(demons) personate an angel of light, but that they actually are from heaven.

I would like to clarify that to say, they were from heaven. There are no heavenly beings now involved in deception of the children of God on earth.

"And the LORD said unto Satan, From whence comest thou? And Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it."

Job 2:2 KJV

"And the huge dragon was cast down and out--that age-old serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, he who is the seducer (deceiver) of all humanity the world over; he was forced out and down to the earth, and his angels were flung out along with him."Revelation 12:9 AMP

Blessings!

[LifeHiscost]

I think the best way to understand the Bible is through moderate or conservative historical/critical studies.

I wouldn't disagree that may be the best way to study. However I see a better way to understand. And it would seem to me to be absolutely important as probably 95% percent of those yielding themselves now to Christ will never have time or opportunity to study in depth, historically and critically.

"But earnestly desire and zealously cultivate the greatest and best gifts and graces (the higher gifts and the choicest graces). And yet I will show you a still more excellent way [one that is better by far and the highest of them all--love]." 1 Corinthians 12:31 AMP

"Guide me in Your truth and faithfulness and teach me, for You are the God of my salvation; for You [You only and altogether] do I wait [expectantly] all the day long." Psalm 25:5 AMP

"However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come."John 16:13 NKJV

Blessings!

[Ron Amnsn]

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.

I don't think the NT calls what happened to Paul on the road to Damascus a "conversion". People who call it a conversion imagine that Paul converted from Judaism to Christianity or something. Not true. Paul stayed within Judaism just as Jesus and the other followers of Jesus stayed within Judaism. If you check your history, Christianity didn't separate from Judaism until after the Jewish revolts against Rome. If Christians had been separate from Judaism they wouldn't have been exempt from worshiping the Roman emperor.

Nobody talks about the other apostles "converting" at the time when they were called to be a follower of Jesus. Why just Paul?

[Musicman1228]

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

I really wish you wouldn't feel this way.

Thank you, Richard, for you have expressed an honest feeling on my behalf, and that is gratifying. For your sake I am sorry I must still feel the way I do.

[Musicman1228]

Wow, Ron, you are so good at this. Yes, I realize the use of the word 'conversion' in conjunction with Paul's Damascus road experience is a bit iffy. I use is only because that is common usage among Christians, and a word that they understand without too much explanation.

As far as when Christianity split from Judaism I would go so far as to be even more specific and say it occurred after the sacking of Jerusalem and the Temple by Titus in 70 C.E. This is the kick off event for the young Christian church, because before that the Christians were constantly under the thumb of the Jews who even if sympathetic with the movement tried to use forceful tactics to apply all sorts of Jewish tradition to the doctrine, theology and liturgy of the budding church.

We see evidence of this in how James the brother of Jesus captured the leadership of the Way, the Jerusalem assembly, away from the titular leader Peter, and tried to force many Jewish rites onto the early Christians by using his perceived relationship with his brother (Jesus) as leverage. Paul writes about this.

When Jesus was on the mount of Olives looking at the Temple with His disciples a few days before His crucifixion He mentioned this important event specifically, and with good reason. For without the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem the rites and rituals of animal sacrifice would have continued unabated, and eventually the young new church surely would have been reabsorbed back into Judaism, from whence it came. The execution of Jesus on the cross did away with the necessity of animal sacrifice, that part of Jewish statutory law that pointed toward the Messiah and what He would do to save Israel. The Jews as a nation had rejected the Messiah in 30 C.E. by saying that they had no king but Caesar. Soon thereafter (33 C.E.) the trusteeship of the Covenant given to Israel at Sinai was revoked by God (again, right on time at the end of the 490 years of Dan.9:24) and they became as any other earthy nation; yet they were still practicing the rites that God had used to set them apart from the other nations of the world. God had to stop this for two reasons; 1) Israel was no longer God's chosen people, the Kingdom of Heaven on earth, and 2) because the fledgling Christian church would not have stood a chance of becoming a viable spiritual force in the world if Israel had continued to practice the main tenet of their religion.

It was right on time that God sent the General of a pagan Emperor to destroy by war the very symbol of the Jewish religion in the world, and stop the practice of animal sacrifice which was the main visible sign of that religion. [An attempt was made previous to this in 68 C.E., but it was too early, so God lured the army away to quell an uprising elsewhere allowing Christians to flee Jerusalem.]

And I saw a beast rising out of the sea, with ten horns and seven heads, with ten diadems on its horns and blasphemous names on its heads. And the beast that I saw was like a leopard; its feet were like a bear's, and its mouth was like a lion's mouth. And to it the dragon gave his power and his throne and great authority. One of its heads seemed to have a mortal wound, but its mortal wound was healed, and the whole earth marveled as they followed the beast. Rev.13:1-3.

Could Israel and not Rome be the wounded head spoken of in this prophecy? All of the specifications of the prophecy fit perfectly. We will know if and when the Temple in Jerusalem is rebuilt and once again animal sacrifice begins. (I'm not saying that this is the way it will be, only that it could be.)

[Guest]

And I saw a beast rising out of the sea, with ten horns and seven heads, with ten diadems on its horns and blasphemous names on its heads. And the beast that I saw was like a leopard; its feet were like a bear's, and its mouth was like a lion's mouth. And to it the dragon gave his power and his throne and great authority. One of its heads seemed to have a mortal wound, but its mortal wound was healed, and the whole earth marveled as they followed the beast. Rev.13:1-3.

Could Israel and not Rome be the wounded head spoken of in this prophecy? All of the specifications of the prophecy fit perfectly.

Musicman, tell me how in the world this prophecy fits perfectly with the nation of Israel. They don't have great power and authority like the RCC, The whole world is not marveling and following after Israel, They don't have blasphemy on their head like the pope does, and they don't have a throne like the pope does. So pray tell how does this fit perfectly???

[Musicman1228]

The first Beast of Rev. 13 has 7 heads each with a blasphemous name. Blaspheme implies a religious identity, 7 implies completeness, therefore you have the complete number of religious identities represented in the heads of the Beast. The prophecy doesn't say that the whole Beast is this wounded head, it says ONE of the heads has been wounded as if to death. That singular head is the identifier of the Beast. (This is not the same Beast as seen in Dan.7 - different number of heads and horns.)

What causes a religion to have a particular identity? The practice of that religion is the identity of the religion. The RCC has the mass and Eucharist, the Christians have the Last Supper and the washing of feet, Islam has the Hadj and jihad. These are all religious practices NOT religious personages. The identifiers in the prophecy are not talking about people such as Jesus for the Christians, Mohammed for Islam or the Pope for Catholicism.

If that is true then what is the singular religious practice of a major world religion that was suspended because of war? We can eliminate Christianity because Jesus rose from the grave; we can eliminate Islam because there is no record of any practice of Islam being done away with by war; we can eliminate Catholicism because there has never been a cessation of the Mass and Eucharist because of a war; the only one left is Judaism, where the practice of animal sacrifice which was central to the practice of that religion was eliminated by war in 70 C.E. That is why I said that IF or WHEN the Temple is rebuilt in Jerusalem that is when we will know that the Beast has arrived on earth.

Of course this disagrees with the traditional SDA view of things, but since when has that stopped me. Look it over carefully and see if it makes sense. We will know one way or the other pretty soon.

[Musicman1228]

By the way, the prophecy does not say that this entity has great power and authority right now, it gets this authority from Satan AFTER it comes up out of the sea. This has not happened yet because none of the trumpets has sounded as yet. Yet another topic of discussion.

[skyblue888]

muscicman, do you know what a "plant" is?

[Woody]

muscicman, do you know what a "plant" is?

If you don't musicman ... check out the thread on my opium plants.

[skyblue888]

Red, you know what I mean, don't you? In the Old Testament the Spirit of Christ who was in the prophets said, "Jacob is my plant." And when He walked among men He said, "Every plant which My Father has not planted will be uprooted. See Matt.15:13.

sky

[Musicman1228]

Redwood, personal attacks indicate an inability to disprove a proposition. Why don't you dialogue with me on these issues as would a colleague instead of becoming defensive and treating the concepts I have presented as if you think they are worthless just because you disagree with them. Surely you could ask some questions that would show me where I am mistaken in my interpretation rather than just make a blanket statement to that effect.

What would the harm be in checking to see if the current interpretation of the Beast of Rev.13 really fits the specifications of the prophecy.

[Guest]

He would if he was awake.

Hey MM did you know Ted Kennedy died? Not that we were close or anything.

[Ron Amnsn]

As far as when Christianity split from Judaism I would go so far as to be even more specific and say it occurred after the sacking of Jerusalem and the Temple by Titus in 70 C.E. This is the kick off event for the young Christian church, because before that the Christians were constantly under the thumb of the Jews who even if sympathetic with the movement tried to use forceful tactics to apply all sorts of Jewish tradition to the doctrine, theology and liturgy of the budding church.

We see evidence of this in how James the brother of Jesus captured the leadership of the Way, the Jerusalem assembly, away from the titular leader Peter, and tried to force many Jewish rites onto the early Christians by using his perceived relationship with his brother (Jesus) as leverage. Paul writes about this.

[Twilight]

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.

You are not being castigated MM.

You are being opposed because what you are teaching is error.

The basis for you rejecting the writings of Paul, is fundamentally flawed.

Why?

Because you deny the work of the Holy Spirit.

You are trying to justify this idea that only those things approved of by Jesus are permisable.

But that is not correct.

It is those things that are approved of by the Godhead that are applicable to our work.

The idea that Jesus during His lifetime gave us a cannon is not scriptural and cannot be found in any of Jesus Teachings.

Please show us where Jesus expressed a "Canon" for us to consider?

The Canon you are presenting is one of human devising, not Gods.

Pauls writings are approved, but not by the narrow definition you have placed on it, with this "canon" you are trying to impose on the biblical books.

God bless,

Mark :-)

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Musicman1228

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.

One major difference between your scenario and Paul's proclamation is that numbers of people over the past(close) two thousand years have been motivated by Paul's writings,( believe you included Luke in this also) to yield their lives to Jesus Christ and have been a telling force for advancing the gospel of Jesus Christ to the benefit of multitudes who now walk in the Light just as they walked in the Light.

And we still have promises that will come to pass no matter whether we believe them or not.

"When they heard this, they were furious and wanted to put them to death. But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, who was honored by all the people, stood up in the Sanhedrin and ordered that the men be put outside for a little while.

Then he addressed them: "Men of Israel, consider carefully what you intend to do to these men. Some time ago Theudas appeared, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing. After him, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered.

Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God." " Acts 5:33-39 NIV

"And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy disciples.

And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out. "Luke 19:39-41 NIV

"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come." Matthew 24:14 KJV

Is there some argument more important or stronger than this?

Blessings!

Further to this, let us consider Jesus' own words:

Mark 9:38And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.

39But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.

40For he that is not against us is on our part.

41For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.

MM, you are forbidding Paul...

And Ellen White...

God bless,

Mark

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Musicman1228

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.

I don't think the NT calls what happened to Paul on the road to Damascus a "conversion". People who call it a conversion imagine that Paul converted from Judaism to Christianity or something. Not true. Paul stayed within Judaism just as Jesus and the other followers of Jesus stayed within Judaism. If you check your history, Christianity didn't separate from Judaism until after the Jewish revolts against Rome. If Christians had been separate from Judaism they wouldn't have been exempt from worshiping the Roman emperor.

Nobody talks about the other apostles "converting" at the time when they were called to be a follower of Jesus. Why just Paul?

He was opposed to Jesus, then was turned to Jesus (conversion). :-)

[Musicman1228]

Several quick responses before work:

Richard, Yes I read that Ted Kennedy died. When I was 16 years old and in Sun Valley Idaho on winter vacation with my family I was knocked down by Ethyl Kennedy while I was stopped checking my equipment on the Warm Springs run. She ran over the tips of my skis and her elbow hit me in the chest and knocked me down. Secret service was all over her after she fell. The didn't even look my way to ask if I was OK. Oh well, so much for my brush with fame.

Ron, I am going to go over your material later when I have time to work on it.

Twilight said,

You are being opposed because what you are teaching is error.

Don't you think that would be better phrased: You are being opposed because I BELIEVE that what you are teaching is error? If I am making assumptions then this shows that you are also.

[Musicman1228]

Ron,

You have again given a fabulous critique to one of my posts, done without rancor and personal innuendo. You have also asked some very important questions that I will be delighted to answer. Rather than answer them en-mass which would take up lot of space I will answer each question in term to the best of my limited ability.

I'm not sure that this thread is the best venue for this discussion because it is slightly off topic, so is there any way for us to start a new thread specifically for this discussion? I have never started a new thread so I am not sure how to do that. If you would do it I would appreciate it. If not then I will try to learn how to do it and I will let you know title of the thread so we can continue our discussion without monopolizing this thread.

Thanks.

MM

[Twilight]

Several quick responses before work:

Richard, Yes I read that Ted Kennedy died. When I was 16 years old and in Sun Valley Idaho on winter vacation with my family I was knocked down by Ethyl Kennedy while I was stopped checking my equipment on the Warm Springs run. She ran over the tips of my skis and her elbow hit me in the chest and knocked me down. Secret service was all over her after she fell. The didn't even look my way to ask if I was OK. Oh well, so much for my brush with fame.

Ron, I am going to go over your material later when I have time to work on it.

Twilight said,

You are being opposed because what you are teaching is error.

Don't you think that would be better phrased: You are being opposed because I BELIEVE that what you are teaching is error? If I am making assumptions then this shows that you are also.

No, you are being oppossed because it is error. :-)

Nothing to do with my beliefs, purely stated from a scriptural position. :-)

That is a bit like saying:

Moses parted the Red Sea is a belief.

No, it is a fact.

God bless,

Mark

[skyblue888]

Excellent point Mark.

[LifeHiscost]

Further to this, let us consider Jesus' own words:

Mark 9:38And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.

39But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.

40For he that is not against us is on our part.

41For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.

MM, you are forbidding Paul...

And Ellen White...

God bless,

Mark