Moderators John317 Posted March 28, 2011 Moderators Posted March 28, 2011 ...My reading of the posts says that TW notes that the Bible does not say Noah preached. That was agreed too by John. I agreed that the Flood narrative in Genesis makes no mention of Noah preaching. That's a given. No one has said that it did. But that is nothing. The Eden narrative also does not mention anything about God's giving the Sabbath to Adam and Eve. The fact that the Bible does not mention something does not mean it didn't happen. The point here is that we have enough evidence in other parts of the Bible to conclude that Noah preached to the people before the Flood. It is the reason that the SDA church believes that Noah preached. This evidence can be easily found in Sabbath School lesson quarterlies, in Bible commentaries, and in many other books and publications by the church, including the Spirit of prophecy volumes that speak to the topic. Originally Posted By: CoAspen TW also mentions that Peter calls Noah a preacher. No heresy here just pointing out the lack of Biblical verification o Noah being a preacher. Since 2 Peter 2: 5 says that Noah was a preacher of righteousness, and since Ellen White also says that Noah warned the people of the coming Flood, and urged them to repent, Seventh-day Adventists who accept the whole Bible and accept Ellen White as a genuine prophet of God will believe that Noah preached to the people who lived before the Flood. People who reject parts of the Bible and either reject Ellen White's prophetic gift or don't trust what she wrote will feel they have good reason to doubt that Noah preached. Originally Posted By: Co=Aspen He goes on to note that our predominant source for this belief is from EGW. This appears to ignore the fact that the belief that Noah preached to the people prior to the Flood is common among non-SDA Christians, and it is based on the Bible. It is actually a Christian belief that goes all the way back to near the end of the first century AD. Referencdes to Noah's preaching may be found in the writings of Clement of Rome (96 AD). See par. 7 & 9. References to Noah's preaching may also be found in the writings of Josephus, a Jewish contemporary of Paul and Peter. (See Antiquities, 1.3.1) Nelson's Bible Dictionary (1995) says, "During the time of grace, Noah continued to preach God's judgment and mercy, warning the ungoldly of their approaching doom (2 Peter 2: 5). He preached for 120 years, howeer, without any converts (2 Peter 3: 20). People continued in their evil ways and turned deaf ears to his pleadings and warnings until they were overtaken by the Flood" (page 900).)(FF Bruce is one of the leading editors of Nelson Bible Dictionary.) The Davis Bible Dictionary: "Jehovah resolved to destroy the human race, but allowed a respite of one hundred and twenty years, during which Noah sought to bring them to repentance (Gen. 6: 1-9; 1 Peter 3: 20; 2 Peter 2: 5) Thus he was a 'preacher of righteousness,' exercising faith in the testimony of God, and condemning the world by the contrasted excellence of his conduct" (page 797). Notice it does not once refer to, or quote, Ellen G. White. The Nelson Study Bible says, "Noah is called a preacher of righteousness because his righteous life put to shame the immoral lives of his neighbors. Noah's building of the ark would certainly have given him the opportunity to explain the coming judgment and to invite people to repent and believe in God.But his entreaties fell on deaf ears, just as the truth of Christ's atonement fell on the deaf ears of the false teachers of Peter's day. Such indifference and unbelief brought the ungodly of Noah's world to certain destruction." (See on 2 Peter 2: 5) As anyone can see, the conclusions of these various scholarly sources are based on Scripture and not on Ellen White. It turns out, then, that contrary to some people's opinions,Ellen G. White is in some pretty good company when it comes to the question of whether Noah preached. As for the verse in Matt. 24: 39 which says the people didn't know about the Flood until they were swept away, it literally says that "they did not come to know" or "did not come to a recognition." "For 120 years Noah had warned the antediluvians of the coming of the Flood. They had ample opportunity to know, but they chose not to believe. They locked themselves in the darkness of unbelief." (SDA BC, vol. 5, page 504) 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.
ClubV12 Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 There are thousands of "good books", I don't want to and don't need to read them. The Conflict of the Ages series alone will keep me busy for a very long time. Those are books you don't read just once, you "study" them, read them again. If you HAVEN'T yet read the Conflict Series, why are you wasting time on yet another "good book" that comes along? First build a solid foundation, then branch out from there.
Moderators John317 Posted March 28, 2011 Moderators Posted March 28, 2011 Good insight. I'm sure that many agree with you but for whatever reason choose not to bark. 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.
ClubV12 Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Point taken John, thankyou. ....whispers,,,, read the Conflict Series, please. :)
Moderators John317 Posted March 28, 2011 Moderators Posted March 28, 2011 ... the replies on this thread alone prove how dangerious it is to bring something up that goes against tredition. It has nothing to do with tradition, Dr. Rich. It has to do with the fact that Matt. 24: 39 literally says that "they did not come to know" or "did not come to a recognition." "For 120 years Noah had warned the antediluvians of the coming of the Flood. They had ample opportunity to know, but they chose not to believe. They locked themselves in the darkness of unbelief." (SDA BC, vol. 5, page 504) Those people of that day did very much like many people are doing today: rejecting the messages God brings to them. 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.
Dr. Shane Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 There are thousands of "good books", I don't want to and don't need to read them. The Conflict of the Ages series alone will keep me busy for a very long time. Those are books you don't read just once, you "study" them, read them again. I read the Conflict of the Ages series soon after I returned to the church some twenty years ago. I was raised in a back-slidden Adventist home where Ellen White was a bad word. My parents did not approve of preachers using her writing is sermons and would often complain about it. As an adult I have been greatly blessed by her ministry. I wanted to name my daughter after her but my wife didn't like the name Ellen. There are a lot of books out there to read. Some people have more time to read than others. People that travel a lot and find themselves waiting in airports and planes have a lot of time to read a lot. Other people that are constantly busy have to be more prudent to what they choose to read with their limited time. Audio books are great and can be listened to in the car and while working out. I have found that to be a blessing. Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity
doug yowell Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 I do agree John, I was just giving him the benefit of the doubt about the Bible not saying anything. I just figured lets say that he was correct in that, it still seemed to me that common sense would take over.What the Bible says,what the Bible is saying, and common sense seems a rare commodity on parts of this thread. Peter TWICE clearly indicates (as John formerly posted)that the Holy Spirit of Christ was speaking thru Noah indicating His long suffering.This long suffering is meant to indicate something that accompanied the building of the ark. Jesus clearly indicated that "as in the days of Noah...until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came AND DESTROYED THEM ALL. EVEN SO IT WILL BE WHEN THE SON OF MAN IS REVEALED."Peter calls Noah "a preacher of righteousness" (not merely a lunatic). So what was he preaching,who was he preaching to,and why?Paul notes that the building of the ark stood as a "condemnation of the world" and Jesus clarifies that "If I had not come and spoken to them (I Pet.3:18-21)they would have no sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin." pk's common sense look at the situation has been given no common sense answer. Since there had never been rain in the history of the world then what in that world was Noah doing?? Do we assume that Noah (or God) wasn't interested in saving anyone but himself? If that's the case then how can Peter say that God was long-suffering? The case against the traditional meaning of the flood and God's impending judgment is not merely an intellectual exercise in openness it's an attack on the judgment and the gospel itself (John 16:8-11)and is devoid of Bible support as well as common sense.
Moderators John317 Posted March 28, 2011 Moderators Posted March 28, 2011 Most of the people of earth in such case don't reject God. They reject a version of God that's rendered to them in a rather incoherent form. If they had better understanding of God, and better understanding of reality... there would not be a need for harsh solutions. People like Hitler are simply misdirected. They have a solution for the problems of Germany, crime, poverty... and in their mind ends justify the means. If you look at US treatment of Japanese at times of war, it's the same type of ends justifying the means type of solution mentality. Such mentality exists because God "does not exist" outside of a Book and some "feeling" that you describe. Perhaps there's a reason why God does not simply show up at our door, but I doubt very much it's for the reasons you present. I've already shown you that your reasoning (i.e. it would negate the free choice) is quite illogical. What you really need to do, then, is tell the Infinite One that you think he is wrong, because I am only telling you what Christ said. I actually think He is right. Notice that Jesus had a great deal to say about our attitudes toward God-- our motives. Do we hunger and thirst after righteousness? Or are we still hanging on to some sin or sins in our life? That makes a big difference. If we are genuinely seeking truth and are willing to do anything God asks of us, the Holy Spirit is able to lead in a way He otherwise won't be able to. Are we willing to die to self Check it out: John 7:17 If anyone's will is to do God's will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority. John 6:37 All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. John 8:31-32 So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, "If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, [32] and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." John 8:43-45 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. [44] You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. [45] But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. John 10:26-27 but you do not believe because you are not part of my flock. [27] My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. Daniel 12:10 Many shall purify themselves and make themselves white and be refined, but the wicked shall act wickedly. And none of the wicked shall understand, but those who are wise shall understand. 1 Cor. 2:6-14 Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away. [7] But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. [8] None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. [9] But, as it is written, "What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man imagined, what God has prepared for those who love him"— [10] these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. [11] For who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. [12] Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. [13] And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual. [14] The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. 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.
doug yowell Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 All extra-Biblical commentary... In the end, will any of this matter? In the end, only belief or disbelief in the Biblical commentary will matter, unless you believe that all will eventually be saved anyway,then nothing matters, including any cautions against prejudging "the Spirit" at work.
doug yowell Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Most of the people of earth in such case don't reject God. They reject a version of God that's rendered to them in a rather incoherent form. If they had better understanding of God, and better understanding of reality... there would not be a need for harsh solutions. This view of reality is 180 degrees opposed to the testimony of one of the main writers of the New Testament. You might want to read his comments on this in Romans 1:18-20 Romans 2:14-16 This is a guy who claimed to have received his information directly from Jesus Himself and who other writers of the Bible claimed was equally inspired to speak on these things. If there's something that you think explains God's thinking better than it is explained in the Bible I'd be glad to know what it is.If you have problems with the concepts proclaimed by the Bible then that's a different story.Is the problem the Bible or those who interpret it wrongly?
Moderators John317 Posted March 28, 2011 Moderators Posted March 28, 2011 Yes, I do and always am reading those things. I used to be only interested in readings unrelated to Christianity-- mostly the classics in fiction, poetry, philosophy, psychology, history. But I seldom have time for those things any more. I still enjoy the great writers, such as Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Henry James, Faulkner, Conrad, etc. Yet I am much more interested now in studying the Bible and Ellen White's writings. For every hour I study Ellen White's books, though, I probably study the Bible for 3 hours. Right now I am reading the Manuscript Releases. I've read the Great Controversy at least four times, and some parts I have read many times. My favorite parts in GC are those dealing with the heavenly sanctuary and the Investigative Judgment. 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.
CoAspen Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 There are thousands of "good books", I don't want to and don't need to read them. The Conflict of the Ages series alone will keep me busy for a very long time. Those are books you don't read just once, you "study" them, read them again. If you HAVEN'T yet read the Conflict Series, why are you wasting time on yet another "good book" that comes along? First build a solid foundation, then branch out from there. Presumption.....for or against TW having read EGW? Sounds like a presumption against. Maybe you need to reword. I think you will see that he is branching out as do many of us. I would suggest people spend more time studing their Bibles rather than just 'any' books. We all choose who or what we wish to read, it's called being 'well rounded'.
ClubV12 Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Neither for or against, just recommending what I consider primary or foundational reading. For me, the EGW series, which shed great light on understanding the bible, is what I use to compare all other philosophie's. Without a foundation, how will you know what it reasonable and truth? Some might have their foundation in the Koran, or a Buddhist book or the writings of the Mormon, Joseph Smith. There is wide variety of seemingly "good books" upon which to build that foundation, but they ALL pale when compared to the Conflict Series, in my opinion.
Dr. Rich Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Fccool wrote: "Much of the people of earth in such case don't reject God. They reject a version of God that's rendered to them in a rather incoherent form." Huh? Are you telling us that God rendered to Adam and Israel a rather incoherent form of Himself? And are you telling us that Jesus failed with His ministry? If so, I object.
Guest Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Neither for or against, just recommending what I consider primary or foundational reading. For me, the EWG series, which shed great light on understanding the bible, is what I use to compare all other philosophie's. Without a foundation, how will you know what it reasonable and truth? Some might have their foundation in the Koran, or a Buddhist book or the writings of the Mormon, Joseph Smith. There is wide variety of seemingly "good books" upon which to build that foundation, but they ALL pale when compared to the Conflict Series, in my opinion. Amen!
fccool Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Huh? Are you telling us that God rendered to Adam and Israel a rather incoherent form of Himself? And are you telling us that Jesus failed with His ministry? If so, I object. Sure, to Adam and Israel it was fairly coherent. Those people seen and heard God... and that's exactly my point. What we have today is a 2000 year-old book that one has to work really hard at to reconcile the discrepancies and moral relativism found in it... and (according to John) some feelings of conviction of right and wrong. That's not exactly very coherent IMO. If I told you that I have an invisible friend who wrote a book that you should follow in which there are description of miracles he did a long time ago, why should you believe me?
Dr. Rich Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 I find it very interesting when people will go all out and say or write what ever they want in order to make their gods (who they worship) correct. None is so blind as those who refuse to put the eye salve on and open their eyes. I find the saying "Eyes Wide Shut" right on point! This thread was about a book called "LOVE WINS" John and Richard--not about EGW or the unknown writer of 2ndPeter.
Dr. Rich Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 fccool, I understand your point. Problem is, you and the rest of the world have not observed what I have. Truth is singular and absolute. Seeking truth is my passion. Since most believe in lies, then the truth seeking few will be called names and cursed by them. I have chosen to believe and obey ONLY in the words of Jesus Christ given to us by His eyewitnesses for this truth. If people make fun of me for this, then that is their choice.
Administrators Gail Posted March 28, 2011 Administrators Posted March 28, 2011 fccool, I understand your point. Problem is, you and the rest of the world have not observed what I have. Truth is singular and absolute. Seeking truth is my passion. Since most believe in lies, then the truth seeking few will be called names and cursed by them. I have chosen to believe and obey ONLY in the words of Jesus Christ given to us by His eyewitnesses for this truth. If people make fun of me for this, then that is their choice. I would like to see some mutual respect. Shall we consider this topic killed? Isaiah 32:17 And the work of righteousness shall be peace; and the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance for ever.
Administrators Tom Wetmore Posted March 29, 2011 Author Administrators Posted March 29, 2011 Yes, smothered to death... Ironically, I just don't feel the love in this discussion. "Absurdity reigns and confusion makes it look good." "Sinless perfection is such a shallow goal." "I love God only as much as the person I love the least." *Forgiveness is always good news. And that is the gospel truth. (And finally, the ideas expressed above are solely my person views and not that of any organization with which I am associated.)
Recommended Posts