Are Humans Free Moral Agents?

[John317]

Yahweh Himself, who spoke to the people directly and led them through the desert with a cloud of fire by night, and fed them with manna 6 days a week for 40 years. They could see Moses talking to God. They saw the proof with their own eyes of Moses' authority as God's prophet.

[miz3]

The problem as I see it is that there is no independent verifiable entity that can attest your assertion that Moses was a prophet. The witnesses you point to have a prejudiced testimony for various reasons. Besides they are humans like you and I who could do the same thing today if we thought we were witnessing what we thought were manifestations. We cannot be certain that the Children of Israel did not make up the legend of Moses in order to enhance their standing and pride among themselves.

I don't know, it seems to me that we should be able to have a better witness than the Children of Israel since even in the writings they claimed that a "golden calf" brought them out of Egypt.

[John317]

Alright. :-)

[miz3]

Don't you see that we have a problem of verification in regard to Moses as a Prophet? If you agree, then how is this solved? If you don't agree please explain.

(I was at another place reading posts and got so involved I did not pay attention that you had responded.)

I didn't mean to leave you hanging.

[Dr. Rich]

miz3, you brought up the key problem with any discussion some time ago and that was about 'authority'. Most of my life I was in agreement with John317 and Richard in that EGW was an authority to quote because I thought she was a true prophet of God. After several years of reading about everything she wrote and seeing for myself the many times she said that God showed her this and that and we now clearly see that she was wrong, I could no longer hold her as an authority. In fact she even said not to use her writings as any authority so I question all of those who do this why they are doing what she didn't want them to do????

You also said that you now want to be honest--does that mean that you were not honest with us in the past?

As for the authority of Moses, Jesus verified the Law and the Prophets because He quoted from them. You need look no further than this. Jesus also verfied the writing of the eyewitness disciples in John 14:26 and 17:17-20 so I would call them authorized too. But you can't say the same for any of Paul's writings, Luke and the unknown writer(s) of Hebrews, 1st and 2nd Peter and even James as he was not a disciple, but a step brother of Jesus and at one time tried to get Jesus killed.

Am I throwing out the bible?? No--I just treat those other writings the same way I treat EGW's writings and Qu'ran. I do not use them as authority to build my foundation of belief upon as Jesus warned us about and found in Matthew 7:24-27.

[miz3]

You also said that you now want to be honest--does that mean that you were not honest with us in the past?

I do not recall saying that I was not honest in the past. I do recall saying that my "social behavior was wrong and that I let it deteriorate into an unChristlike demonstration for which I am thoroughly ashamed of.

Again, I have never not been honest in the presentations I have made. I only apologize and recant those words and attitudes I just stated were unChristlike.

Please show me where I said I was dishonest? then give me chance to explain any such statement because I don't believe I ever made such a statement.

[Guest]

Am I throwing out the bible?? No--I just treat those other writings the same way I treat EGW's writings and Qu'ran. I do not use them as authority to build my foundation of belief upon as Jesus warned us about and found in Matthew 7:24-27.

So how do you justify all of your beliefs that cannot be found anywhere in the Bible? And more importantly, what about the ones where the Bible says the exact opposite of what you believe hmmmmm?

[Dr. Rich]

Richard, such as what? Please be specific since you are personally attacking me and my belief. Give me one at a time please.

[Dr. Rich]

miz3, I didn't say you were not honest, please read what you wrote in post number 438139 "Let's be honest"... Didn't mean that you were not honest, but I have caught lawyers saying "to be honest with you", in court and when they do I jump up and yell out "objection", and ask the court to strike everything before this because the attorney (or witness) admitted that he was not honest before. (LOL) I don't trust any of them! That is why I am not associated with them in the union they all belong to and take an oath to obey.

[John317]

Dr. Rich, are you practicing law in court as an attorney?

On this Forum, we really need to assume that everyone is being honest and sincere, even when we suspect it may not be the case.

I understand what you're saying, but don't you think that when people say, "I'll be honest with you," or "To tell you the truth," they simply mean that they want to emphasize the truth of something, and they realize that some people may not tell it the way they're telling it? I don't think the saying is an implication that they were lying beforehand.

When you make your objection in court, what response do you usually get from the judge and other attorneys? Overruled, right? And some "oh please," etc.

[miz3]

Dr. Rich,

Thank you pointing that out. This is a case of your not understanding my meaning.

When I said, "Let's be honest" I mean for the reader or the person I am talking to be honest about what we are talking about and to stop filibustering, presenting talking points, twisting the Word, etc.

I was not calling my self to be honest because I always take it that I am honest. I MIGHT be wrong but I am not wrong dishonestly or knowingly. If I have been wrong I do try and correct the record as soon as I can.

I believe honesty is the best way for people to gain trust. When we are NOT HONEST sooner or later it catches up with us. The later it catches us the worse it is for us. I digress a little.

The "final answer" to your question is, NO! I was not calling for my self to be honest.

I hope this clears up your confusion.

[John317]

... In fact she even said not to use her writings as any authority...

This can lead to a real misunderstanding of what Ellen White wrote. She never implied that her writings are not "any authority." Of course they are an authority for those who believe what she wrote-- that Christ commissioned her as His messenger and gave her many visions and dreams and told her to write them out for the church.

Ellen White certainly did not imply, then, that people should ignore her writings. What she did say is that people are to look to God and the Bible as their ultimate authority, particularly in terms of establishing doctrine. But if they do that, they will accept the messages of a genuine prophet of God, because that is what the Bible commands us to do.

See these statements, for instance:

Quote:

Those who have been seeking to undermine the confidence of our people in the testimonies of the Spirit of God, and in the leadings of Providence in our work, will one day be revealed as having acted a part similar to that of Judas. Judas was tempted and tried, but not rising above these temptations, he lost ground, and finally went so far as to betray his Lord. Christ permitted Judas to go with the other disciples on their evangelistic tours, but on these occasions, Judas often manifested a spirit of superiority. He sought to exercise authority over his brethren. This spirit, unchecked, opened the way for the enemy to work upon his heart and mind, until at length he went so far as to betray his Saviour with a treacherous kiss. There are today, among the professed people of God, some who are walking in the same path; and unless they are converted, they will one day be numbered with the open enemies of God's work for this time. {RH, September 9, 1909 par. 8}

Quote:

I am instructed to say to those who endeavor to tear down the foundation that has made us Seventh-day Adventists: We are God's commandmentkeeping people. For the past fifty years every phase of heresy has been brought to bear upon us, to becloud our minds regarding the teaching of the Word--especially concerning the ministration of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary, and the message of heaven for these last days, as given by the angels of the fourteenth chapter of Revelation. Messages of every order and kind have been urged upon Seventh-day Adventists, to take the place of the truth which, point by point, has been sought out by prayerful study and testified to by the miracle-working power of the Lord. But the waymarks which have made us what we are, are to be preserved, and they will be preserved, as God has signified through His word and the testimonies of His Spirit. He calls upon us to hold firmly with the grip of faith, to the fundamental principles that are based upon unquestionable authority. {4MR 246.1}

Quote:

God is either teaching His church, reproving their wrongs and strengthening their faith, or He is not. This work is of God, or it is not. God does nothing in partnership with Satan. My work . . . bears the stamp of God or the stamp of the enemy. There is no halfway work in the matter. The Testimonies are of the Spirit of God, or of the devil. As the Lord has manifested Himself through the Spirit of prophecy, past, present, and future have passed before me. I have been shown faces that I had never seen, and years afterward I knew them when I saw them. I have been aroused from my sleep with a vivid sense of subjects previously presented to my mind; and I have written, at midnight, letters that have gone across the continent and, arriving at a crisis, have saved great disaster to the cause of God. This has been my work for many years. A power has impelled me to reprove and rebuke wrongs that I had not thought of. Is this work from above or from beneath. 120 {CCh 93.2}

Satan’s Aim Is to Cause Doubt

In many cases the Testimonies are fully received, the sin and indulgence broken off, and reformation at once commences in harmony with the light God has given. In other instances sinful indulgences are cherished, the Testimonies are rejected, and many excuses which are untrue are offered to others as the reason for refusing to receive them. The true reason is not given. It is a lack of moral courage—a will, strengthened and controlled by the Spirit of God, to renounce hurtful habits. {CCh 93.3}

Satan has ability to suggest doubts and to devise objections to the pointed testimony that God sends, and many think it a virtue, a mark of intelligence in them, to be unbelieving and to question and quibble. Those who desire to doubt will have plenty of room. God does not propose to remove all occasion for unbelief. He gives evidence, which must be carefully investigated with a humble mind and a teachable spirit, and all should decide from the weight of evidence. God gives sufficient evidence for the candid mind to believe; but he who turns from the weight of evidence because there are a few things which he cannot make plain to his finite understanding will be left in the cold, chilling atmosphere of unbelief and questioning doubts, and will make shipwreck of faith. {CCh 93.4}

It is Satan's plan to weaken the faith of God's people in the Testimonies. Satan knows how to make his attacks. He works upon minds to excite jealousy and dissatisfaction toward those at the head of the work. {CCh 93.5}

[miz3]

John317,

Maybe I am reading you wrong but it appears that you just used one authority to testify as to another authority and then used that same authority to verify your first authority. Kind of circular don't you think?

If use item "A" to state that item "B" is an Authority and then turn around and use item "B" to state that item "A" is an Authority and that is our proof. Is doing such valid?

[John317]

Is this in response to post#438266 ?

If so, all I am saying in that post is that Ellen White never intended to give the impression that her writings hold no authority for SDAs.

[John317]

Don't you see that we have a problem of verification in regard to Moses as a Prophet? If you agree, then how is this solved? If you don't agree please explain.

Actually, we have objective evidence that Moses and the other prophets spoke the truth and were of God. We have the fulfillment of the prophecies. We have the entire history of the children of Israel, the fulfillment of specific propehcies in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ, and we also have the testimony of the Spirit of God in our lives that the Bible is the word of God and that we are children of God.

So, no, we're not dependent on mere human beings-- the wicked Israelites who refused to go into teh promised Land-- for evidence that Moses was a true prophet of God.

[miz3]

Thank you John417,

That is what I was looking for. Good job!

Now what about my question in post #438270.

[Guest]

Richard, such as what? Please be specific since you are personally attacking me and my belief. Give me one at a time please.

Ok, here's one just off the top of my head:

You say that Jesus never said anything about needing to have faith, in order to be saved. But NOTHING could be further from the truth.

Mat 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

To believe something you cannot prove, is the very definition of faith. And you cannot prove that Jesus is the son of God. So not only is it impossible to please God without faith, it is impossible to be saved without it. This is the one constant throughout Jesus' ministry. Over and over and over again He tells people that they must believe something they cannot prove. In other words, to have FAITH!

If you do not believe He is the son of God, then you cannot be saved, according to Jn 3:16 and many other texts. And since you cannot prove it, you HAVE to take it on faith.

The fact that you can read the words of Jesus and not see this, suggests to me that it is not the Holy Spirit that is leading you.

Mar 11:22 And Jesus answering said unto them, Have faith in God.

[Guest]

Richard, such as what? Please be specific since you are personally attacking me and my belief. Give me one at a time please.

Here's another one:

You say that Jesus has nothing to do with grace, and that the idea that we are saved by it comes ONLY from Paul.

Again, nothing could be further from the truth. The very fact that Jesus died on the cross for us IS GRACE, because not one of us deserves to have that done on our behalf.

Joh 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

You claim to believe John above all the other gospels. So why is your mind locked up on this issue? Did wayfinder hypnotize you or something?

And before you can say that Jesus didn't die for our sins, let me quote another text by John:

1Jn 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

[miz3]

To Dr, Rich,

Boy, do I agree with Richard Holbrook on this one!

[wayfinder]

Proverbs 14:12 There is a way which seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death.

Matthew 7:13,14 NAS

[The Narrow and Wide Gates] "Enter through the narrow gate ; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it.

"For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.

Richard, you had better hope and pray that I am wrong, but I would say, judging from the responses on this forum to new thinking, I am among the few and you are among the many, even miz3 agrees with you on this. Incidently, I do not know hypnosis, or I would have used it on you a long time ago.

[doug yowell]

[John317]

Now what about my question in post #438270.

Is this with regard to my post about Ellen White's authority? If so, all I am saying in that post is that Ellen White did not mean for us to believe her writings have no authority. She certainly does have authoirty, but that authority doesn't replace the authority of the Bible. Dr. Rich was saying that Ellen White wrote that she doesn't have "any authority," and I am merely saying that this is incorrect.

I'm not sure if this answers your question or not. Let me know.

:-)

[Guest]

Richard, you had better hope and pray that I am wrong, but I would say, judging from the responses on this forum to new thinking, I am among the few and you are among the many, even miz3 agrees with you on this. Incidently, I do not know hypnosis, or I would have used it on you a long time ago.

Don't tell me you're right just because you are in the minority. That's ridiculous! Adventism as a whole (which you are not a part of) is a minority, among the other denominations.

If that is really what determines what truth is, then I could come up with some beliefs even more absurd than yours, and have only one follower. Would I then have more truth than you? According to your reasoning here I would!

Why don't you instead, try to refute the words of Jesus that I posted, which say the exact opposite of what you believe? You didn't even address it. Instead, you reason that you MUST be right since there are only 3 people in the world that believe that stuff. PLEASE!!! Give me a break!

The reason you don't even try to address it when Jesus' words prove you wrong is, you know you can't for one. And two, your beliefs are not based in scripture. Oh you say they are, but when all you can say is: "I'm right because I'm in the minority" it shows that they're not.

So when Jesus says something that destroys your whole philosophy of speculation, it's no big deal to you. Because MOST of what you try to pass off as theology cannot be found anywhere in the Bible. So what's one more little obstacle?

So you keep right on thinking you must be on the right track since nobody can see any light in what you're saying. And me, I'll stick to what the Bible actually says.

And one more thing that obviously has never crossed your mind. That is, you cannot come up with a whole new religion, with a whole new belief system, and usurp the name of an existing religion that has already been established on totally different beliefs and principles.

When you tell people you are SDA, that is exactly what you are doing.

PS. I purposely only used portions of the Bible that you claim to believe in. That way you can't just say: "well I don't believe that". You would have to show that the words of Jesus and John mean something totally opposite of what they say. And that is why you can't even address it with scripture.

[miz3]

John317,

I think it is the statement you made that made me make my statement about A and B Authorities.

It is my fault that I did not quote you in my post what you said and then go on about my As and Bs. Thus we are now stuck with an ambiguity. I have been busy all day and have been in and out of looking at things here and so I am not sure. However, I think the quote below is what I was referring to:

What she did say is that people are to look to God and the Bible as their ultimate authority, particularly in terms of establishing doctrine. But if they do that, they will accept the messages of a genuine prophet of God, because that is what the Bible commands us to do.

[wayfinder]

Richard, I was mearly using an example, I was not saying that because I have "come up with my own truth" so I can be in the minority, and therefore be the one who receives eternal life, you must think I am a terrible person. If I have created my own truth so I can be saved, without reguard to anyone elses salvation than you would be absolutely right in your assessment of me, but I am not that way. If I were that way I would not spend time on this forum or blogtalkradio explaining "my truth", although it is not mine, that would be counterproductive to the understanding you believe I maintain. I spend time here with you and John317 and the others, because I care about you.

It is true that you provided one text that have the word grace in it and one with the word propitiation, neither text is a direct quote from Jesus, as you state, but neither text teaches salvation by grace through faith either. The word grace, in John 1:17, means loving-kindness, and I know that God shows us loving-kindness. Propitiation means satisfying or appeasing, in the context of our debt to death. Jesus paid our debt to death and we become His bondservants.

If there was a Jewish forum, back in Jesus day, would you talk to him the same way you are talking to me? He died, alone, on Calvary. Would you tell Him that He had created His own truth to make Himself in the vast miniorty? He only had 12 disciples and one of them betrayed Him. Would you say He shouldn't consider Himself a Jewish believer because His truth clashed with the religeous establishment. Do you say, if I had been alive in Jesus day, I would not have rejected or abandoned Him. You have your opportunity today, what will you choose?