70 x 7

[Lysimachus]

I wasn't aware the "counsel of the brethren" was Scripture. I thought the Bible was Scripture!

Oh, ya my mistake, the "counsel of the brethren" actually in your world "supersedes" the counsel of the Bible!

[Lysimachus]

Quote:

Men and women will arise professing to have some new light or some new revelation whose tendency is to unsettle faith in the old landmarks. Their doctrines will not bear the test of God's Word, yet souls will be deceived. False reports will be circulated, and some will be taken in this snare. . . . We cannot be too watchful against every form of error, for Satan is constantly seeking to draw men from the truth.--5T 293, 295, 296 (1885). {LDE 91.4}

We must make it appear essential to be united, not that we are to require others to come to our ideas, but if all are seeking the meekness and lowliness of Christ they will have the mind of Christ. Then there will be unity of spirit.--Letter 15, 1892. {LDE 92.1}

I urge those who claim to believe the truth to WALK IN UNITY WITH THEIR BRETHREN. Do not seek to give to the world occasion to say that we are extremists, that we are disunited, that one teaches one thing, and one another. Avoid dissension.--TM 57 (1893). {LDE 92.2}

[Lysimachus]

This forum is FILLED with former Adventists and also other Adventists who love to swim in their "new ideas" of interpreting Scripture. They think they are wise, but they are not wise. They are unwilling to submit to the counsel of the brethren when we tell them that their interpretations of those passages they think support their views actually do not say what they think them to say. Their ideas of what those text mean are based on their own, carnal, unsanctified interpretations, rather than allowing the Holy Spirit, working through the counsel of the brethren, to reveal their faulty premises.

[cheddar]

OK, lets just say for the sake of argument that 1844 is correct which it is not, not only because of the day for a year hocus pocus but also because there is no accurate start date given. William Miller got around this by using the start date for the 70 weeks but no where in Daniel does it say that he can do this, so his use of it is at best a guess.

But lets just say he was correct. If we go to Dan. 7 there is a scene of the son of man (Jesus) being brought before the ancient of days (God the Father). This scene takes place in the heavenly sanctuary, the books are opened and some type of judgment takes place and at the end a kingdom is given to the son of man.

If we move on to Dan. 8, the theme continues and we are given more information. The sanctuary will be cleansed at the end of 2300 days. Now if Adventists see both of these occurring in 1844 which would apply to the Christian age why would Dan. 9 all of a sudden go backwards 2000 years and talk about something that happened during the time of the Jews.

Dan. 9 continues the theme first introduced in Dan. 7. On the day of atonement the blood was brought into the most Holy place and sprinkled on the ark of the covenant. Please show the verse where the term anoint is used in connention with the most Holy place prior to the day of atonement because I’ve never seen it.

[miz3]

"Folly is joy to him that is destitute of wisdom: but a man of understanding walketh uprightly. Without counsel purposes are disappointed: but in the multitude of counsellors they are established." (Proverbs 15:21,22)

"A wise man [is] strong; yea, a man of knowledge increaseth strength. For by wise counsel thou shalt make thy war: and in multitude of counsellors there is safety." (Proverbs 24:5,6)

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost." (2 Peter 1:20,21)

"Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and [that] there be no divisions among you; but [that] ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment." (1 Cor 10,11)

These texts are better applied to you in regard to your usage. It appears you are the one "destitute of wisdom"! You cannot and will not answer my simple questions.

Second Peter means you have a private interpretation because it is not Biblical. If it is not Biblical no matter how many humans you get to agree with you, the "Lysimachus interpretation" is thus "private opinion".

Third, First Corinthians chapter ten verse eleven does want us all to be of the same opinion as Jesus Christ. NOT THE SAME OPINION BECAUSE WE BELONG TO SOME HUMAN GROUP! We can find many groups of humans across the Globe that share the "same mind and the same judgment", and also "speak the same thing" and "have no divisions among" them. Having said that does not make such groups correct. Satan did this with the fallen angels! They are of like mind in that they fear and hate Jesus Christ!

You want us to be human robotic slaves to other humans (ie. the Brethren).

What makes us correct is to "have the mind of Christ" (1Corinthians 2:6-12)!

Again, we see that you lack a great deal in understanding the Scripture. This is called a "surface reader of Scripture"! Such a one just picks words and phrases at random to suit themselves and their agenda! They don't really care what the Scripture as the Word of God is actually telling them! Usually but not always such ones have grown up being taught this way and are thus habitually locked into their preconceptions. Others are so glad to get out of their old worldview and practices that they latch onto such surface practices in regard to the Bible! This one reason why SDA are often viewed as Cult!

Your lack of knowledge appears to show that you have been conditioned to do whatever the "Brethren" say and that ends the matter!

You need to develop the "mind of Christ"! (1Corinthians 2:6-16.)!

[Lysimachus]

OK, lets just say for the sake of argument the 1844 is correct which it is not, not only because of the day for a year hocus pocus but also because there is no accurate start date given. William Miller got around this by using the start date for the 70 weeks but no where in Daniel does it say that he can do this, so his use of it is at best a guess.

But lets just say he was correct. If we go to Dan. 7 there is a scene of the son of man (Jesus) being brought before the ancient of days (God the Father). This scene takes place in the heavenly sanctuary, the books are opened and some type of judgment takes place and at the end a kingdom is given to the son of man.

If we move on to Dan. 8, the theme continues and we are given more information. The sanctuary will be cleansed at the end of 2300 days. Now if Adventists see both of these occurring in 1844 which would apply to the Christian age why would Dan. 9 all of a sudden go backwards 2000 years and talk about something that happened during the time of the Jews.

Dan. 9 continues the theme first introduced in Dan. 7. On the day of atonement the blood was brought into the most Holy place and sprinkled on the ark of the covenant. Please show the verse where the term anoint is used in connention with the most Holy place prior to the day of atonement because I’ve never seen it.

Is not the book of Revelation notorious for backing up and going all the way to the beginning? Prophets often wrote down events, then back up and went to the beginning later on to help fill in more details. This is a common theme throughout prophetic writings.

It says that the 70 weeks were "chathak" from something else. The primary Hebrew use of this word was to cut something off a larger portion. It was a term used to amputate limbs from animals.

What Daniel did not understand was the beginning portion of the 2300, nor did he understand because he thought God was going to extend the 70 year captivity to 2300 years, which is why he fainted.

Relief came in chapter 9 when he was shown that only 70 weeks portioned out of those 2300 belonged to His Jewish people.

[Lysimachus]

Originally Posted By: Lysimachus

"Folly is joy to him that is destitute of wisdom: but a man of understanding walketh uprightly. Without counsel purposes are disappointed: but in the multitude of counsellors they are established." (Proverbs 15:21,22)

"A wise man [is] strong; yea, a man of knowledge increaseth strength. For by wise counsel thou shalt make thy war: and in multitude of counsellors there is safety." (Proverbs 24:5,6)

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost." (2 Peter 1:20,21)

"Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and [that] there be no divisions among you; but [that] ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment." (1 Cor 10,11)

These texts are better applied to you in regard to your usage. It appears you are the one "destitute of wisdom"! You cannot and will not answer my simple questions.

Second Peter means you have a private interpretation because it is not Biblical. If it is not Biblical no matter how many humans you get to agree with you, the "Lysimachus interpretation" is thus "private opinion".

Third, First Corinthians chapter ten verse eleven does want us all to be of the same opinion as Jesus Christ. NOT THE SAME OPINION BECAUSE WE BELONG TO SOME HUMAN GROUP! We can find many groups of humans across the Globe that share the "same mind and the same judgment", and also "speak the same thing" and "have no divisions among" them. Having said that does not make such groups correct. Satan did this with the fallen angels! They are of like mind in that they fear and hate Jesus Christ!

You want us to be human robotic slaves to other humans (ie. the Brethren).

What makes us correct is to "have the mind of Christ" (1Corinthians 2:6-12)!

Again, we see that you lack a great deal in understanding the Scripture. This is called a "surface reader of Scripture"! Such a one just picks words and phrases at random to suit themselves and their agenda! They don't really care what the Scripture as the Word of God is actually telling them! Usually but not always such ones have grown up being taught this way and are thus habitually locked into their preconceptions. Others are so glad to get out of their old worldview and practices that they latch onto such surface practices in regard to the Bible! This one reason why SDA are often viewed as Cult!

Your lack of knowledge appears to show that you have been conditioned to do whatever the "Brethren" say and that ends the matter!

You need to develop the "mind of Christ"! (1Corinthians 2:6-16.)!

You say it is not Biblical. But we say it is. We say you are wrong, and that you are interpreting Scripture wrong. You are reading texts with your own preconceived ideas and notions. Therefore, if we come to you after we have evaluated your positions as brothers and sisters, and show you that you are wrong, you need to accept it, humble yourself, sit down, and submit.

That's the bottom line. Period.

[Lysimachus]

And I am done arguing with you miz3. You are a piece of work that is set in his ways. From now on, I'm going to dialogue with those who seriously wish to grapple with texts rather than wrest them to their own destruction.

[Dr. Rich]

This forum is FILLED with former Adventists and also other Adventists who love to swim in their "new ideas" of interpreting Scripture. They think they are wise, but they are not wise. They are unwilling to submit to the counsel of the brethren when we tell them that their interpretations of those passages they think support their views actually do not say what they think them to say. Their ideas of what those text mean are based on their own, carnal, unsanctified interpretations, rather than allowing the Holy Spirit, working through the counsel of the brethren, to reveal their faulty premises.

Who made you judge? If you are correct, then please give us the real test to put all of these issues on trial. Can you even do this? How is IT that YOU think you know the real truth?

[Dr. Rich]

Dan. 8:14 is restoring, not cleansing. The restoration of the temple means that the host for the Kingdom of Heaven were then set up at this time as we find in the Rock cut out w/o hands is. Miller was right about the date, but wrong on the event. What happened was that the host or the citizens for the KOH were established at that time. This same group is now spiritually sleeping.

[Dr. Rich]

Dan. 8:14 is restoring, not cleansing. The restoration of the temple means that the host for the Kingdom of Heaven were then set up at this time as we find in the Rock cut out w/o hands is. Miller was right about the date, but wrong on the event. What happened was that the host or the citizens for the KOH were established at that time. This same group is now spiritually sleeping.

[Lysimachus]

Dan. 8:14 is restoring, not cleansing. The restoration of the temple means that the host for the Kingdom of Heaven were then set up at this time as we find in the Rock cut out w/o hands is. Miller was right about the date, but wrong on the event. What happened was that the host or the citizens for the KOH were established at that time. This same group is now spiritually sleeping.

Daniel 8:14 is both about restoration and cleansing. Enough research has unequivocally established that the intent of this word was both for cleansing and restoring. Restoration is intrinsically tied to cleansing. This Hebrew word "sadaq" is a word that has multiple meanings in relation to restoration, cleansing, and vindication. When you are restoring an Israelite camp or congregation, you are cleansing it from its sins.

Both Pastor Stephen Bohr in his binder notes, and Daniel E. Augsburger in his book "The Good News of Daniel 8:14" establish this fact in stone. Nobody yet has been able to refute the exegetical and syntactical analysis by Augsburger of the word "sadaq" in Daniel 8:14.

[John317]

How is IT that YOU think you know the real truth?

He doesn't think he knows the truth. He knows he knows the truth. Probably just like you know you know the truth, right? So how it that you think you know you know the truth?

[cheddar]

It says that the 70 weeks were "chathak" from something else. The primary Hebrew use of this word was to cut something off a larger portion. It was a term used to amputate limbs from animals.

What Daniel did not understand was the beginning portion of the 2300, nor did he understand because he thought God was going to extend the 70 year captivity to 2300 years, which is why he fainted.

Relief came in chapter 9 when he was shown that only 70 weeks portioned out of those 2300 belonged to His Jewish people.

I know this and I agree with it, but what if the 70 weeks are cut off at the end of the 2300 days. There's still no start date and it's a 50/50 chance of one or the other being correct.

Something as important as 1844 should be built upon something sturdier than a 50/50 chance.

Also at the end of the 2300 days the sanctuary is cleansed or as some would say 'made righteous', I have no problem with either term. If something is cleansed or made righteous, it's a finished process. But that's not what Adventists teach - they teach that in 1844 the cleansing is just beginning with no end in sight. That is not something that's completed or finished or cleansed or made righteous. Another problem for the validity of 1844.

I would also like to say that in asking these questions, I am not trying to tear down anyones faith. Some on this forum would have us believe that the bible can only be interpreted by Ellen White or men of higher learning. These were the same sentiments in days of the reformation when Catholics feared that the common man would not be able to grasp the big words of the bible.

Questions should always drive us to the bible and prayer - if they don't we're not seekers of truth.

[Dr. Rich]

Originally Posted By: Dr. Rich

Dan. 8:14 is restoring, not cleansing. The restoration of the temple means that the host for the Kingdom of Heaven were then set up at this time as we find in the Rock cut out w/o hands is. Miller was right about the date, but wrong on the event. What happened was that the host or the citizens for the KOH were established at that time. This same group is now spiritually sleeping.

Daniel 8:14 is both about restoration and cleansing. Enough research has unequivocally established that the intent of this word was both for cleansing and restoring. Restoration is intrinsically tied to cleansing. This Hebrew word "sadaq" is a word that has multiple meanings in relation to restoration, cleansing, and vindication. When you are restoring an Israelite camp or congregation, you are cleansing it from its sins.

Both Pastor Stephen Bohr in his binder notes, and Daniel E. Augsburger in his book "The Good News of Daniel 8:14" establish this fact in stone. Nobody yet has been able to refute the exegetical and syntactical analysis of the word "sadaq" in Daniel 8:14.

Here is the thing: The truth was taken and trampled upon and destroyed for thousands of years, until the time came for the establishment of the LAST Kingdom of Heaven, the same as the Rock cut out w/o hands in Dan. 2, and the group that Jesus said would receive the KOH in Matthew 21:43. The time for this restoration of the KOH and it's host was established by the 2300 years found in Dan. 8:14.

What was restored was the truth regarding God's covenant and a group now called Adventists saw this and proclaimed they would now keep all of the covenant, thus restoring the truth of God's commandments.

[Dr. Rich]

Originally Posted By: Dr. Rich

How is IT that YOU think you know the real truth?

He doesn't think he knows the truth. He knows he knows the truth. Probably just like you know you know the truth, right? So how it that you think you know you know the truth?

Simple John317, Jesus' words are the real truth. Do you not agree with this?

[Lysimachus]

Here is the thing: The truth was taken and trampled upon and destroyed for thousands of years, until the time came for the establishment of the LAST Kingdom of Heaven, the same as the Rock cut out w/o hands in Dan. 2, and the group that Jesus said would receive the KOH in Matthew 21:43. The time for this restoration of the KOH and it's host was established by the 2300 years found in Dan. 8:14.

What was restored was the truth regarding God's covenant and a group now called Adventists saw this and proclaimed they would now keep all of the covenant, thus restoring the truth of God's commandments.

But in order to restore truth, what must be done? Cleanse out the error out of the minds of the people, which mirror the heavenly sanctuary. Remember, there is a two-fold sanctuary. Christ's spiritual sanctuary on earth, His Church, His people, and Christ's literal sanctuary in heaven. The work of restoring truth requires the cleansing of sin and error. It is all intrinsically tied.

The Papacy polluted the sanctuary. How so? By polluting the minds of the people with heresies and error, by interfering with the connection between humanity and Christ's High Priestly ministry. Such an obscuring polluted the minds of the people with untold errors. And error ends up leading one to sin when they don't see the truth of what Christ is doing for them. Therefore, the pollution of the Papacy only multiplies. But once the heresies are cleansed and removed, now people can appreciate what Christ has done for them, and live a holy life. :)

[cheddar]

My question remains, cheddar, WHICH "TIME OF THE END"?

Daniel refers to a 'time of the end' and a 'time of trouble'

The 'time of the end' happens prior to the 'time of trouble' - I'm not sure if that's what you mean?

[John317]

...

But lets just say he was correct [about 1844 ed] . If we go to Dan. 7 there is a scene of the son of man (Jesus) being brought before the ancient of days (God the Father). This scene takes place in the heavenly sanctuary, the books are opened and some type of judgment takes place and at the end a kingdom is given to the son of man.

If we move on to Dan. 8, the theme continues and we are given more information. The sanctuary will be cleansed at the end of 2300 days. Now if Adventists see both of these occurring in 1844 which would apply to the Christian age why would Dan. 9 all of a sudden go backwards 2000 years and talk about something that happened during the time of the Jews.

Simply because the angel of God was sent to Daniel to explain the vision of the 2300 days. The eighth chapter ends with Daniel wondering about the meaning of that vision. The 2300 day vision made him sick and he wanted to understand it. So the beginning of the 70 weeks (457 BC) was also the starting point of the 2300 evening-and-mornings.

By the way, why did the 2300 day prophecy make Daniel sick and faint? If he knew it was 2300 literal days-- which would be only about 6 years-- why would he have been sick? He was sick because the long prophecy seemed to him to conflict with the prophecy of Jeremiah that the people would soon be going home. That why the ninth chapter shows Daniel studying the prophecy of Jeremiah to review its promises. Then Daniel prays to God about the sins of Israel to plead with God to fulfill the promises to let Israel return. Notice Daniel 9: 17, Daniel's mention of the sanctuary that is desolate. (It had seemed to Daniel that the 2300 day prophecy meant the sanctuary would be desolate thousands of years. No wonder Daniel was sick!)

Notice that the first thing the angel says to Daniel is that he has come to help him understand the vision. Daniel 9: 22.

[John317]

How is IT that YOU think you know the real truth?

Originally Posted By: John3:17

He doesn't think he knows the truth. He knows he knows the truth. Probably just like you know you know the truth, right? So how it that you think you know you know the truth?

Originally Posted By: Dr. Rich

Simple John317, Jesus' words are the real truth. Do you not agree with this?

Jesus' words are the real truth, sure, but they are not the only truth. All of God's revelations through the prophets and apostles are also real truth. In fact, the Bible teaches that it was the Spirit of Jesus who inspired the prophets. That is why the Holy Spirit is called the Spirit of prophecy. It is the Spirit who inspires the prophets.

If you and I don't accept all the truth that God has for us, we don't know the real truth. WE would then know part of the truth but not all the truth that God has for us. What would you think of people who only accept the Pentateuch or only accept the Gospels? Would you say they are missing out on a lot of God's truth? I certainly would.

[jasd]

Let me be forthright with you. You provided the following:

Quote:

Submit New Light to Experienced Brethren.--There are a thousand temptations in disguise prepared for those who have the light of truth; and the only safety for any of us is in receiving no new doctrine, no new interpretation of the Scriptures, without first submitting it to brethren of experience. Lay it before them in a humble, teachable spirit, with earnest prayer; and if they see no light in it, yield to their judgment; for "in the multitude of counselors there is safety."--Testimonies, Vol. 5, pp. 291-293. (1885.) {CW 47.1}

To every church I would bear the message that man is not to exalt his own judgment. Meekness and lowliness of heart will lead men to desire counsel at every step. And the Lord will say, "Take My yoke upon you, and learn of Me." It is our privilege to learn of Jesus. But when men, full of self-confidence, think that it is their place to give counsel instead of desiring to be counseled by their experienced brethren, they will listen to voices that will lead them in strange paths. {TM 501.1}

as example to one or more of the forum. The above omits the fact that all of those early members, which comprised the association – left other churches to seek new light. Now the advice is exactly the opposite re others doing likewise. Helter-skelter.

Quote:

Quote Lysimachus

This forum is FILLED with former Adventists and also other Adventists who love to swim in their "new ideas" of interpreting Scripture. They think they are wise, but they are not wise. They are unwilling to submit to the counsel of the brethren when we tell them that their interpretations of those passages they think support their views actually do not say what they think them to say. Their ideas of what those text mean are based on their own, carnal, unsanctified interpretations, rather than allowing the Holy Spirit, working through the counsel of the brethren, to reveal their faulty premises.

I am constrained to advise you – warranted, received or not – that your posts, though holding much promise, contain an inordinate amount of snarkiness.

It is not flattering to you. You lose credibility. It is a shame, as you seem to present your views well enough.

Though there is another who is attempting to sharpen his bit of iron against yours (Biblical) – you need to present your best face (consider it noblesse oblige) – as you seem to imply that you represent the best of the .Org.

Now, were you me...,

you wouldn’t give a rat’s fundament.

However, you’re probably a better person than me – and ought to be aware of your polish.

No harm, no foul.

[John317]

The truth was taken and trampled upon and destroyed for thousands of years, until the time came for the establishment of the LAST Kingdom of Heaven, the same as the Rock cut out w/o hands in Dan. 2, and the group that Jesus said would receive the KOH in Matthew 21:43. The time for this restoration of the KOH and it's host was established by the 2300 years found in Dan. 8:14.

What was restored was the truth regarding God's covenant and a group now called Adventists saw this and proclaimed they would now keep all of the covenant, thus restoring the truth of God's commandments.

I agree with you to the extent that God raised up the Advent Movement for the purpose of calling the world's attention to God's down-trodden law. That is part of the Three Angels Messages, which is to be proclaimed to the whole wolrd just before Christ returns.

But why would you say this at the same time that you tell people that God's prophet among the Adventists was inspired by the Devil?

And why would you say this about Daniel 8: 14 at the same time that you claim the Great Disappointment was not a movement of God?

By the way, the Rock cut out w/o hands in Daniel 2 represents the second coming of Christ to establish His everlasting kingdom. It is not the establishment of the SDA church.

[miz3]

Daniel refers to a 'time of the end' and a 'time of trouble'

The 'time of the end' happens prior to the 'time of trouble' - I'm not sure if that's what you mean?

My point in raising this question is, it depends on your view of Daniel's prophecies "what the end" means!

For example: Some might think the prophecy ends at the end of the Roman Empire. To them "time of the end" would be when the Roman Empire ends.

If for example: Some think the prophecy ended in 1844, then that would be the "time of the end".

Thus, such a phrase is up for multiple interpretation depending on what you believe the texts mean in Daniel. So simply stating that the "time of the end" is now or in the future is not proof of one's take the Prophecies of Daniel. "the time of the end phrase" is not proof that yours, mine, or anyone's interpretation of Daniel is correct. Such proof either lies elsewhere or nowhere!

[miz3]

By the way, the Rock cut out w/o hands in Daniel 2 represents the second coming of Christ to establish His everlasting kingdom. It is not the establishment of the SDA church.

Is that the only way the Daniel chapter two could be taken?

[Lysimachus]

Let me be forthright with you. You provided the following:

<Quoting Lysimachus>

as example to one or more of the forum. The above omits the fact that all of those early members, which comprised the association – left other churches to seek new light. Now the advice is exactly the opposite re others doing likewise. Helter-skelter.