teresaq Posted July 23, 2011 Posted July 23, 2011 Hey TF, the post was responding to "John 3:17". :) Quote facebook. /teresa.quintero.790
Truth Files Posted July 23, 2011 Author Posted July 23, 2011 Now I believe we have it straightened out ... I thought you were concerned that I was being critical of your posting Thanks Quote Stephen - Author - Truth Files
Lysimachus Posted July 23, 2011 Posted July 23, 2011 He specifically points out that there would be those who would come and say that they are "Jews" [israel] .... when they are not .... those professing Christians who steal Israel's identity by replacement theology are on His hit list [Revelation 2:9; 3:9] Romans 2:25-29 already gives the definition of what a "Jew" means. So therefore, John's definition of a Jew would be that of Paul's. A true Jew is one who's heart has been circumcised--a Christian. Therefore, those who claim to be Jews and who are not, John is really saying: "those who claim to be Christians and are not", as the symbolic term "Jew" applies to all those who are born again. John the Revelator is using symbolic terms--such as "the seven golden candlesticks" being the 7 Churches. Notice he is using Jewish symbols to represent the Churches in Revelation 1-3. He even uses the word "synagogue", a Jewish house of worship, to represent the "synagogue of Satan". He also applies "Jezebel" and "Balaac" to issues revolving the Church. And who was Jezebel and Balaac opposed to in the Old Testament? Ancient Israel! It's not hard to see just how miserably inconsistent your application of these symbols really are. Quote ~Lysimachus (Marcos S.) Author of article, Vindicating the Year-Day Principle of Prophetic Interpretation (see attachment for article) Currently writing a book, Vindicating the Historical School of Prophetic Interpretation Founder of the largest and fastest SDA Apologetics Group on Facebook, Seventh-Day Adventism - Defending the Pillars of the Faith Writer and apologetics contributor at Adventist Defense League Vindicating the Year-Day Principle of Prophetic Interpretation.pdf
Truth Files Posted July 23, 2011 Author Posted July 23, 2011 Wrong interpretation above Paul speaks of the unsaved "Jew" [ethnic] in Romans 25-29 He is speaking to the professing church in Revelation 1; 2; 3 [not to Israel] .... and to those specifically who say they are spiritual "Jews" [gentile replacement theologists] .... and are not And you are really off regarding the symbol of Jezebel used to describe segments of the professing church who follow a false prophetess [there have been a number of these women who teach their followers another gospel] .... you have done this thing I also notice that you can never present your position without railing at others who have different views ... [Words here deleted by the moderator.] This tells me that your moorings are very questionable .... those who have confidence in their walk with Jesus Christ do not need an aggressive/defensive posture Quote Stephen - Author - Truth Files
Moderators John317 Posted July 23, 2011 Moderators Posted July 23, 2011 ...Revelation 1,2,3 is addressed to the Lord's church .... His evaluation of professing Christianity over time [from the first century unto this day] He specifically points out that there would be those who would come and say that they are "Jews" [israel] .... when they are not .... those professing Christians who steal Israel's identity by replacement theology are on His hit list [Revelation 2:9; 3:9] "Jews" in REv. 2: 9 and 3: 9 does not refer to literal Jews but to spiritual Jews, that is, Christians. In other words, God is saying that there will be false followers of Christ. Those verses have nothing to do with "replacement theology." Please show that post #462917 by Lysamachus is in error. Quote 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.
Aussiemike Posted July 23, 2011 Posted July 23, 2011 Wrong interpretation above Paul speaks of the unsaved "Jew" [ethnic] in Romans 25-29 He is speaking to the professing church in Revelation 1; 2; 3 [not to Israel] .... and to those specifically who say they are spiritual "Jews" [gentile replacement theologists] .... and are not Return of the Jews rubbish again. I see that you are still trying to rebuild that wall of partition that Jesus tore down. Jesus made the 2 into one. You and your false theology are trying to make the one back into two. Quote
Moderators John317 Posted July 23, 2011 Moderators Posted July 23, 2011 You're right. God does not have two different ways of saving mankind. He save literal Jews today the same way He saves non-Jews, by His grace through faith in Jesus Christ. Quote 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.
miz3 Posted July 23, 2011 Posted July 23, 2011 Originally Posted By: Truth Files He specifically points out that there would be those who would come and say that they are "Jews" [israel] .... when they are not .... those professing Christians who steal Israel's identity by replacement theology are on His hit list [Revelation 2:9; 3:9] Romans 2:25-29 already gives the definition of what a "Jew" means. So therefore, John's definition of a Jew would be that of Paul's. A true Jew is one who's heart has been circumcised--a Christian. Therefore, those who claim to be Jews and who are not, John is really saying: "those who claim to be Christians and are not", as the symbolic term "Jew" applies to all those who are born again. John the Revelator is using symbolic terms--such as "the seven golden candlesticks" being the 7 Churches. Notice he is using Jewish symbols to represent the Churches in Revelation 1-3. He even uses the word "synagogue", a Jewish house of worship, to represent the "synagogue of Satan". He also applies "Jezebel" and "Balaac" to issues revolving the Church. And who was Jezebel and Balaac opposed to in the Old Testament? Ancient Israel! It's not hard to see just how miserably inconsistent your application of these symbols really are. The names of the Churches are "GREEK"! Doesn't that have some symbolic significance? Quote
ClubV12 Posted July 23, 2011 Posted July 23, 2011 You must also understand God's people, whether they be SDA or not, have an obligation to call sin by it's right name. To make clear the way of the Lord, not to speak smooth sayings and tickle the ears of those who present error, but to speak plainly. There are many on this forum that present the most grotesque doctrines and continually fight against the truth. We have a duty to meet it, to give a reason for our faith. For those who would attack the church and/or the Lords messenger, do not think you will go unopposed in posting your heretic and false doctrines. Do not take solace in the idea that you are being persecuted for your faith and belief. Tis a foolish man willing to give up his life for his beliefs when they are not grounded in God and he has been overcome by grand delusion. Such is the case I see here all to often. Sincere-ly mistaken people espousing doctrine that is little more than babble, and then rejoicing they are persecuted because of it. Fools abound... Quote
Moderators John317 Posted July 23, 2011 Moderators Posted July 23, 2011 If you have an interest in learning what SDAs believe, see the following link: http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/books/27/index.htm It should answer just about every question you have if you study the book. It is titled, What Seventh-day Adventists Believe, and it shows our official doctrines and then gives an explanation of each one. It is fairly complete and accurate as far as showing what the church believes. Quote 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.
Moderators John317 Posted July 23, 2011 Moderators Posted July 23, 2011 Here is the book that I read regarding your questions [Matthew 24:4-5; 2Peter 1:16-21; Revelation 3:9] Have you ever seriously read it? Yes, many times. But when it comes to understanding the beliefs of William Miller and the way he preached or whether the Millerites were "hoodwinked," it is not enough to simply read the above verses. If you or anyone else is going to talk about the beliefs of a group or a denomination, don't you think it would be a good idea to read what they've written or published? You ask these questions but you appear to have no real interest in learning the answers to them. If you do, there are plenty of good sources to find the answers. Quote 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.
Moderators John317 Posted July 23, 2011 Moderators Posted July 23, 2011 ...If what SDAs teach is true, then what about all of the believers who died between the cross of Christ, and the beginning of the investigative judgment of 1844? If Christ needed to complete His work of redemption, then why did He wait until 1844? Either the ex-SDA who asks this question never studied what his church believes or else the question is being asked by someone who has never been SDA and who has never studied SDA beliefs. I suspect it's the latter. There are many books and articles readily available that answer these questions. You say, "If what SDAs teach is true," but what do you believe we teach? People who died between the cross and the 1844 are in the same condition spiritually as those who died between Adam and the cross. Everyone is judged by the light they have of the truth or the light they could have had if they had sought for the light of truth. Living after 1844 doesn't give anyone an advantage for salvation over someone who lived before 1844. That is not what the Investigative Judgment is all about. Have you read the official doctrine of the SDA church on the Investigative Judgment? It is a statement that was voted on and passed by the world church in General Conference. It gives a good indication of what we believe regarding your question: Quote: There is a sanctuary in heaven, the true tabernacle which the Lord set up and not man. In it Christ ministers on our behalf, making available to believers the benefits of His atoning sacrifice offered once for all on the cross. He was inaugurated as our great High Priest and began His intercessory ministry at the time of His ascension. In 1844, at the end of the prophetic period of 2300 days, He entered the second and last phase of His atoning ministry. It is a work of investigative judgment which is part of the ultimate disposition of all sin, typified by the cleansing of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary on the Day of Atonement. In that typical service the sanctuary was cleansed with the blood of animal sacrifices, but the heavenly things are purified with the perfect sacrifice of the blood of Jesus. The investigative judgment reveals to heavenly intelligences who among the dead are asleep in Christ and therefore, in Him, are deemed worthy to have part in the first resurrection. It also makes manifest who among the living are abiding in Christ, keeping the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, and in Him, therefore, are ready for translation into His everlasting kingdom. This judgment vindicates the justice of God in saving those who believe in Jesus. It declares that those who have remained loyal to God shall receive the kingdom. The completion of this ministry of Christ will mark the close of human probation before the Second Advent.—Fundamental Beliefs, 23 Source: http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/books/27/27-23.htm Continued Quote 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.
Moderators John317 Posted July 23, 2011 Moderators Posted July 23, 2011 Continued Questions from a former SDA member: ....If what SDAs teach is true, then what about all of the believers who died between the cross of Christ, and the beginning of the investigative judgment of 1844? I would be interested to know why you ask the question. What do you believe SDAs believe that would make a problem for people who died before 1844? Originally Posted By: Truth File If Christ needed to complete His work of redemption, then why did He wait until 1844? Do you mean the "atonement"? Christ completed the sacrifice on the cross, but the typical service in the earthly sanctuary shows that the sacrifice was not the completion of the atonement. If all the priest did was slay the animal, there would have been no atonement. See Lev. 16. Therefore the death of Christ on the cross did indeed complete the sacrifice. He will never have to die and shed His blood ever again. But it is obvious that the death of Christ was not the completion of Christ's work of redemption. Do you agree with this? Christ's mediatorial work today in the heavenly sanctuary for us is as important for our salvation as was His work on the cross. If Christ had not been resurrected and gone as our High Priest to heaven, we wouldn't have any salvation. The work of Christ at this time-- in the Most Holy Place in heaven-- must be finished prior to His coming for His church. QUESTION: Why does Jesus wait? Quote 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.
Moderators John317 Posted July 23, 2011 Moderators Posted July 23, 2011 Questions from a former SDA member:... And here's something to really consider, the year 1844 wasn't set by Ellen G. White, it was set by Miller. It really is not accurate to say that William Miller set the date of 1844. William Miller said Christ would return to cleanse the earth by fire "about 1843, 1844." The date of 1844 was actually set by other Millerites, not by William Miller himself. (You can read about this in books about Miller and the establishment of the SDA church.) Miller believed the earth was the sanctuary referred to in Daniel 8: 14. He was wrong. But surprisingly, no one at the time pointed out to Miller or to any of the Millerites that the Bible doesn't teach that the earth is the sanctuary. The date of 1844 is based on valid rules of Bible interpretation. The problem, then, was/is that the Bible gives no indication that the earth is the sanctuary. The Bible never calls the earth the sanctuary. In the Bible there are only two sanctuaries-- the earthly sanctuary and the heavenly. The earthly sanctuary is no more, having been completely destroyed in 70 AD. So the only sanctuary in existence in 1844 is the heavenly sanctuary which Hebrews 9: 23 says is in need of cleansing!! Quote 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.
Moderators John317 Posted July 24, 2011 Moderators Posted July 24, 2011 Questions from a former SDA member: And here's something to really consider, the year 1844 wasn't set by Ellen G. White, it was set by Miller. If Ellen G. White was such an inspired prophetess, why didn't God give her the revelation of the year 1844? Ellen White did not receive her first vision from God until December 1844, a couple of months after the Great Disappointment of Oct. 22, 1844. Your question has to do with the purpose of the Great Disappointment and the purpose of the Investigative Judgment. Let me ask you a couple of questions: If Peter and John were such great apostles and prophets, why didn't God give them a revelation of what was to happen when Christ's died? Why didn't God give them a vision of what was to happen? Why does the Bible say, "But their eyes were prevented from recognizing [Jesus]"? And why does it say, a little later, "Their eyes were opened and they recognized Him"? (Luke 24: 16, 31) Quote 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.
Moderators John317 Posted July 24, 2011 Moderators Posted July 24, 2011 Questions from a former SDA member: If Ellen G. White was such an inspired prophetess, why didn't God give her the revelation of the year 1844? Why would God give it to Miller? God did not give a revelation to William Miller, and no one has ever claimed that He did. William Miller himself never claimed God gave him a revelation. Miller was a Baptist minister and preacher, that's all. He was not a prophet nor did he ever claim to be. It is obvious that you have not studied to find out the truth of these things. Why not? It seems to me that if you're really as interested in it as you say you are, you'd take the time and effort to do some research. That way you wouldn't make so many misstatements. It wouldn't take long to study and find out the facts. Quote 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.
Truth Files Posted July 24, 2011 Author Posted July 24, 2011 Here is what the Lord says about those of the professing church who claim to be "Jews" [israel] [Revelation 2:9; 3:9] Because they do this, He relegates them to the synagogue of Satan, the place of the paraphrasical Jews And here is what He says about those who venerate a "Jezebel" .... follow a female false prophet [Revelation 2:20-23] .... and He will judge them according to their works [Revelation 20:11-15] And any one who makes a prediction by the divination of foretelling the future which does not come to pass is a false prophet [Ezekiel 13] Quote Stephen - Author - Truth Files
miz3 Posted July 24, 2011 Posted July 24, 2011 If we are making everything concerning the Revelation Churches please tell what the Greek Names of the Churches means? What do these Greek Name symbols actually mean? Quote
Truth Files Posted July 24, 2011 Author Posted July 24, 2011 The Lord speaks to the professing church in Revelation 1, 2, and 3 The 7 churches of Asia Minor are used as examples of certain positive and negative characteristics of the church which still apply today .... and these pronounced behaviors can be found in the hallmarks of various denominations and movements The names of the sampled churches designate their ancient locations Quote Stephen - Author - Truth Files
Moderators John317 Posted July 24, 2011 Moderators Posted July 24, 2011 And any one who makes a prediction by the divination of foretelling the future which does not come to pass is a false prophet [Ezekiel 13] But there are many prophecies in the Bible which have not yet come to pass. Does that mean the prophets who wrote them are false prophets? Here's a prophecy of Jonah: 3:4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown. Was Ninevah overthrown in forty days? Does that mean Jonah is a false prophet? Why isn't he? Do you believe in conditional prophecies? Ezekiel did. See Ezekiel 18; also Deut. 28. Quote 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.
Truth Files Posted July 24, 2011 Author Posted July 24, 2011 There are no "conditional" prophecies within the scope of the Bible prophets False prophecies which do not come to pass made by the diviner are the subject of discussion .... the Bible prophets are always 100% accurate regarding fulfilled, or unfulfilled visions of events still to come The false prophet is never accurate and always fails because the claimed revelations are not from the Lord Quote Stephen - Author - Truth Files
Moderators John317 Posted July 24, 2011 Moderators Posted July 24, 2011 3:4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown. Was Ninevah overthrown in forty days? Does that mean Jonah is a false prophet? Why isn't he? Do you believe in conditional prophecies? They do exist in the Bible. See Deut. 28. This prophecy was based on the response of the people of Israel. Quote 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.
Truth Files Posted July 24, 2011 Author Posted July 24, 2011 The Lord may tell of coming judgment and state that if those to be judged will turn from their unacceptable behavior .... He will withold His Judgment ..... He never lies about these things and always upholds His word But the final and completed predictions of His prophets always come to pass with 100% accuracy .... none of these are "conditional" Quote Stephen - Author - Truth Files
Moderators John317 Posted July 24, 2011 Moderators Posted July 24, 2011 The Lord may tell of coming judgment and state that if those to be judged will turn from their unacceptable behavior .... He will withold His Judgment ..... This is one of the kind of prophecies in Scripture called "conditional prophecy." It is prophecy that depends on people's responses to God. Jonah's prophecy about 40 days was one such conditional prophecy. Originally Posted By: Truth Files He never lies about these things and always upholds His word This is true. God cannot lie. He upholds His word, yes, but people sometimes misread His Word and make Him say things He's not saying. When those things don't happen, we can't honestly say that God lied. What happened is that people misunderstood God. Originally Posted By: Truth Files But the final and completed predictions of His prophets always come to pass with 100% accuracy .... none of these are "conditional" I agree that all the prophecies God intended to come true will come true, but the Bible does contain conditional prophecies that will never come true literally. Quote 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.
Truth Files Posted July 24, 2011 Author Posted July 24, 2011 "I agree that all the prophecies God intended to come true will come true, but the Bible does contain conditional prophecies that will never come true literally." >But this does not mean that the Lord's conditional edicts are false prophecies .... the projections of the false prophet never materialize because they are not speaking truth .... their alleged visions and prophecies [predictions] are not inspired by the Lord Quote Stephen - Author - Truth Files
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.