The 1260 Year Interpretation of Protestantism

[ClubV12]

Uh,,, miz3,,,, your no John the Baptist! Nor are you a prophet in any regard. Your just a guy standing alone in the corner without a foundation.

[miz3]

Uh,,, miz3,,,, your no John the Baptist!

Your in a position to JUDGE THIS?

WHO MADE YOU GOD?

I never claimed to be John the Baptist, nor did I ever claim to be a prophet or the son of a prophet.

Even just guys like me standing on the corner are used by God to disseminate the TRUTH!

My Foundation is the Word of God (Bible).

Your foundation seems to be anything that suits your fancy.

[miz3]

Uh,,, miz3,,,, your no John the Baptist! Nor are you a prophet in any regard. Your just a guy standing alone in the corner without a foundation.

I believe Noah was just a guy standing alone in the corner when God called him.

Noah was no "defined" prophet or the son of a "defined" prophet.

Again, you demonstrate that you do err in understanding how God works.

[miz3]

Uh,,, miz3,,,, your no John the Baptist! Nor are you a prophet in any regard. Your just a guy standing alone in the corner without a foundation.

It looks to me like you are having trouble attacking the "MESSAGE".

It looks like because you cannot discredit the "MESSAGE" you are now trying to discredit the messenger?

[ClubV12]

miz3 says,

"Your in a position to JUDGE THIS?"

As to whether or not miz3 is John the Baptist.

I believe I am in a position to make this call, as many of us are. The Lord has provided us with biblical tests for anyone who makes claim to be a prophet. I find no evidence that you rise even to the level of consideration when it comes to applying such tests. Your not a prophet, period, done, you fail the biblical tests at a glance.

But my curiosity is pequed,,,, do you actually think you ARE John the Baptist or a prophet of some kind?

[Lysimachus]

My belief is that prophecy is not for us to know and understand all of the events completely and thoroughly. It is given to certain groups of people for certain purpose. Generally it relates to people that it's given to.

Prophetic interpretation is not a "sure thing" that Adventist and other theologians would like you to believe. Prophecy is largely symbolic, and thus confined to a certain understanding that is rather of of the recognizing from the past occurrence, than that of seeing into the future of the world.

[fccool]

Quote:

I totally reject that position. Adventist understanding comes from a careful comparison of scripture to scripture.

so it the position of Jewish theologians,and JW theologians and Protestant theologians.

Quote:

The timelines are not difficult to establish, they are reasonable and logical, they simply fit. Not a force fit, the 2,300 day prophecy is solid as a rock. It was not revealed to one man, it was revealed over time to many. It was carefully considered by many men of faith.

Sure, but there are likewise the many man of faith who considered and disagree. Would you consider everyone who disagrees to be in the "babylon" camp?

Quote:

The conclusions were verified by the Lords inspired messenger, Ellen White. Now Ellen White may not mean much to you, not being a Seventh-day Adventist, but it shows me the excellent work of this "composite" of men who studied the issue and came to the correct conclusion.

I love Ellen White's advice. Much of it is lost on Adventism today. They only cling to the things that are contemporary and comfortable. There's a lot of picking and choosing.

Ellen White is usually used as a universal excuse for validating poor interpretation or understanding. The prophetic interpretation did not come through Ellen White, it came through Miller and Bates.

You may not know that, but there were several people who had visions in those days. Extreme stress and belief can induce fairly strong delusions. I'm not saying that this was the case, but I'm not counting it out as a possibility. People can see what they want to see. Such was always the case. Coupled with severe head trauma and desire to be noticed, one can see some amazing things and believe that these were seen.

My reservations about E.G. Whites visions are primarily on these grounds.

- There were other people who had visions. See William Foy and Hazen Foss (Ellen's Brother in Law). Hazen did not disclose his visions and claimed that the gift was passed on to his sister in law.

- Prophets were generally very educated people. The major prophets were men. You will not find any major or minor prophets of the OT who were women. There's a specific reason for it that I won't go into. And that reason extends beyond cultural sentiments.

- Ellen had a pretty bad had trauma that both damaged her self-esteem, looks and set her back in her schooling.

- Most of her visions seem to validate some theological dispute that people had with Adventist leadership. If there ever was a question, then Ellen conveniently had a vision that would confirm what they have discovered. Anotherwords, very few new things were relayed to her through visions.

She read a lot of material of other authors, some of which she quoted and sourced extensively using "I was shown".

- Her prophetic gift started during the time of what one could call a severe psychological trauma and breakdown of certain belief and expectation.

It's very common for people to hold on to certain belief, even when when it was shown to them to be contradicting reality. People get stuck in certain reality that they are not willing to let go, which they create themselves. They can be completely unaware that they are creating the reality in their minds... and believe that they see visions from God.

- Her prophetic confirmations seemed to rarely contradict the clique of established Adventist leadership. She seemed to validate their findings, with very rare reproof or contradiction. So, if Adventist father's theology remained as it was... we'd still have quite a bit of it. It simply would not have the confirmation from God that they were correct.

You can call me whatever you want, but in the end, I don't find the above illogical suspicions as to primarily rely on other sources that I don't find questionable. Like she said herself, if what she taught did not contradict Bible, we should be all for it.

Could she be a prophet? Yes. Am I convinced that she was based on the above issues? No.

Quote:

This inspired source of counsel, Ellen White, is what sets apart the 100's of other denominations comprising "babylon". Each one with their own distinct views on any given bible text or bible theory. Where there is no vision, the people perish.

And that's why it should be truly sad. If that's the only thing that sets you apart, then Adventism is merely a theologicla school with very little to show for it other than a piece of paper with "Approved by God as taught by E.G. White" on it.

I would rather be a part of denomination that sets itself apart by their love for one another, and their neighbor. Sure, they don't have all of the pride of being "god's chosen for a special purpose", but they don't need it. Love is not proud.

I'm not giving up on Adventism yet, I believe God will work great things through it when they truly get back to the roots of the love message.

[fccool]

Quote:

There are 2 schools of Adventist researchers:

1. Those who search, discover what they call "truths", and expect those so called truths to "replace" all the landmarks that God has established.

.....

I sincerely believe you just need to revamp the entire way you're looking at things. It's just the way you've allowed it to program your mind. You need to reprogram your perspective.

The issue is that I've seen your perspective. I've been there and done that. I believed it once, until I understood what love was and how we come to see it. It's a perspective of the people who form a clique and then make sure that the rules are maintained to the point that their clique is closed to people who desire some understanding and discussion. It's generally "that's just the way it is, like it or leave it" presentation. I can't tell you how many times I've been told both on this forum and in church that there are plenty of other churches around.

Adventism is like a military style husband that hands over his wife a list of chores to do, and says, "Make sure you'll do them before I come back home". He then comes back and checks off every one point on the list, and if she misses one, he tells her that she is not a worthy wife, and she does not love him.

Godly perspective is like a husband who goes out of the door by kissing his wife and tells her that he loves her, and she still does every single thing on the list, because she truly understands her husband's wants. And if she unknowingly misses one, the husband looks at the heart explains it in a manner that she can relate to, or simply forgives it because he knows that she is trying her best to please him.

That's the difference. You tell me which perspective God wants us to approach the world with.

[ClubV12]

"I'm not giving up on Adventism yet,"

Me thinks you have already and don't recognize it yet, the danger is, you may never recognize it. By rejecting the 2,300 day prophecy and more of the most basic SDA beliefs, (not to mention Sister Whites counsel on them) you sweep away the very foundations of SDA belief.

Your unbalanced approach that "love" is everything is reputed by the third angels message. The third angels message IS love, but more, it's also judgment. God will in no wise clear the guilty. The message must be love, mixed with mercy, righteousness by faith and a judgment taking place right now. Decisions must be made, for life or for death. Preaching only love is as bad as preaching only the law, either way, the message is corrupted. The devil doesn't care which path your on, love, peace and safety (and sudden destruction comes upon them) or the law only.

When you find yourself in significant conflict with the positions of the solid foundation upon which the church has been built, you can be assured you have yet to come to the truth of these matters.

[fccool]

Quote:

When you find yourself in significant conflict with the positions of the solid foundation upon which the church has been built, you can be assured you have yet to come to the truth of these matters.

I'm sure that SDA church has monopoly on truth. Everyone else are just "lost", right?

[Lysimachus]

I'm sure that SDA church has monopoly on truth. Everyone else are just "lost", right?

Well, God gave the Jews the truth. But they hedged themselves in. Despite Israel's demeaning of other nations, they still had the truth. They just squandered what was given to them.

We are in danger of doing the same. But despite the way our people act, like with Israel, the Adventist Church was given the credentials of truth for the most part. You are correct that many SDA do tend to manifest a character similar to the Pharisees toward the Gentiles. We must pray to utilize that truth God has given us in a loving manner, yet not in a lukewarm way either. It has to be a love that stirs the sinner to conviction, and many times it is necessary that it cuts deep if it is to shake one's senses concerning their downward course toward ruin.

[ClubV12]

fccool says,

"There's a lot of picking and choosing."

Well, I don't know about a lot, but I see your pretty good at picking and choosing what you want to believe about Sister White.

To answer your supposition that "everyone else is lost", thats pretty close to truth right there!

Who, which group, which church, which body of believers, what prophet in the world, what man on the street corner would you recommend the SDA's consulte for divine counsel on doctrine? I'm listening! Man, I spent 30 years looking for THAT group or person, found them, in the SDA church. Went through a ton of garbage doctrines and a couple of false prophets getting here, maybe I missed one along the way. Who would that be?

[John317]

"I'm not giving up on Adventism yet,"

Me thinks you have already and don't recognize it yet, the danger is, you may never recognize it.

People change masters and can be marching under a different banner without even knowing they've made the change.

[John317]

Uh,,, miz3,,,, your no John the Baptist! Nor are you a prophet in any regard. Your just a guy standing alone in the corner without a foundation.

Originally Posted By: miz3

It looks to me like you are having trouble attacking the "MESSAGE".

It looks like because you cannot discredit the "MESSAGE" you are now trying to discredit the messenger?

I disagree. They are talking about your message. Your message has no foundation. It is not based on sound exegesis or hermenautical principles. I believe you've demonstrated it time and again by your posts. (Let the readers decide in their own mind if this is true.)

Please notice that I'm attacking the message, not you personally. The rules of the Forum have to allow for that. If not, we can't have a vigorous exchange about the truth, and it's very important that we be able to do that and still remain on friendly terms with people. The last part may be hard, but by God's grace we can all learn to do it, starting right now. :-)

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: ClubV12

Uh,,, miz3,,,, your no John the Baptist! Nor are you a prophet in any regard. Your just a guy standing alone in the corner without a foundation.

Originally Posted By: miz3

It looks to me like you are having trouble attacking the "MESSAGE".

It looks like because you cannot discredit the "MESSAGE" you are now trying to discredit the messenger?

I disagree. They are talking about your message. Your message has no foundation. It is not based on sound exegesis or hermenautical principles. I believe you've demonstrated it time and again by your posts. (Let the readers decide in their own mind if this is true.)

Please notice that I'm attacking the message, not you personally. The rules of the Forum have to allow for that. If not, we can't have a vigorous exchange about the truth, and it's very important that we be able to do that and still remain on friendly terms with people. The last part may be hard, but by God's grace we can all learn to do it, starting right now. :-)

Is this the message you want to send to others that SDA are like this?

I have also noticed that you are intently biased in your orthodoxy. Of course that is your privilege. Does this bias ever cloud your judgment? I am just askin'.

Do you think when you look at the truth in your own heart that your actions and judgments meet with God's approval?

In my opinion, which does not count here, ClubV12 did attack me personally.

Each time you make a call (judgment) you are sending a message to me and to all who view this. Just sayin' not accusein'.

[ClubV12]

miz3 says,

"Jesus Christ and John the Baptist did not line up with the "brethren" of their day."

"In fact that is why we talk about John the Baptist as that "lone voice in the wilderness". In his day he was "one man's opinion"."

Here you directly compare and infer your "standing alone" on your doctrine as being of the same caliber as John the Baptist.

Well, your no John the Baptist miz3. There are biblical tests for those who infer, suggest or claim to be of that status. By employing such tests anyone is able to "judge" the suggested status of a "would be prophet". One who claims to stand alone, as if God speaks to him directly. One who has no need of the counsel of men, the church or any other worldly agency to compare scripture with. One who would make such a claim IS professing, infering or suggesting they have a special connection to heaven like that of a prophet. It is the only reasonable and logical conclusion for someone proclaiming to have the truth on all things, indepedant of all others.

You fail the tests of a prophet by the biblical standards.

[miz3]

miz3 says,

"Jesus Christ and John the Baptist did not line up with the "brethren" of their day."

"In fact that is why we talk about John the Baptist as that "lone voice in the wilderness". In his day he was "one man's opinion"."

Here you directly compare and infer your "standing alone" on your doctrine as being of the same caliber as John the Baptist.

Well, your no John the Baptist miz3. There are biblical tests for those who infer, suggest or claim to be of that status. By employing such tests anyone is able to "judge" the suggested status of a "would be prophet". One who claims to stand alone, as if God speaks to him directly. One who has no need of the counsel of men, the church or any other worldly agency to compare scripture with. One who would make such a claim IS professing, infering or suggesting they have a special connection to heaven like that of a prophet. It is the only reasonable and logical conclusion for someone proclaiming to have the truth on all things, indepedant of all others.

You fail the tests of a prophet by the biblical standards.

NO! YOU ARE WRONG AGAIN!

God always speaks to the individual by the Holy Spirit see 1Corinthians 2:6-16. This text states exactly what you say is "impossible".

In saying what you say in your post above you have directly contradicted the Scripture and set your own human definition above the definitions of God.

You do this so as to personally attack me. You do this so as to be dishonest about what I have said.

If you do not want to believe the things I say that is your privilege.

However, you do not have the right to be dishonest and twist my posts to mean something they do not mean.

[John317]

...God always speaks to the individual by the Holy Spirit see 1Corinthians 2:6-16. This text states exactly what you say is "impossible".

In saying what you say in your post above you have directly contradicted the Scripture and set your own human definition above the definitions of God.

God does speak directly by the Holy Spirit to believers if they are listening for His voice.

But that doesn't mean believers are not held accountable to the church or to other Christians.

Think for a moment what God told Saul [Paul] to do as soon as he met Jesus on the road to Damascus. The first thing Jesus told Paul to do was to go to Ananias. Acts 9.

And what happened to the Ethiopian eunich? Acts 8. God put him in touch with Phillip. And what about Cornelius? God had him go to Peter for the purpose of being taught.

The same might be said of Apollos. Acts 18: 25, 26.

So it is all through the New Testament. God uses other Christians to teach Christians. The Holy Spirit is not teaching everyone separately and independently of everyone else. God is leading out a church and a people, not independent individuals. We are all part of one body, and we should be working in harmony with one another. But that can't be if we think of ourselves as having no responsibility and no connection with the rest of the body of Christ. Review 1 Cor. 12.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

...God always speaks to the individual by the Holy Spirit see 1Corinthians 2:6-16. This text states exactly what you say is "impossible".

In saying what you say in your post above you have directly contradicted the Scripture and set your own human definition above the definitions of God.

God does speak directly by the Holy Spirit to believers if they are listening for His voice.

But that doesn't mean believers are not held accountable to the church or to other Christians.

Think for a moment what God told Saul [Paul] to do as soon as he met Jesus on the road to Damascus. The first thing Jesus told Paul to do was to go to Ananias. Acts 9.

And what happened to the Ethiopian eunich? Acts 8. God put him in touch with Phillip. And what about Cornelius? God had him go to Peter for the purpose of being taught.

The same might be said of Apollos. Acts 18: 25, 26.

So it is all through the New Testament. God uses other Christians to teach Christians. The Holy Spirit is not teaching everyone separately and independently of everyone else. God is leading out a church and a people, not independent individuals. We are all part of one body, and we should be working in harmony with one another. But that can't be if we think of ourselves as having no responsibility and no connection with the rest of the body of Christ. Review 1 Cor. 12.

[Lysimachus]

The problem is, miz3, no matter who it is, you will never think the Holy Spirit is speaking through anybody. So its a lost cause. You can only read the Bible and think in your mind "well yeah, if I was living back then, I'd know the Holy Spirit was speaking through Andrew, or Phillip, or Ananias". But would you have? Really?

But since you are "delivered" from those times, now you can feel at liberty to decide who you want to consider as one who the Holy Spirit is speaking through, right? RRRiiight.

[fccool]

Quote:

We are in danger of doing the same. But despite the way our people act, like with Israel, the Adventist Church was given the credentials of truth for the most part. You are correct that many SDA do tend to manifest a character similar to the Pharisees toward the Gentiles. We must pray to utilize that truth God has given us in a loving manner, yet not in a lukewarm way either. It has to be a love that stirs the sinner to conviction, and many times it is necessary that it cuts deep if it is to shake one's senses concerning their downward course toward ruin.

The issue is that the credentials are self-ascribed by the denomination. It's not that there are people outside of the Church who recognize SDA Church to be everything it claims to. It's people inside the church who padding themselves on the back for being God's chosen and messengers of God.

If a church gives itself a name of the ONLY chosen church of God, then how much credibility would you put in such self-credit?

It's like me saying that my view science is the best view of science thus I'm giving myself a doctorate in science, although the rest of the scientific world would disagree with me.

[miz3]

The problem is, miz3, no matter who it is, you will never think the Holy Spirit is speaking through anybody. So its a lost cause. You can only read the Bible and think in your mind "well yeah, if I was living back then, I'd know the Holy Spirit was speaking through Andrew, or Phillip, or Ananias". But would you have? Really?

But since you are "delivered" from those times, now you can feel at liberty to decide who you want to consider as one who the Holy Spirit is speaking through, right? RRRiiight.

You are wrong once again because their have been things that people (humans) who I have heard or read and I am sure the Holy Spirit is/was speaking through them.

I cannot prove it but in my own heart I believed that God was speaking through that person. No, I am not talking about people in the Bible although I believe God spoke through those writers. I am speaking of people who are my contemporaries.

Judging by the way I am treated by you I am quite sure the Holy Spirit is not talking to me through you. Therefore what you say about the Bible certainly cannot be true.

[miz3]

Quote:

We are in danger of doing the same. But despite the way our people act, like with Israel, the Adventist Church was given the credentials of truth for the most part. You are correct that many SDA do tend to manifest a character similar to the Pharisees toward the Gentiles. We must pray to utilize that truth God has given us in a loving manner, yet not in a lukewarm way either. It has to be a love that stirs the sinner to conviction, and many times it is necessary that it cuts deep if it is to shake one's senses concerning their downward course toward ruin.

The issue is that the credentials are self-ascribed by the denomination. It's not that there are people outside of the Church who recognize SDA Church to be everything it claims to. It's people inside the church who padding themselves on the back for being God's chosen and messengers of God.

If a church gives itself a name of the ONLY chosen church of God, then how much credibility would you put in such self-credit?

It's like me saying that my view science is the best view of science thus I'm giving myself a doctorate in science, although the rest of the scientific world would disagree with me.

Well stated!

[fccool]

Who, which group, which church, which body of believers, what prophet in the world, what man on the street corner would you recommend the SDA's consulte for divine counsel on doctrine? I'm listening! Man, I spent 30 years looking for THAT group or person, found them, in the SDA church. Went through a ton of garbage doctrines and a couple of false prophets getting here, maybe I missed one along the way. Who would that be?

You don't have to, and that's the entire point. You don't need to run to any "church", you don't need to run to any "divine consel", you don't need to run to any "creed" or "doctrine". That's not what Christianity is about. Doctrine and Creed is "indocrtination" without processing what goes in. It exists for recitation and then make you believe what's being recited. It's a shortcut for the things you should be arriving at yourself.

Imagine a math teacher teaching students

"Everyone repeat after me:

(23 x 6) + 9 - 6 = 30

(32 + 1) + 60 - 6 = 81

Now, I'm going to give you a blank sheet of paper, and you are going to recite for me what I've told you. The person who comes closest, gets the best grade..."

Then, she sees one of the students trying to solve the problem. And the conversation goes:

- What are you doing?

- I'm trying to come up with my own answers.

- Why?

- Because I would like to see if I can do it on my own, and if the answer would be the same.

- Well, you can't do it on your own. You can't do it without my help. The answers are right. I can assure you of that. My math teacher taught me the same thing using the same methods. And the teacher before him, who invented the math, taught him exactly the same answers. These are 100% right. All you have to is to remember them word by word.

- It just does not seem right to me. I'd like to come up with my own solution.

- Get out of the class! You get an F for the entire course!

That's not Christianity! Christianity is about example that God sets for us through Christ. Not merely following the law, but explaining what it means in respect to relationships of people around us, and consequently God.

People who understand these concepts join together in resources and cooperation, and that "joining", or "gathering" is called a Church. Church is not a denomination. Church is a gathering of the people who understand God's love and want to reinforce it, and express in a community setting.

The "church" the way it exists today is a Catholic tradition. Protestants modified it a bit, but in essence only some names changed, but much stayed the same.

What you are talking about as a "Church" is in fact a financial corporation, that has a Bank account, an army of lawyers, it's own logo and verbalized name that it threatens a jail time with if anyone dares to use, and a self-proclaimed status and mission to make everyone conform to 28 beliefs that's everyone's interpretation of what Bible should say. Yet, if the same people are pulled over in the room and really quizzed on these beliefs with plain Bible on the table... they will fail to even name them without external sources that string up loosely-related verses, and then E.G. White's commentary.

Without any external reference, try to name and number those 28 beliefs that make SDA chuch what it is. I can list you mine. They are not that complicated and I actually remember them. I remember them, because they are close to my heart... and not some regurgitation of creeds that I suppose to follow to earn myself a label of "the chosen people", or pointing of finger with saying "Yes, that sounds good... I believe THAT thing".

That's not what church is. And you don't have to run to any church. Just find a group of people who truly love people, and who love God, and you will be ok. You'll have disagreements, but these will be resolved without fist-pounding, or balloon-headed steam letting, or suing other churches for "stealing your name". Through that difference of opinions and perspectives... you will find more truth than in a "church" who does not want to see or evaluate any different opinions or perspectives.

[jasd]

Quote:

What you are talking about as a "Church" is in fact a financial corporation, that has a Bank account, an army of lawyers, it's own logo and verbalized name that it threatens a jail time with if anyone dares to use, and a self-proclaimed status and mission to make everyone conform to 28 beliefs that's everyone's interpretation of what Bible should say.

In verity.

*sigh*