doug yowell Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 John317 wrote: “Good question. The answer is, Yes. If you look carefully at these texts, you'll find that there is no actual contradiction but only an apparent one. Pharaoh's heart was hardened by the way he chose to respond to God's activity. God knew Pharaoh’s character and He knew how Pharaoh would respond to His activity.” Apparent? You are telling me that there is no real contradiction between “God hardened the heart of Pharaoh” and “Pharaoh hardened his heart”? I did look carefully at those texts and I find there the most glaring contradiction. I need to choose between thesed two contradictory assertions. If I choose the first one, then I have to agree with the erroneous and unbiblical doctrine Paul alluded in Romans 9. Do you accept said doctrine? Adventists don’t. Adventists are Armenian. Why is it that you keep avoiding my question? Why don't you create another thread on God's sovereignty and the errancy of the Scriptures. Sounds like you are simply admitting that you really don't know what the Bible teaches due to it's many contradictions so you choose the option you like, assure yourself that your choice is the right one, and consign the rest to error.How do you know for sure which parts are truly Inspired and which parts are sinful insertions? How do you know that Paul's teaching in Rom.1,2 is not his own warped version of Arminianism? Quote
Nic Samojluk Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 doug yowell wrote: “Why don't you create another thread on God's sovereignty and the errancy of the Scriptures.” I have no special burden to deal with what is clearly apparent from the simple reading of Scripture. The doctrine of the inerrancy of Scripture is based on wishful thinking and on philosophical speculations and the reasons so many have rejected Christianity and have become either agnostics or else atheists. But, you may start another thread if you wish! “Sounds like you are simply admitting that you really don't know what the Bible teaches due to it's many contradictions so you choose the option you like, assure yourself that your choice is the right one, and consign the rest to error.” By rejecting what I have stated about Paul’s doctrine of God’s sovereignty as described in Romans 9, you are also rejecting our Adventist understanding of said passage. Adventist reject the Calvinistic teaching and accept the Armenian view instead. If you reject the Adventist view, then you agree both with Paul and with Calvin. What is your position? Are you with Adventists on this, or are you in agreement with Calvinism. If you agree with the Adventist position, then you agree with me and reject Paul’s teaching. If you reject Paul’s teaching in Romans 9, then you tacitly admit that Paul was teaching error in said passage. “How do you know for sure which parts are truly Inspired and which parts are sinful insertions?” How did Adventists decide that Calvin’s doctrine is not true? They studied other passages found in the Bible and concluded that Paul and Calvin were wrong because said view distorts the view we have of God’s character. “How do you know that Paul's teaching in Rom.1,2 is not his own warped version of Arminianism?” The teachings found in Romans 1 and 2 have nothing to do with the controversy between Calvin and Armin. What Paul teaches in said chapters do agree with God’s view of sinners as found in the rest of the Bible. Quote
Umfundize Posted June 27, 2012 Posted June 27, 2012 I believe you will enjoy the perspective of a SDA Conference Evangelist who changed his mind on the subject. Check out www.adventistalternative.org Quote
Nic Samojluk Posted June 28, 2012 Posted June 28, 2012 I believe you will enjoy the perspective of a SDA Conference Evangelist who changed his mind on the subject. Check out www.adventistalternative.org I did watch the video and I do agree that some of the doctrines we emphasize so much cannot be supported by the Bible only. The man talks about our Investigative Judgment [iJ]teaching, and I could name a couple more. Nevertheless, I believe that our compromise with evil regarding abortion represents such a drastic departure from the teaching of Scripture about the value of human life that our adherence to the IJ dogma pales when compared with our direct violation of the Sixth Commandment. If the Lord ever decided to reject the Adventist Church—God forbid that this would ever happen—it will be because of our toleration of elective abortion by our church for the sake of profit. Yes, many Adventist have left the church as a result of our unbiblical understanding of the IJ doctrine, but no loss of life results from this. Contrast this with the deaths of millions resulting from the legalization of abortion; and let’s us not forget that we—Adventists—did lead in the slaughter of the innocent unborn babies. We started offering abortions on demand in our Castle Memorial Hospital back in 1970—three years before this evil practice was legalized in the U.S. mainland. Quote
skyblue888 Posted June 29, 2012 Posted June 29, 2012 Yes, many Adventist have left the church as a result of our unbiblical understanding of the IJ doctrine, but no loss of life results from this. Nic __________ No loss of life results from this! Who says? sky Quote "The merits of His sacrifice are sufficient to present to the Father in our behalf." S.C.36.
Nic Samojluk Posted June 30, 2012 Posted June 30, 2012 Yes, many Adventist have left the church as a result of our unbiblical understanding of the IJ doctrine, but no loss of life results from this. Nic __________ No loss of life results from this! Who says? sky The loss of over fifty millions as a direct result of the legalization of abortion is well documented. Do we have similar statistics for the number of deaths caused by our teaching of the Investigative Judgment Doctrine? Quote
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.