Are the three Angels' Messages Dead or Alive?

[hch]

An update on President Obama's situation as the image beast whose number is 666

President Obama said things would change in Syria by 8/1/16 or there would be consequences.

A Russian helicopter was downed and the "Syrian rebels" are having more success. The US claims

Russia has changed its focus from Syria to Crimea stating that American backed Ukrainian forces attacked and killed 2 Russian troops. And Iran executed a nuclear scientist who they accused of being a traitor and collaborating with the USA.

Da 11:44  "But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him: therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many."

 

[Martn]

13 hours ago, hch said:

 

The solo messengers that Jesus sited were Noah, Lot, Elijah, and Jonah.

As I said: Untrue.

The ones cited were not solo.

Each one did have secondary witness, and ALL (true) messengers do.

Naturally, you refuse to see them, though they are in plain sight.

 

[Martn]

14 hours ago, hch said:

 

you are misapplying the rule

I have no objection to your message per se. It could yet prove to be true. I'm open to the possibility of additional witnesses coming forward, though that seems quite unlikely at this point.

The rule or "two or three" is so numerously repeated, with numerous examples throughout the scriptures, there can be no mistaking it. What is odd it how determined you are to reject it and brace yourself against it.

Rejection of the rule of "two or three" is characteristic in all cult groups. People would not be so susceptible to cults and cult leaders if they were trained to observe the rule consistently --without exception.

If any messenger in history actually was unique in his or her message, there can be no reasonable doubt that messenger was false.

It makes no difference whether or not you allow yourself to see who the other witnesses were. Any argument from silence is not a valid argument at all.

 

 

[Martn]

Wherever "two or three" are united in his name, on any point, he is with them.

If there are not two or three, at the very least, then he is not with them.

[hch]

Martn,

you say:
 

Quote

 

Wherever "two or three" are united in his name, on any point, he is with them.

If there are not two or three, at the very least, then he is not with them.

 

I meet with a group of as many as 25 people, of which several believe this message -- twice as many as two or three.

[hch]

Martn

Quote

If any messenger in history actually was unique in his or her message, there can be no reasonable doubt that messenger was false.

you just tossed out, Elijah, Jonah, Noah and Lot.

[Martn]

23 hours ago, hch said:

 meet with a group of as many as 25 people, of which several believe this message -- twice as many as two or three.

These are people trained by you to think as you do. They are not witnesses who obtained their witness independently of you.

The independent nature of a witness is what establishes corroboration.

Where are the witnesses who had the same message as you before they encountered you or your writings?

[Martn]

23 hours ago, hch said:

tossed out, Elijah, Jonah, Noah and Lot.

How?

Every single one of them had other witnesses who seconded their message. Why do you deny this?

[Martn]

I'm not saying there are no witnesses out there, independently, with the same message as Henry. I'm saying there aren't any I'm aware of --yet. Until I find that kind of corroboration, I cannot accept Henry's message. I cannot accept anyone's message without such basic corroboration. Sister White had this kind of corroboration --in a very big way.

The prophets who corroborated her are in turn corroborated by her, and by one another. Though each was scarcely aware of the others, if at all. She even had negative opinions of several of them, unjustified of course, for they supported her, just as she supported them in spite of herself.

These are the four "angels" (messengers) foretold by John. No four prophets in history were ever more alike, and more independent of one another, than those four. All four had the very same message, expressed in different ways of course.

Taken separately, not one of them was without error, even in doctrinal matters. But taken together, one flawless message can be seen. The points they differ on are not needed. What is needed are the many, often startling points all four share in common.

There are remarkable, extraordinary teachings revealed by Sister White which she herself wasn't even aware she was presenting. These stand out clear as day when the same words --the exact same words-- and ideas are found among her fellows, and vice versa.

[Rick Sterling]

The proclamations of the three angels described in Revelation 14:6-11 will begin in the very near future.  As for the discussion on the testimony of witnesses, one, two or three, it would appear expedient to note the difference between a prophet and a witness. I am not saying that a prophet is not a witness, or vice versa. A prophet is a messenger, one sent to deliver a specific message to those for whom the message is directed. A witness is called upon to testify on behalf of the truth concerning what they saw or heard, in a judicial proceeding; this is known as the process of discovery.

The four aforementioned messengers, Noah, Lot, Jonah and Elijah, were called upon to testify on behalf of the truth in the judicial process; the verdict had already been decided in the court in heaven. The world at the years before the flood had already reached a hardness of heart that was unchangeable (see Genesis 6:5-8). Noah was not called upon to warn that unchangeably wicked generation about their emanate destruction, he was instructed by God to build a huge ship so that he, and his family, would not be put to death. God did this because Noah was righteous and to put him to death with the wicked would be an unjust act by God. Lot's situation was the same, if he stayed in Sodom he would die with the wicked in the city; therefore he was warned to leave by the heavenly beings. Jonah's message was one of certain destruction from God because of the widespread wickedness. His message caused a complete change in the character of those in Nineveh from the lowliest servant to the King himself (see Jonah chapter 3). Elijah was not called upon to testify in court concerning the spiritual condition of Israel; He was called upon to warn them that final judgment was at their doorstep.

The three angels messages are warnings to the world just before and during the great tribulation. The first warning is the judgment of the living has started; Notice the connection of Revelation 14:8 (heaven, the earth and sea and springs of waters) with the first four trumpets. The second warning is to not worship the beast, and the third warning not to receive his mark (Revelation 9, 13, 16,17, 19,). The fifth trumpet is when this beast is released from his prison in the abyss. The sixth trumpet is the great war he brings. The seventh trumpet is the end of the judgment which began with the first angels message.  

[hch]

Martn,

Quote

Naturally you reject the rule. Because you cannot stand by it.

 

Thus far we have danced around the rule that you said is a rule without seeing the evidence that there is even such a rule. Jesus said

Mt 18:20  "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."

Give the Scriptures that establishes the rule that you are trying apply in my situation that states: 1) that it takes 2-3 people from different areas who do not know each other to confirm that a message is from God and 2) that when 2-3 are gathered in Christ's name to study the word, they will not have Jesus presence to lead them to all truth.

Those appear to be the two applications that you are making of this imaginary rule. So please enlighten us.

Jesus said as it was in the days of Noe and Noe was the only one with the universal flood message and the only people that responded to his message were people who were in his immediate family (people that were close by Noah).

[hch]

Martn,

What you call "Henry's message" is a study of the Scriptures in conjunction with the Spirit of Prophecy.

It is the Bible's Present Truth for these times. Better to look at the whole message and evaluate it point by point than to reject it sight unseen.

Lest we forget how God led his people in the past:

The Millerites got the 1843 date wrong.

They got the 1844 date wrong.

Then when they learned that the 1844 date was right

They discovered that they got the event wrong.

When they got the event right,

then they had no way of proving what was going on in Heaven.

People debunked Miller because he set a date for Jesus to come.

Folks, abandoned Miller's teaching because was setting dates

and because he was wrong about 1843 & 1844 & the event

Folks made up their mind before they thoroughly studied the topic

God used the responses that folks had to Present Truth as a means to sift out those who were not faithful. If how God has led in the past is any indication of how He will lead now, we could learn a few pointers lest we repeat the sad history of those who made up their minds before all the facts were in.

 

[hch]

Nice to hear from you Rick

I will have to reread your post a few time for it to sink in.

[hch]

Martn

While discussing your questions at our meeting last evening, one of the brethren named the name of a witness that confirms my Bible study.

I teach based on Daniel 7:17 "These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth."

This is a brief summary with the minister's testimony at the end

Daniel saw sea-beasts 7:1-3

But Heaven explained earth-beasts 7:17

The prophetic sea is not the prophetic earth.

Revelation 13 identifies the beast that arises from the earth as the USA (sparsely populated area)

Because the sea-beasts in Daniel 7 are (Babylon to Rome)

the earth-beasts must be American Presidents

Daniel 7:12 states that they are allotted a season and a time

A prophetic year has 360-days

There are 4 seasons in a year

Thus 360/4=90 and a time

90-days is 90-years and a time is already a year= 91-years

Reagan was 90-years old on 2/6/01

Thus in his 91st year 9/11/01 occurred and on 9/11/ Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton met the conditions

1) they were alive

2) they were out of office - their dominion was taken away

When the kings from the earth Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton are inserted into Daniel's prophecy

Reagan is the lion (earth-king)

Bush I is the bear (earth-king)

and Clinton is the leopard (earth-king)

Thus as pagan and papal Rome were viewed as one entity

Bush II and Obama are viewed as one President

Daniel continues to state that the fourth earth beast (GW and Obama)

" I beheld even till the beast [context 4th earth-king] was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame" (Daniel 7:11)

The next event that correlates with burning flames is Christ Advent

when the wicked will be consumed by the brightness of His glory.

Thus from Daniel 7 I identify President Obama as America's last President.

The witness that confirms my study of Daniel is now dead

But I was told last night that he was an Adventist pastor who had a dream in or around 1987

In his dream, he dreamed that America's last President would be a black man with big ears.

So I looked it up online:

Quote

"The first dream takes place in the mid 80's from a pastor in California who ran an SDA end time/prophecy training center. His name was elder Jack Darnall. He is now deceased. One night he sponsored a Bible study at his home and as the guests were leaving, he pulled one of the men aside and told him that he was impressed to tell him an impressive dream that he had. "It was the time when Jesus returned to earth in power and great glory. America had an African-American president when Jesus returned. He was tall and thin, had close-cropped hair, and large ears. When elected, at first, he was greatly beloved by the people, but then he became a terrible dictator. The dream was not widely discussed, because at this time they could not see a black man being voted in as president with so much prejudice in the country still.
    "Friends, I made a call to Patti, the woman mentioned in the third dream to confirm the first dream was true. Patti said, 'Yes, Danny, it is true. Elder Darnall told his wife, a friend, and a neighbor about the dream. His wife and friend had the exact same story and they perfectly matched. I checked it out myself. He also said there would be one more pope after John Paul II.' That means Pope Benedict XVI--the pope of the Inquisition--would be the last pope!"   End of 2008 newsletter.  (Steve Wohlberg also had this in his newsletter.)  http://www.seventh-day.org/obama.htm

 

[Martn]

Lots and lots and lots of people have been warning, all along, that Mr. Obama will become a terrible dictator. (He hasn't, and all indications are he won't.)

Is that your message? (There's more of racism in the pastor's purported dream than truth.)

If the dream comes completely true --now not likely-- then it could prove significant.

What I'm looking for, however, is corroboration of your very unusual method of prophetic interpretation. That's what I don't find in any one else.

[Martn]

1 hour ago, hch said:

Martn

 

Thank you for getting my name right. (There's no i in me.)

[Martn]

3 hours ago, hch said:

Folks made up their mind before they thoroughly studied the topic

I've tried real hard to read everything you've written here. I happen to have a particular appreciation for very unusual ideas. That's what gets my attention.

The problem, for me, is I can't find any truth in what you've written. The whole, entire thing reads false to me.

What I find, instead, is a lot of hate, a lot of ignorance, a lot of fear, a lot of bigotry, a lot of anger, a lot of bitterness, a lot of hate...

But, I'll never stop looking and listening for the better side of everything.

[Martn]

6 hours ago, hch said:

Noe was the only one with the universal flood message

No e wasn't.

I didn't say a corroborative witness must always be entirely unknown to or unaware of the one corroborated. However, the more unaware they are of one another, the better --the more corroborative their message. The evidence is simply stronger that way.

Paul said, Have the prophets speak two or three at a time, and have a another [a third or fourth prophet] explain them.

Paul also said, and Jesus said (quoting Moses and the Torah), In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall EVERY single word be confirmed.

They also said, Where two or three agree on any point, it shall be granted.

When two or three of you are united together, I am with you, he said. (Not when they stand alone.)

John said, three testify in heaven, and three testify in earth.

So on and so on and so forth. Numerous examples. But what good would it do me to spend the next dozen hours or so writing everything out for you?

All the examples in the world won't mean a thing to one who has dug in his knees as you have. You are determined, as you have demonstrated, to reject this rule no matter what. 

[Martn]

18 hours ago, Rick Sterling said:

the difference between a prophet and a witness

three angels messages

Whether one is a prophet, witness, supplicant, or whatever, engaged in whatever pursuit, the rule of two or three is still applied.

When one examines the teachings of all four "angels" (messengers) --who have already come and gone-- one sees not three or four separate messages, but a single message, told from four different perspectives. While each one emphasizes a particular point, as stated in John's prophecy, he or she also repeats each of the points made by the other three.

[hch]

Martn

I am very surprised by your statement.

Quote

What I find, instead, is a lot of hate, a lot of ignorance, a lot of fear, a lot of bigotry, a lot of anger, a lot of bitterness, a lot of hate...

If you are reading all of that into what I have written, it is no wonder that you are having difficulty understanding the things of the Spirit that I have attempted to share with you.

The Lord invites His people to reason together. They say that iron sharpens iron. And the sword of the Spirit is the word of God.  But it is the Holy Spirit's job to convict of sin and righteousness. I only give the information to the best of my understanding at the time of my writing.

I don't know what I possible said to offend you so, but I apologize for the offense.

Paraphrasing Scripture is not as good as citing a reference when asked.

Galatians 5:22  "The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith"

[hch]

Quote

 In Noah's day, the inhabitants of the old world laughed to scorn what they termed the superstitious fears and forebodings of the preacher of righteousness. He was denounced as a visionary character, a fanatic, an alarmist. "As it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man." Men will reject the solemn message of warning in our day as they did in Noah's time. They will refer to those false teachers who have predicted the event and set the definite time, and will say they have no more faith in our warning than in theirs. This is the attitude of the world today. Unbelief is wide spread, and the preaching of Christ's coming is mocked at and derided. This makes it all the more essential that those who believe present truth show their faith by their works. They should be sanctified through the truth which they profess to believe; for they are savors of life unto life or of death unto death.  {RH, August 16, 1887 par. 8}

 

[hch]

Quote

"By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith." Hebrews 11:7. While Noah was giving his warning message to the world, his works testified of his sincerity. It was thus that his faith was perfected and made evident. He gave the world an example of believing just what God says. All that he possessed, he invested in the ark. As he began to construct that immense boat on dry ground, multitudes came from every direction to see the strange sight and to hear the earnest, fervent words of the singular preacher. Every blow struck upon the ark was a witness to the people.  {PP 95.1}

Within the context--Definition

singular: "being the only one of its kind; distinctive; unique:"

[ In grammar, expressing one person or thing; as the singular number. The singular number stands opposed to dual and plural. Webster's Dictionary 1828 ed., (the one that EGW used)]

[Rick Sterling]

3 hours ago, Martn said:

Whether one is a prophet, witness, supplicant, or whatever, engaged in whatever pursuit, the rule of two or three is still applied.

When one examines the teachings of all four "angels" (messengers) --who have already come and gone-- one sees not three or four separate messages, but a single message, told from four different perspectives. While each one emphasizes a particular point, as stated in John's prophecy, he or she also repeats each of the points made by the other three.

You find the "rule" in Deuteronomy 17:6-7, the context is clearly that of a trial where the charge against the defendant caries the death penalty. It is clear in Genesis chapter six that the judgment of the world had been decided already by Elohim; therefore eyewitness testimony had already been given. Noah was instructed by Elohim to build a ship so he would not die along with the condemned. Lot lived in Sodom, the judgment of the people of Sodom had concluded and they were guilty as charged. Lot alone was not guilty and the heavenly beings came to warn him to leave or he would die as well. By the way, there were two heavenly beings (two witnesses). Lot was not instructed to warn the people of Sodom they were about to be executed. Jonah was instructed by God to warn the people living in the great city Nineveh that God was about to destroy them. This caused a true change of heart in all the people, they confessed their iniquity and changed their ways and Elohim relented from his plan to destroy them (see Jonah chapter 3, in particular verse 10). See Deuteronomy 18:15-22, Moses, a prophet, explained the role of a prophet of Elohim. Elohim "puts" Their words in his/her mouth, the prophet is then required to testify to the intended recipient/s the exact words which they received from Elohim; therefore, Elohim and their prophet are two or more witnesses. See John 8:13-18 particularly verse18 I may be testifying on My own behalf, but the Father who sent Me is My witness too. Elijah's other witnesses were Elohim, and to confirmation of their testimony was they shut up the sky for three years during which time it did not rain at all. In fact the Son of Elohim used the testimony of His miracles as confirmation of His Father's testimony.

The three/four angels are future and I confirmed this with scriptural citations in my earlier post. Clearly a statement made that they are all past would necessitate scriptural citations to support it.  

[hch]

Quote

 

hours ago, Rick said:

You find the "rule" in Deuteronomy 17:6-7, the context is clearly that of a trial where the charge against the defendant caries the death penalty.

 

Thank you Rick for sharing this insight. But it does not really say what Martn would have me to believe the Scriptures say.

Quote

Scripture requires that all things revealed by God must be revealed to two or three witnesses at the very least.

This statement sounds more like a private interpretation or a traditional point of view.

The burden is on Martn to give the Scripture(s) that he is applying to validate his statement. It has been my experience that many of the things that he emphatically asserts do not do well when the facts are checked.

When he gives the Scripture that he had in mind that validate his claim, I'll review it.

By the way Rick, your posts are well thought out. Thanks for sharing.

[Martn]

On 8/14/2016 at 1:56 PM, hch said:

don't know what I possible said to offend

Paraphrasing Scripture is not as good as citing a reference when asked.

Calling another's interpretation "trash" isn't helpful.

Do you deny saying that?

Just one example, among way too many.

Probably you are not intentionally angry, hateful, and bitter.

It's a terribly common trait in fundamentalists of all stripes. Not all of course, but most. Gives religion a very bad reputation.

I try hard to avoid paraphrases and paraphrasing. I do strive for accuracy in all my translations, but of course I'm not perfect.

Most folks are thoroughly aware of established translations, so nothing's being hidden. Just contributing to the menu.