Abortion...I would call this a theological issue

[Robert]

6 hours ago, Robert said:

You see guilt involves volition. Because of Adam's sin I belong to a condemned humanity.  I have nothing but the grave in font of me. When I come to know that I am a sinner then I become guilty of transgression.  Now I stand guilty under law. 

 

I had a typo....I said, "Because of Adam's sinned...."  I changed it to "Because of Adam's sin"

[Robert]

7 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

To say something is not counted is rather different than to say it did not exist, don't you think?  But if your argument that "where there is no law" is used to protect ignorance/ignorants, then evangelists must really be doing the work of the devil to tell everyone the truth. 

The last time I checked evangelists weren't preaching to infants - either in or out of the womb. So again, another straw man.

Anyway ...let's keep to the context, Green...okay?  The subject is infants and abortion.

Infants cannot reason.  They know nothing of God's law; sin; redemption or even Jesus Himself. They haven't matured.  They haven't reached the age at which they can comprehend spiritual things, i.e., they haven't reached "the age of accountability."

The reason we have death isn't because we stand guilty before the law.  The first death occurs because we share Adam's fallen life, indwelt with iniquity. Paul explains this in Romans chapter 5.

Once we come to know that we are sinners; guilty before God's law, then we become transgressors.  To remain "under law" means death, the second death.

 

[Robert]

6 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

Ah…if that is your definition and example for applying it, you had best never meet a meat-eating hunter, because he's a murderer.  For that matter, don't ever swat that mosquito--isn't such a taking of life for a selfish purpose?

The Bible is careful with words.  We must be also.

I have already stated the moral law applies to humans....If sin had not entered our world we would have no death....Animals wouldn't be eaten and some of them wouldn't be eating us....

[Green Cochoa]

7 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Knowledge may be said to be a factor.

Be careful that you do not reject truth.  It is more than "may" here.  It is explicitly stated to be a factor, as said by one under inspiration, not me.

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Green, you be careful that you do not build a straw-man.

By the way, one may have knowledge and yet not have salvation.  In this case, I might be able to say that knowledge was not a factor in the salvation of the person. 

[Green Cochoa]

2 hours ago, Robert said:

The reason we have death isn't because we stand guilty before the law.  The first death occurs because we share Adam's fallen life, indwelt with iniquity. Paul explains this in Romans chapter 5.

I would say we have the first death because we do not have access to the tree of life.  We could live forever with that, sin or no sin.  The death has little to do with sharing anything of Adam's "fallen life" beyond this.  But the Bible is clear that "the soul that sinneth, it shall die."  I believe that speaks of the second death.

2 hours ago, Robert said:

The last time I checked evangelists weren't preaching to infants - either in or out of the womb. So again, another straw man.

Anyway ...let's keep to the context, Green...okay?  The subject is infants and abortion.

Infants cannot reason.  They know nothing of God's law; sin; redemption or even Jesus Himself. They haven't matured.  They haven't reached the age at which they can comprehend spiritual things, i.e., they haven't reached "the age of accountability."

 

For this reason, it is unclear if they will even be saved.

"Whether all the children of unbelieving parents will be saved we cannot tell, because God has not made known His purpose in regard to this matter, and we had better leave it where God has left it and dwell upon subjects made plain in His Word."  {3SM 315.1}  

2 hours ago, Robert said:

I have already stated the moral law applies to humans....If sin had not entered our world we would have no death....Animals wouldn't be eaten and some of them wouldn't be eating us....

I'm glad you see a difference between murder and killing.  That's an understanding that is more foundational to our doctrines than some realize.  It touches on a number of things, including the matter of abortion, but also including the very nature of God.

[Green Cochoa]

55 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Green, you be careful that you do not build a straw-man.

By the way, one may have knowledge and yet not have salvation.  In this case, I might be able to say that knowledge was not a factor in the salvation of the person. 

There is no single thing that saves us.  You should know this.  We can truthfully compare our salvation to a chain--break even one link, and the whole chain is in vain.  At the same time, every link is required, and can be put into focus by such words as "by faith alone" or "by grace alone" or "no other name under heaven by which we must be saved."  Knowledge plays a critical role in multiple links of the chain, but the mark of the beast can as easily be placed upon the hand of works as upon the head of ignorance/knowledge.

Salvation is through faith in Jesus Christ alone.  {FW 18.1}  

He who grudges the reward to another, forgets that he himself is saved by grace alone.  {RH, July 10, 1894 par. 5}

"So then, faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

It is true that there are many aspects to our salvation.

Regardless. as you have said below, there is only one thing that saves us.

Knowledge can be corrupted as it is human and dependent, in part, upon our brains which are quite human.  Even the Holy Spirit has to work within the boundaries of our humanity and our human brain.  We are not anywhere near to be being God.  Even in eternity we  will not be God.

Salvation is through faith in Jesus Christ alone.  {FW 18.1}  

He who grudges the reward to another, forgets that he himself is saved by grace alone.  {RH, July 10, 1894 par. 5}

 

 

[Robert]

2 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

I would say we have the first death because we do not have access to the tree of life.  .  

You are referring Gen 3:22 

Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”

Now before Adam & Eve ate from "the tree of knowledge of good and evil" God had warned Adam, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.” Gen 2:16,17

What did God mean by "you will surely die"?  Did God mean that Adam & Eve would  die the moment they ate the forbidden fruit or did He mean "dying you will die".  I tend to go with the latter based on the following:

Quote

The Hebrew is, literally, die-die (muwth-muwth) with two different verb tenses (dying and die), which can be translated as “surely die” or “dying you shall die.” This indicates the beginning of dying, an ingressive sense, which finally culminates with death.  Ref: https://answersingenesis.org/bible-characters/adam-and-eve/why-didnt-adam-and-eve-die-the-instant-they-ate-the-fruit/

 

[Green Cochoa]

5 minutes ago, Robert said:

You are referring Gen 3:22 

Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”

Now before Adam & Eve ate from "the tree of knowledge of good and evil" God had warned Adam, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.” Gen 2:16,17

What did God mean by "you will surely die"?  Did God mean that Adam & Eve would  die the moment they ate the forbidden fruit or did He mean "dying you will die".  I tend to go with the latter based on the following:

 

One Biblical principle is that when God repeats something, saying essentially the same thing twice, it means it is important, significant, or imminent.  The repetition you point out in that verse is interesting, and I believe it has that meaning. 

What most people miss, however, is the true significance of the word "day" in that promise God made.  Find its meaning in 2 Peter 3:8 and Psalm 90:4.  Adam and Eve did indeed die on that "day."  In contrast to Adam, Satan has been given a week of probation, not just a single day.  Earth's week is nearly up to the point of having its sabbath rest.

[Robert]

10 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

I would say we have the first death because we do not have access to the tree of life.  We could live forever with that, sin or no sin.  The death has little to do with sharing anything of Adam's "fallen life" beyond this. 

The above was your response to one of my previous statements:

Quote

The reason we have death isn't because we stand guilty before the law.  The first death occurs because we share Adam's fallen life, indwelt with iniquity. Paul explains this in Romans chapter 5.

Apparently you reject Paul's view of why Adam's children (humanity) dies the first death.  According to your view we simply die because we do not have access to "the tree of life".

Yes, I agree that access to the tree of life would have prevented death under most circumstances, but keep in mind that there must be some conditions to immortality.

Sin brings discord...it brings crime...it brings violence and death.  (See Romans 3:10-18; James 4:1,2) In this scenario Cain would have stilled murdered Abel. The tree of life wouldn't have prevented bloodshed - rather it would have maintained optimum health.  

Ultimately sin destroys: "Each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death." James 1:14,15

 

[Robert]

On 8/26/2016 at 2:57 AM, Robert said:

Rom 5:12  "Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned...

What was the result of Adam's sin? 

Gen 5:1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; 2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam (plural: mankind), in the day when they were created.

3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years (i.e., after the fall), and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image...

Adam's descendants were born in his likeness after his image. No longer was mankind in the image and likeness of God.  Keep in mind that God is Spirit; so Moses isn't speaking of God's form.  Moses is speaking of God's agape, as in, "God is agape".  

Ellen White: 

"Man (mankind) was originally endowed with noble powers and a well-balanced mind. He was perfect in his being, and in harmony with God. His thoughts were pure, his aims holy. But through disobedience, his powers were perverted, and selfishness took the place of love (agape)." SC 17

 

 

 

[Robert]

Romans 5:13 For before the law was given, sin was in the world.  But sin is not taken into account when there is no law.

 

[Paul] is giving us an implication here that there was a time when there was no law.  (Some translations read “until the law,” which means before God gave the law.) He’s using the word “law” and he’s referring to the Ten Commandments, as a legal code.  The law was existing from before.  But when did God post up His Ten Commandments in black and white for men to see?  It was at Mount Sinai.

Were people sinning before God actually gave the law in writing?  And the answer is yes.  For Paul is saying in verse 13:

“Sin was in the world.” That is, in the human race.  The human race who lived from Adam to Moses were sinning.

“But,” he says, “sin is not imputed (or counted or reckoned) when there is no law.”

In other words, legally, God could not say to those people, “You have broken My Ten Commandments, therefore, you must die.” He could not do that because he had not yet posted the Commandments.

If tomorrow the U.S.  government decides to reverse the law of our freeways and return back to 55 miles per hour, no policeman can touch me until they have repainted the new speed limit on the posters.  As long as it says 65 miles per hour, even though the U.S.  federal government passes a law, they can’t touch me until they change the law on those posters.

So God legally could not touch them for their sins.  Since God is a just God, He could not do it.  And yet he says in verse 14:

 

Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses....

 

These people were dying.  If they were not dying for their personal sins, then the only reason they were dying is because they transgressed in Adam.  That’s his argument.

I want you to notice the play of words, which is also important.  Listen to all of Romans 5:14:

 

Nevertheless, death reigned [that means they were all dying] from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command [they were sinning, but they had not sinned], as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.

 

Yes, they were sinning, but their sinning was different.  It was not the same as Adam’s transgression.  I want you to notice the play of words.  There are twelve words in the Bible, Old and New Testament, for sin.  [For details, see Biblical Definition of Sin.]  Each word has a specific meaning.  The word “sin” is “missing the mark.” The word “transgression” is not missing the mark; the word “transgression” means a willful, deliberate violation of a law.  In other words, you can never transgress without the knowledge of the law.  The prerequisite for transgression is the knowledge of the law.

The people from Adam to Moses were sinning.  But they were not transgressing.  Why?  God had not spelled out the law in clear terms.  They had an understanding in their conscience.  We saw that in chapter 2.  But there was no clear statement from God, “Thou shall not kill.  Thou shall not steal.” That came at Mount Sinai.

Adam’s sin was a transgression because he willfully disobeyed.  When Eve brought that fruit to him, he knew that it was the forbidden fruit.  He knew that God had commanded them not to touch it.  So when Adam sinned, he was willfully violating a law.  He transgressed.  And God said to Adam that, ’The day you transgress, you will die.’

These people were sinning, but they did not transgress.  Yet they were dying.  Was God being unfair to them?  Was He being unjust?  No!  They were not dying because of their personal sins.  They were dying because they participated, they were implicated, or, to use the language of Hebrews 7, they were “in the loins of Adam” when Adam transgressed.

Jack Sequeira

[Robert]

Jack: "The reason Adam’s sin brought condemnation and death to all mankind is not because humanity is guilty of Adam’s sin, but because Adam’s sin was a representative sin."

My commentary:   The Roman Church teaches that we stand guilty of Adam's sin.  This is called "Original sin", which is a heresy.

Jack: "We were in Adam by creation [Acts 17:26] and, therefore, were implicated in his sin at the Fall.  Likewise, by uniting Christ’s divinity with our corporate humanity that needed redeeming, in the incarnation, Christ qualified to be the second Adam, our representative and substitute.  His obedience can be lawfully credited to all mankind since all obeyed in Christ. We were in Christ by God’s act of incarnation [1 Cor.  1:30] and therefore implicated in His obedience, i.e., in His life, death, and resurrection [2 Cor. 5:14; Eph. 2:5,6]."

My commentary:  We - i.e., Adam's children - were implicated in his sin because all of us share his fallen life indwelt with our bent-to-self.  We share his fallen life under the sentence of death, the 1st death. Like Eve, you and I are bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. 

Jack: The whole force of the parallel, in Romans 5:12-21, between Adam and Christ, depends on the idea of the solidarity of mankind in Adam and in Christ. In the great majority of the 510 times the word “Adam” is used in the Old Testament Hebrew text, it possesses a collective significance.  In the same sense, Christ is referred to as the “last Adam” in the New Testament.  In Him, all humanity was gathered up and given a new history in which we stand justified. 

 

[Robert]

34 minutes ago, Robert said:

We - i.e., Adam's children - were implicated in his sin because all of us share his fallen life indwelt with our bent-to-self.  We share his fallen life under the sentence of death, the 1st death. Like Eve, you and I are bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. 

Like Eve, we are "bone of (his) bones, and flesh of (his) flesh... she (Eve) was taken out of Man"  Gen 2:23

Because of Adam's sin we are born "in (fallen Adam's) own likeness, after his image" Gen 5:3

Hence "in Adam all die" 1 Cor 15:22

Thus "death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" Rom 5:12

What sin did we commit "in Adam"?  The sin of breaking a known command, as did Adam?

No! 

The sin of belonging to a fallen race indwelt with the sin nature and being a slave to that fallen nature. The sin of actually sharing his fallen, condemned life.  After all we are simply the multiplication of Adam's life after the fall.  We are, to repeat myself, "bone of his bones and flesh of his flesh." That's our predicament "in Adam".

"As related to the first Adam, men receive from him nothing but guilt (condemnation) and the sentence of death." 6BC 1074.7

 

 

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Green said below:

This is an actual rule of grammar is some Asian languages.

One Biblical principle is that when God repeats something, saying essentially the same thing twice, it means it is important, . . .

[Robert]

On 8/26/2016 at 8:30 AM, Green Cochoa said:

In light of the basics in the plan of redemption, Robert makes some untenable, astounding, claims.  He contradicts himself without realizing, as all who espouse some error eventually must.  In this case, he is pitting several inspired passages against each other.  Carefully consider these:

1) For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. (Romans 3:23) If fetuses have souls, they are certainly included in the above "all."  That means they have sinned.

We are by nature sinners because we are conceived in sin:

"Lo, in iniquity I have been brought forth, And in sin doth my mother conceive me." Ps 51:5 

Here sin is not to be considered an action, but a condition.  Because of the fall the only life that David's mother could pass onto him was a life in slavery to iniquity - a life bound in iniquity.  

Iniquity is "the love of self" - that is, our bent-to-self - the very opposite of agape. Everything about human development in the womb is polluted with the principle of self.  

Quote

2) Sin is the transgression of the law. (1 John 3:4)

"Our only definition of sin is that given in the word of God; it is "the transgression of the law;" it is the outworking of a principle at war with the great law of love (agape) which is the foundation of the divine government." [GC 493]

Sin is the outworking of a principle - that principle being the love of self - which is at war with agape.

What is agape?  I can tell you what it is not:  "Love (agape)...is not self-seeking" 1 Cor 13:5

 I can describe to what it looks like in action:  "Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth." 1 Cor 10:24 KJV

Do I have Ellen White to back me up?  Yes:

 "In heaven none will think of self, nor seek their own pleasure; but all, from pure, genuine love (agape), will seek the happiness of the heavenly beings around them." [Maranatha 110]

There's no self-love in agape.  Everything fallen man produce is polluted with self-love.  Everything.  That is why Christ said, "Without Me you can do nothing". 

 

[Robert]

On 8/26/2016 at 8:30 AM, Green Cochoa said:

I would go so far as to say that fetuses, if indeed they have souls, cannot be saved....I believe that a fetus cannot understand "what constitutes sin."

So infant salvation depends on them knowing that they are sinners?  That's salvation by knowledge; not salvation by and through Christ Jesus.

Quote

 Thankfully, I also understand that a fetus does not have a soul, and therefore may not yet be a sinner...

Any primitive, cognitive ability in the infant is polluted with self-interest and self-love, at no fault of the infant.  It did not ask to receive the fallen life of Adam from it's mother.

"What is man, that he should be clean? and he which is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?" Job 15:14

"How then can man be just with God? or how can he be clean that is born of a woman?"  Job 25:4

The idea here is that the woman can only pass to her infant the fallen life of Adam.  We are all bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh.  We are in the image of father Adam.

Quote

...it will not be brought up in the second resurrection to be punished for its sins.

Tell that to any Christian mom. Perhaps she had an abortion before Christ (or maybe after Christ)?  Perhaps she had a miscarriage?  What would you say? "So sorry for your loss, but no worries, your child will not be raised to damnation, it will remain dead for eternity"?

The good news, moms, if you have lost a child he/she will be raised in glory, not because of anything you have done or your infant has done, but because of the righteousness of Christ and His agape love. See Romans 5:18 NASB for example.

As to some of EGW statements on the salvation of infants who had died, well, she does not have the last word on this subject.  She clearly states that during her life that she and church, of that time, only had a glimmer of the light that was yet to come.  Ellen White is not infallible on the subject of the salvation of infants.  So we must continue to understand the implications of the glorious gospel of Christ and what He has done for the fallen race. 

 

[Green Cochoa]

2 minutes ago, Robert said:

Ellen White is not infallible on the subject of the salvation of infants.  So we must continue to understand the implications of the glorious gospel of Christ and what He has done for the fallen race. 

When you set your judgment above that of the inspired testimonies, you place yourself on very dangerous ground.  The last great deception is based on a self-deception.  Read about this in Mrs. White's writings.  I would strongly encourage you to pick up the nine volumes of the Testimonies for the Church and begin reading them through systematically.

[Robert]

4 minutes ago, Robert said:

We must continue to understand the implications of the glorious gospel of Christ and what He has done for the fallen race. 

Romans 5:9 "...having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him.10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life...

Romans 5:18  So then as through one transgression [Adam's sin] there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness [Christ's - the 2nd Adam] there resulted justification of life to all men. 

[Robert]

5 minutes ago, Green Cochoa said:

When you set your judgment above that of the inspired testimonies, you place yourself on very dangerous ground.  The last great deception is based on a self-deception.  Read about this in Mrs. White's writings.  I would strongly encourage you to pick up the nine volumes of the Testimonies for the Church and begin reading them through systematically.

Been there, done that.  Because the majority of Ellen White's work is on Christian living and because my local SDA church stressed Christian living (the keeping of the law) I naturally became a full fledged legalist with no peace and no assurance.  I almost became an atheist.  

First we must understand the glorious gospel and then Christian living will have its proper place.

Ellen White on herself:

 

Quote

 

"In regard to infallibility, I NEVER claimed it; God ALONE is Infallible."  Selected Messages, Book One, pp 415 and 37

"Let no one come to the conclusion that there is no more truth to be revealed.  The diligent, prayerful seeker for truth will find precious rays of light yet to shine forth from the word of God."  Counsels on Sabbath School Work, p. 34

"There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without error.  The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people is not a proof that our ideas are infallible.  Age will not make an error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair.  No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation.  Review and Herald, December 20,1892 

"We cannot hold that a position once taken, an idea once advocated, is not, under any circumstances, to be relinquished.  There is but One who is infallible --- He is the way, the truth, and the life.

"If the pillars of our faith will not stand the test of investigation, it is time we knew it." Testimonies to Ministers, pp 105 and 107

"The Bible and the Bible alone, is our creed, the sole bond of union; all who bow to this holy Word will be in harmony . . . Man is fallible, but God's Word is infallible.

"We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn.  God and heaven alone are infallible.  Those who think that they will never have to give up a cherished view, never have occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed.  

"In regard to infallibility, I never claimed it; God alone is infallible.  His word is true, and in Him is no variableness, or shadow of turning."  Selected Messages, Book One, pp. 416 and 37.

"Our position and faith is in the Bible. . . . And never do we want any soul to bring in the Testimonies ahead of the Bible."  Evangelism, p. 256

“We are not to accept the opinion of commentators as the voice of God; they are erring mortals like ourselves.  God has given reasoning powers to us as well as to them.  We should make the Bible its own expositor.

“We must study the truth for ourselves.  No man should be relied upon to think for us.  No matter who he is, or in what position he may be placed, we are not to look upon any man as a criterion for us.  Testimonies to Ministers, pp. 106 and 110

“Whatever may be man’s intellectual advancement, let him not for a moment think that there is no need of thorough and continuous searching of Scripture for greater light.  As a people we are called individually to be students of prophecy.  We must watch with earnestness that we may discern any ray of light which God shall present to us.  We are to catch the first gleamings of truth; and through prayerful study, clearer light may be obtained, which can be brought to others.

“Some of our leading brethren have frequently taken their position on the wrong side: and if God would send a message and wait for these older brethren to open the way for its advancement, it would never reach the people.

“The rebuke of the Lord will rest upon those who would bar the way, that clearer light shall not come to the people. . . . Let no one run the risk of interposing between the people and the message of heaven.”  Gospel Workers, pp 300, 303, and 304.

A spirit of pharisaism has been coming in upon the people who claim to believe the truth for these last days.  They are self-satisfied.  They have said, “We have the truth.  There is no more light for the people of God.  But we are not safe when we take the position that we will not accept anything else than that upon which we have settled as truth.  We should take the Bible, and investigate it closely for ourselves.  We should dig in the mine of God’s word for truth.”  Review and Herald, June 18, 1888.

We need to begin all over again. . . . Errors may be hoary with age; but age dos not make error truth, nor truth error.  Altogether too long have the old customs and habits been followed.  The Lord would now have every idea that is false put away from teachers and students.  We are not at liberty to teach that which shall meet the world’s standard or the standard of the church, simply because it is the custom to do so.”  Testimonies for the Church, vol 6, p. 142.

 

 

[Green Cochoa]

Robert,

My recommendation still stands.  There are guiding principles in those Testimonies which will not fail you, I assure you.  Ellen White was not infallible, I would agree.  Neither were Paul, Daniel, Moses, Jonah, Matthew, John, David, Peter, or any of the others.  But they wrote under the inspiration of God.  Is God fallible?  I'm sure you would agree that He is not.  Then you will likely accept that His inspiration is not fallible either.  The exact word choices the prophets used may not have been God's, but the thought behind it always was.  Therefore, the principle of the matter cannot be questioned without calling into question the very pillars of our faith.

[Robert]

Let none think that there is no more knowledge for them to gain. The depth of human intellect may be measured; the works of human authors may be mastered; but the highest, deepest, broadest flight of the imagination cannot find out God. There is infinity beyond all that we can comprehend. We have seen only the glimmering of divine glory and of the infinitude of knowledge and wisdom; we have, as it were, been working on the surface of the mine, when rich golden ore is beneath the surface, to reward the one who will dig for it. The shaft must be sunk deeper and yet deeper in the mine, and the result will be glorious treasure. Through a correct faith, divine knowledge will become human knowledge. [COL Page 114]

In a morning talk at Ottawa, Kansas, May 14, 1889, Ellen White made the following statement:

"Do not think that, because we have a glimmer of the light of God, that we have it all."

And in Selected Messages I, we see her repeat this:

"We have only the glimmerings of the rays of the light that is yet to come to us."

[Robert]

3 minutes ago, Green Cochoa said:

Ellen White was not infallible, I would agree.  Neither were Paul, Daniel, Moses, Jonah, Matthew, John, David, Peter, or any of the others.  But they wrote under the inspiration of God. 

The Bible, according to the Bible itself and EGW, is the measuring stick of truth.  Personally, Paul's writing make things on salvation positively clear.  I read the Apostle Paul's work, especially Romans and Galatians, more than any other....

Romans 1:1 Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle (special messenger, personally chosen representative), set apart for [preaching] the gospel of God [the good news of salvation]... AMP Bible

Gal 1:1 Paul, an apostle (not commissioned and sent from men nor through the agency of man, but through Jesus Christ—the Messiah—and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead)...

 

 

[Robert]

Anyway, I must reject your view that a fetus is a soulless entity.  I believe that your view on abortion is a grievous error and that it also gives credibility to those promoting pro choice.