"Glacier View" 25 yrs later

May 18, 2006

Wow - lots of EGW and not one scriptural reference!

/Bevin

May 18, 2006

What does all this have to do with the title of this thread?

Well maybe if we apply it to the way Des Ford was treated. I dont recall there was much love involved back there. To some he was an enemy...upsetting their "facts". After all "we cant be wrong ...impossible!" Can someone here disprove Des Ford's thesis using scripture only?

mel

May 18, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Can someone here disprove Des Ford's thesis using scripture only?

That is an interesting question, Mel. Which thesis are you referring to?

May 18, 2006

Are you serious David? You really dont know what Glacier View was all about?

mel

May 18, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Wow - lots of EGW and not one scriptural reference!

/Bevin

Yes...for the Adventists who think they are above sin because they keep part of the law. And yes there is scripture references in the EGW quotes!

May 18, 2006

Taggin' in!

Nature of Christ? He was God in human form on earth....explain that mystery if you can. He IS our Savior no matter which side of the 'nature' discussion one takes. He died and was raised from death to life reconciling us sinners to the Father as a voluntary act on His and the Father's decision. Its either true that He was raised from death to life....OR, dear friends, close down this forum and sell all your churches and schools to the gambling agencies, abscond with the money if you can get by the police safely.......there's no hope for any of us!

Foolish argument!

Ben

May 19, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Are you serious David? You really dont know what Glacier View was all about?

mel

I have read quite a bit of what Ford wrote, in a number of areas. Which specific teaching are you referring to? Why don't you briefly state the thesis you are speaking of?

May 19, 2006

David you can easily do some research for yourself on the Glacier View discussions if you do not already know what the issues were.

mel

May 19, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

David you can easily do some research for yourself on the Glacier View discussions if you do not already know what the issues were.

You are the one who raised the question about a thesis propounded by Dr. Ford. You said, "Can someone here disprove Des Ford's thesis using scripture only?"

You did not identify the thesis you were referring to. It is up to you to specify what you mean, since you have opened it up for response here. That is something you would need to do. If you do not wish to pursue it, then so be it.

May 19, 2006

Sigh!....title of this thread..."Glacier View" 25 years later. It is my humble opinion that persons wishing to contribute to the thread should know what the issues were at the Glacier View Conference. I DO know what the issues were. I was referring to those issues. I refuse to attempt to educate some one on the issues who will not study them for him/her self.

mel

May 19, 2006

Melvin, I do not think you have heard David.

Dr. Ford can be described as having more than one issue that was considered to be a problem. David is requesting that you state a specific issue that you wish to discuss.

Yes, I assume that you would tell us that Dr. Ford had one issue, with several parts. O.K., if you wish to state it that way, then respond to David by telling us what specific part of the issue you wish to discuss.

David's question is valid. There are those who know well what Dr. Ford taught, believe him to be wrong, and think that he should have been removed as a SDA minister, yet acknowledge that he was not wrong in some points.

If you do not want to respond to the question asked you, O.K. But, your response sounded a little like sarcasm, which does not lend to discussion.

May 19, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Nature of Christ? He was God in human form on earth....explain that mystery if you can. He IS our Savior no matter which side of the 'nature' discussion one takes. He died and was raised from death to life reconciling us sinners to the Father as a voluntary act on His and the Father's decision.

There is only ONE gospel....If you buy into the wrong one it will have eternal consequences. I'll deal with this later....

May 19, 2006

No that's ok Gregory I understand quite well. I am not that interested in discussing. Any one can pick the area where they feel they can refute Des Ford's teachings and go for it. Surely that is no problem at all! But... anyone who is at all aware of what happened at Glacier View knows that the primary issue was the sanctuary doctrine.

I see so much here of talking past each other, of setting up straw men and knocking them down, of quibbling over insignificant details, of being unwilling to ever concede a point or back down. Sarcasm...well maybe it has a place?

mel

May 19, 2006

The real problem, Melvin, is that so many SDAs know very little about the sanctuary doctrine, and regard it as unimportant, something that could easily be discarded. In truth, the sanctuary doctrine is one of the core doctrines of our church, and if it goes, the church falls. If the Pre-Advent Investigative Judgment goes, the church falls. If 1844 as the starting date for that judgment goes, the church falls. None of these are expendable. Adventism depends upon them, the doctrines depend upon each other, and this is why Satan is orchestrating so many concerted attacks against them.

I have been apalled at the general ignorance about this doctine in the church for decades. I remember once teaching a Sabbath School class where the lesson involved the sanctuary, and I explained some of the most elementary things about what it meant, and half the members--long time SDAs--reacted as if I were giving them wonderful new light!

I have also suspected that the reason the brethren were not more definite and persuasive in trying to refute Dr. Desmond Ford is because even they were far too ignorant of the sanctuary doctrine than they should have been. This came after they had just spent the better part of two decades opposing Robert Brinsmead and his "Sanctuary Awakening Message," branding his teaching as offshoot heresy, when actually he was not an offshoot, just independent, and was teaching fundamental Adventism. The brethren confused themselves by this, and also share some responsibility for Brinsmead's own later giving up and leaving the faith. In point of fact, at the time the Glacier View meeting took place, Brinsmead had already left the church and was teaching the same things Desmond Ford was. What I am saying is that to a large degree, the brethren, the thought leaders, the responsible theologians, created both these monsters--Ford and the latter Brinsmead. The only difference between Ford and Brinsmead was that Brinsmead took the same teachings Ford taught to their logical conclusion, and left the church.

May 20, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Nature of Christ? He was God in human form on earth....explain that mystery if you can. He IS our Savior no matter which side of the 'nature' discussion one takes. He died and was raised from death to life reconciling us sinners to the Father as a voluntary act on His and the Father's decision.

There is only ONE gospel....If you buy into the wrong one it will have eternal consequences. I'll deal with this later....

Yes, Jesus is our Saviour, but the question is what qualified Him to represent us perfect "in Himself" in the heavenly places?

Here's Paul:

Gal 4:4 But when the fulness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law [i.e., under its curse! Why?], 5 in order that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons...

Okay, let's back up:

Gal 3:23 Before the faith [Jesus] came, we were held prisoners by the law [i.e., held under its curse], locked up until the faith [Jesus] should be revealed.

Okay, Ben, what does God's Holy law require?

Gal 3:10 Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them.

BTW, the curse is God abandoning the sinner with no hope of a resurrection. Hence the curse of the law is the 2nd death!

So the law requires that God forsake us eternally. Since life outside God is an impossibility, eternal death is the sure consequences!

Now the question:

How does God justly allow believing sinners into heaven, by faith, and yet maintain integrity to His law that justly condemns them to the eternal grave?

You see if God just forgives us He bypasses His law. Since God is a righteous God, He can't do that without becoming a liar!

Rob

May 21, 2006

I have been studying this subject of the sanctuary on and off since the controversy over it raised by Ford. I have found it to be completely sound. In fact, if we didn't have an Investigative/Pre-advent Judgment, we would have to invent it to explain God's activities. This has been discussed a few times here in the last 5 yrs. If you are interested, we can go over it again, without out even one appeal to EGW as authority.

Gerry

May 24, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Okay, Ben, what does God's Holy law require?

Gal 3:10 Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them.

>>>In the context of Paul's writings, he is de-emphasising 'the Law's' authority in the Christian's life.

What God's Holy Law required of the Jews/Israelites was actually perfect obedience to the "Law of Moses". EGW, whose writings dominate thought in our church, wrote with varying emphasis from time to time on the requirements of 'the Law' for the Christian...mostly demanding literal perfection but in some cases leaving leeway for mild frail humanity to exist temporarily---but eventually our 'characters' must be spotless!...absolute control over 'appetite' and 'passion'and every other multiple weaknesses is required! etc...but..it's impossible for us as humans to gain such an absolute complete victory over all that stuff in order to be 'save-able'. (Would you

like me to give a bunch of quotes, really?) Sabbath- breakers and incorrigible children and base sexual sinners were to be put to death by stoning in 'the Law' of Moses.

What you mention as being "God's Holy Law", Robert, is as it says in Paul's writings, especially, 'done away', 'cast out', 'abolished', and, 'nailed to the cross' AS AN INDIVISIBLE UNIT. See 2Cor 3, Gal 3 & 4, Eph 2, Col 2, 1Tim 1, and the entire book of Hebrews, Romans, and, reallly, the Gospels also....if you can read it without extraBiblical 'authority' dominating your mind as you read. ("There is much to learn and much more to unlearn!"--EGW) The NT includes very clear instructions as to exactly how the Christian should live life under Christ's authority! We have been 'fed' the Law until the message is as 'dry as the hills of Gilboa'...EGW said in one of her better comments, if I remember correctly. Mankind has natural laws built into him by God's creation of mankind. We inherently know, independent of any written Law, what is the way to treat each other in this world. We don't all do it perfectly any of the time and no individual does it perfectly any of the time, either! But, we can live a life of worshipping God and doing 'good deeds' in this life...such a combination is all that is required. Those who are persistent evil doers and unbelievers in God will, it says, be lost in the 'lake of fire'...which implies those who are not in those categories of people, those who love God and worship Him and treat His creation and creatures with respect, will not be subject to the 'lake of fire'....its pretty clear. (see Rev 21:8)

I am NOT against going to church on Sabbath and I am NOT aginst EGW...and I am not against the SDA church...but she should be pastoral rather than 'authoritatively prophetic'!... See 1Cor 12 and 14 about how Christians should treat and consider the 'status' of prophets in these days.

Jack Sequeira is a good man...no doubt.....but you seem to use him as your guide everything you are concerned about in the NT. He is good but....you can read the Bible and specially the NT for yourself and make your own independent conclusions. (See Signs, March 21, 1906) It was written for each person to do just that! The OT was written to prepare the way for the Messiah, The Christ! The NT was written to show to people the very Messiah, The Christ! He has come! He has risen! He is THE ONE to listen to! No, we do not NOW listen to Moses!....we listen to THE SON in whom He is well pleased...listen to him.....not Moses! see 2Cor 3

Before making too rash a decision on this proprosition I make, please read the NT over and over and over without reference to any other extraBiblical writer(s)!

What some of us don't realize is that OT writers never literally 'saw' the face of God or spent time communicating with Him in personal human reality contact like the writers of the NT did. Human people, good and bad, and in between, in Christ's time, saw, openly witnessed, followed, saw miracles, and all aspects of life occur while He lived here for His 33 yrs. He was God! He was the 'face of God'! He ate, slept and lived with, argued with, taught it all to living heart-beating people....no OT writer had that experience. Jesus brought a NEW "WAY"...many, even most, SDA people don't realize that. Those of us who 'continue to read Moses'(through 'the writings'?) have a limited understanding of Jesus and what He did for sinful humanity because of our focus on Moses. As far as all the OT writers were concerned, their minds were not tuned to a Messiah or The Christ! JESUS HADN'T HAPPENED YET! Please understand this as you read the OT.....and.....then read the NT! Many SDAs have been taught a limited understanding of Christ's GIFT of Grace for the sinner! The NT will give a clearer understanding than ANY extraBiblical writer in the history of the world since His ascension! Its human nature that what people literally see, they understand better! The OT writers did not literally 'see' like NT writers did!

Ben

May 25, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

What you mention as being "God's Holy Law", Robert, is as it says in Paul's writings, especially, 'done away', 'cast out', 'abolished', and, 'nailed to the cross' AS AN INDIVISIBLE UNIT. See 2Cor 3, Gal 3 & 4, Eph 2, Col 2, 1Tim 1, and the entire book of Hebrews, Romans, and, reallly, the Gospels also....if you can read it without extraBiblical 'authority' dominating your mind as you read.

No Ben, the law has not be "abolished"! Absolutely not!!!

Matt 5:17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; [:"Red"]I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.[/] 18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear [have they disappeared?], not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

19 “Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and so teaches others, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 “For I say to you, that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Let's talk....

Rob

May 26, 2006

Robert said: "No, Ben, the law has not been abolished! Absolutely not!"

==========================================================

Robert, you are pretty close to being right on many of your posts, IMO. However, you are letting extraBiblical writers, Jack Sequeira, for one, and the SOP for another, to influence your beliefs somewhat. Why don't you put away reading Jack Sequeira and the SOP for a while and just read nothing but the New Testament (with reference to the OT if desired, of course) and really get the teaching and meaning of the New Testament without allowing anything extraBiblical to influence your conclusions but the Bible (particularly the NT)?

Matt 5:17 is widely misconstrued by many Christians and Bible readers who allow others to influence what they understand about it. True!! Christ did NOT COME to 'abolish' "the Law" of Moses, or the Psalms or the Old Testament----it depends upon just how 'the Law' is referred to in this particular passage. "the Law' can mean any one of those. Here, however, it doesn't matter very much, because in terms of Why Jesus came it certainly wasn't primarily to 'abolish' the Law of Moses or the Ten Commandments. What Christ came to do was to complete and fulfill the obscure promises and identification characteristics of the promised Messiah. Isa 52-53 for example. (Remember please, that the purpose of the OT was to prepare the Way for Christ to come as the promised Messiah!) (The OT was for the Jew..nobody else! It was to show the Jew how to live the Jewish religious system and sanctuary...all of which was a teaching tool we see now in retrospect)

(Remember also, the Law was our tutor which was to lead us to Christ. But when He came we were no longer in need of a tutor because we had the REAL THING!..which was Christ Himself!)

Let's take it from the Amplified Version: "Do not think that I have come to do away with or undo the Law or the Prophets; I have come not to do away with or undo but to complete and fulfill them." He came to complete and fulfill but in the process ...and from many other texts a few of which I have listed for you, He did, in fact 'abolish' the authority of 'the Law' over the life of the Christian. See "abolish" in Eph 2, see "done away" in 2Cor 3 (KJV) see 'cast out'in Gal 4 (using Hagar as the allegory), see 'nailed to the cross' in Col 2:13,14---to say nothing about all of the Gospels, all Romans, all Hebrews (you interpret Heb 4 incorrectly in the context of the rest of the NT), see Acts 15, etc---and other references.

Christ 'worked' on Sabbath according to what 'work' was defined as (see John 5) and Christ disobeyed the 'clean and unclean' rules of 'the Law' when, for one example, He literally touched the leper to heal him. So, Christ's example showed that He had 'authority' over 'the Law' in every respect. That He confirmed in His own Christ's Law many of the same principles found in 'the Law of Moses' does not mean that He supported all parts of it at all. He made a 'new' Way---Acts 15 and 24 just for example. Paul was God's chosen expositor of Christ's coming and the life we Christians should live under His authority. So Christ by His actions regarded 'the Law' differently than the Israelite was told to regard it by Moses quoting God.

God was not seen by any of the OT writers! Not one! But, Christ had at a dozen or more humans that lived, breathed, boated, ate, slept, fed others, healed the sick...etc., for at least 3 1/2 yrs not fully comprehending all it meant UNTIL He was cruicifed and resurrected..and even then they, being human, learned slowly. Christ brought a 'new' Way vastly different from the way of the Jew in OT times. Note that the NT references often mentioned the contrast between the "old" and the "new"....see 2Cor 3 again, and I think also of Heb 7, 8, 9 and 10.

So, I'm sorry, Robert....but you MUST put away Jack Sequeira

and the SOP, and any or ALL OTHER EXTRABIBLICAL writings while you figure out the New Testament ALL ALONE for yourself. You have obviously not done that yet. You must do it or you will never realize the impact of both Matt 5:17ff and that list of texts I have given over and over again. I observe you've come quite a long way since exchanging with DelStar (RIP!) days of early SDA chat rooms.

Congratulations!

(It's amazing to me that when I give that list of texts and someone does begin to examine them carefully, they nearly always gloss over them or ignore them completely. It appears to me they are sort of stymied by the possibilities which contemplation of those texts may bring about in their thinking.)

Just so long as one reads the SOP as if it is 'authoritative' they have put it on equal basis with the Bible, if not superiorly, by the way they use and assume the SOP to be accurate, so, the Bible somehow must surely have to agree! They then go to the Bible with that mindset--to prove EGW correct. This is an improper 'biased' approach which favors the SOP in their mind's thinking.

Remember this dictum which is true in any aspect of human integrity: "Unconscious 'bias' is still a mistake; but, conscious 'bias' is fraud!" (Anon)

Use the Bible ONLY----get this, folks, please....ONLY!! Do it with assurance you are doing the right thing according to many quotes from EGW.

Ben

P.S. Robert there is another text which is a stumbling block for SDAs when they ever begin to grapple with Christianity and the relation between it and 'the Law of Moses'. It is Rom 3:31 which is an interesting study... in short, bring in Gal 3:25, as well as, the earlier parts of Rom 3. To wit, and 'in short': "no Law" equals "no guilt"....'no guilt' equals no need for a Savior. Think about the implications of all that in light of what has been said earler in Rom 3 and also in Gal 3. It becomes obvious that the 'problem' text, Rom 3:31, is solved satisfying the entire chapter of Rom 3 and the remaining context of the entire New Testament. Remember 'the Law' made 'sin' worse!

Everybody was guilty of 'wrong doing'but there was not punishment unless there was "Law"...therfore in the plan of God, mankind's wrongdoing was still wrong but not against any law until 'the Law' was given. Christ came to fulfill and complete the purpose and predictions of HIm in the OT. Someone has written, "the Law' brought the disease; Christ's Grace brought the cure!"--(Yancey) It's true! It's what the Bible says. Gal 3 says the Law was our tutor UNTIL Christ/faith came! After that we were no longer under the supervision of 'the Law'. Well, now we are under Christ's law and under the authority of how to live the Christian life through the instructions given in the New Testament.

What is 'old' fades away. See Heb 8:13

Are we talking?

Ben

May 26, 2006

Of course this means war.... <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I'll get back with you this afternoon

Rob

May 27, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

True!! Christ did NOT COME to 'abolish' "the Law" of Moses....

"The law of Moses" is the first five book of the Old Testament. The law of Ten Commandments is contained in 2nd book of the law.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

So, I'm sorry, Robert....but you MUST put away Jack Sequeira...

Ben...the legalists don't like Jack Sequeira. Have you become a legalist? By the way, if I take your word on all that you have written, then you become extra-Biblical.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Gal 3 says the Law was our tutor UNTIL Christ/faith came! After that we were no longer under the supervision of 'the Law'.

The law has a very important function in the life of the unbeliever. It proves he/she is a sinner!!! What's the remedy? Christ and His righteousness accepted by faith.

If you do away with the law then there's nothing to define sin!

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

...now we are under Christ's law...

Let's look at the context of this quote:

Gal 6:1 Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass [transgression or sin], you who are spiritual [mature] should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. 2 Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ."

What's the essence of the law? Let's see what Paul says:

Gal 5:14 "The entire law is summed up in a single command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” If I love my neighbor as I naturally love myself, I will bear another's burden instead of condemning him/her. That's all Paul is saying. Christ is the author of the law of Ten Commandments. He doesn't have another law. Yes the Ten Commandments are only a brief description of sin; that's why in the NT He expanded on them [see Matt chapter 5, Luke chapter 6, etc.]

May 27, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

The law has a very important function in the life of the unbeliever....If you do away with the law then there's nothing to define sin!

Proverbs 28:9 "He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, Even his prayer is an abomination."

May 27, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

True!! Christ did NOT COME to 'abolish' "the Law" of Moses....

"The law of Moses" is the first five book of the Old Testament. The law of Ten Commandments is contained in 2nd book of the law {/quote]

Well, you've backed down on Matt 5:17....

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

So, I'm sorry, Robert....but you MUST put away Jack Sequeira...

Ben...the legalists don't like Jack Sequeira. Have you become a legalist? By the way, if I take your word on all that you have written, then you become extra-Biblical.

So the mouse doesn't like the cat! I don't like cats (for purpose of this discussion) does that make me a 'mouse'?

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Gal 3 says the Law was our tutor UNTIL Christ/faith came! After that we were no longer under the supervision of 'the Law'.

The law has a very important function in the life of the unbeliever. It proves he/she is a sinner!!! What's the remedy? Christ and His righteousness accepted by faith.

If you do away with the law then there's nothing to define sin!

Please let's not change the subject. "..the law was our tutor UNTIL Christ/faith came! After that we were no longer under the supervision of 'the Law'. (paraphrased) So, what's your comment NOW?

The Law is still there for the unbeliever! Christ's Law applies only to the believer. The 'believer' doesn't practice sin. Rev 21:8 describes those who will be in the 'lake of fire' It doesn't list anything resembling a 'believer'....'believers' do not do those things...If they do they are liars and it does speak about liars ---and cowards--in Revelation 21.

You missed something, too, IMO. Mankind did NOT need the Law to know it was 'wrong' to do many things. I am not God so I don't know what He'll do about those who lived after Creation that did not have 'the Law of Moses'. There is no Biblical evidence 'the Law' existed prior to the Exodus and the sand of the Sinai desert. However Paul mentions that wrong existed before the Law but it wasn't held against them. All who in His judgment loved Him He sent Christ to save. Animal blood didn't do any good for anyone, really...it pointed forth to when Christ's blood would be the real 'ransom'.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

...now we are under Christ's law...

Let's look at the context of this quote:

Gal 6:1 Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass [transgression or sin], you who are spiritual [mature] should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. 2 Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ."

Gal 6:1 is referring to a Christian...it is NOT referring to a nonbeliever, a practiced murderer, a habitual thief, one who lies repeatedly, etc etc. As you and I both have said and believe, it appears, nobodoy is or even can be perfect just because we have been born into and tainted to the core with a sinful nature which will not be corrected until He comes again when we shall all be changed.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

What's the essence of the law? Let's see what Paul says:

Gal 5:14 "The entire law is summed up in a single command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” If I love my neighbor as I naturally love myself, I will bear another's burden instead of condemning him/her. That's all Paul is saying. Christ is the author of the law of Ten Commandments. He doesn't have another law. Yes the Ten Commandments are only a brief description of sin; that's why in the NT He expanded on them [see Matt chapter 5, Luke chapter 6, etc.]

Rob...How many times have you read the NT through without reading some other extraBiblical author? Gal 5 is again speaking to the believers....not the unbelievers.

I'm not sure you realize that the 'Law of Moses' is a single unit, like the constitutionn of the United States in that it is one unit. It is not divisible into segments....we do not allow it to be changed from what was written by our founding fathers of this country...so far. The Ten Commandments, though written by the finger of God, are, nevertheless also written in the Book of the Law on scrolls. The Two Tables of stone were deductively from the context of the Pentateuch probably representing a 'proxy' for the entire law. 2Cor 3 speaks specifically about those two tables being a 'ministry of death' and that they are to be 'cast out' 'abolished' 'done away' or whatever synonym might be applicable depending upon the translation...but the meaning is that those 'minstry of death' stones were to fade away to nothing being, like Moses' glowing face, fading away in favor of what will last forever, i.e., faith in Christ as our Redeemer. The blood of the Sinai sanctuary was animal blood---worth nothing in reality. We now have the 'real' Thing...His blood of the New Covenant!

Until you put away every thought of any other source of information about Christianity BUT the New Testament, you will never get the 'point', Rob!....you have that 'veil' over your comprehension......you can't see it because you have given authority to something else, even possibly unwittingly!

Moses brought(past tense)Law; but Christ brings (present tense) Grace and truth! John 1.

The New Testament IS SCRIPTURE!! It was scripture when it was said and/or written! The Holy Spirit has included it in the Bible. All Bibles have it! The New Testament scriptures quote Christ. Everyword of Christ IS a commandment, and carrys the 'authority' of Him as the 'face' of God on earth. The Law served its purpose..namely as our TUTOR until (!) 'faith'/Christ arrived. Then, we are no longer under the supervision/authority of 'the Law of Moses' any longer..We are under everything Christ said and under also the authority of His chosen representatives, witnesses, and 'explainers' of what He said and did. It is what is the NEW WAY for which Paul was in chains, for example. The New Testament is the authority for the believer in Christ...The Law is NOT the 'authority' for the 'believer'!

Rob....read the NT cover to cover a lots of times....its the only way one can 'unlearn' what we have learned that is unBiblical. The NT is the sole authority for the 'believer'..nothing else is a similar 'authority'...The NT makes it all plain.

Read that list of texts and their entire chapters...even entire books. Try it in the Amplfied and even the paraphrased versions which all agree essentially.

You're a good man, Rob....but you've let others tell you what to believe when just reading various versions of the Bible besides the KJV will eventually bring you around.

Respectfully........Ben

Ben

May 27, 2006

I am sorry about all the confusind underlining. I will use different color type from now on.

Also, there is something still wrong with the forum function since the 'hacking'. Mere 'reply' is not accepted. I have to 'copy' it, leave the forum, then return under a new admission, and then 'paste' my reply in order for it to be accepted by the forum system.

I am not complaining, goodness knows Stan is having enough trouble since the 'hackings'. I am only explaining that I should use another mode of answering....I'll work on that.

I'm not a computer whiz by any means...if it wasn't for the occasional visit by my former patient 'guru' I wouldn't be here at all...Now wouldn't that be a happy turn for my opponents here? LOL

Rob, please deal with all those texts I gave first before arguing with me about the Law anymore.. You just haven't dealt with those texts! Why do I have so much difficulty getting strong minded classic SDAs (not you, Rob) to deal with those texts and the strength of them all put together as weight of evidence? Why? One drifted off after trying to tear apart my earliest texts which I used to prepare the way for those harder texts....nevr returning to the real hard texts!! I've seen that happen over and over. I guess those texts are too problematical for them to deal with. And, they don't fit in to what they've been taught.

Once again.....PLEASE, I am not against having Sabbath be the main day of our worship....and I am not against Ellen White.....I am convinced she was of firm opinion and conviction of the Lord's spirit....but that doesn't make even a prophet be equal in authority to the Bible she advised us to use only for all 'doctrines' and 'reproofs'! But that's another discussion.

Another "once again".....read the New Testament over and over and over until you get the complete story of Christianity from it alone. You cannot find any other source which is nearly as good!

Ben

May 27, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Paul mentions that wrong existed before the Law but it wasn't held against them.

Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as through one man [Adam] sin entered into the world [i.e., the human race], and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because [:"red"]all sinned.[/].

Adam’s sin was a corporate sin because his fallen life is a shared life. We are simply the multiplication of his life after the fall. Since the wages of sin is death, all men were dying before they understood sin. This is the first death. This proves that men are sinners.

The law was given to turn sin into transgression. As Paul says, “I would not have known what sin was except through the law.” But what about those who still do not know of the law – that is, the Gentiles?

Romans 1: 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God….2:14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience…

Jesus is the Light, “which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.” Christ works either directly through the law or through one’s conscience. Either way there is no excuse, “For there is no partiality with God. For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law; and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law.” [Romans 2:11,12]

Ben, men’s first death is the result of sin. All men die this death because all men are sinners. The second death the result of rejecting one’s need of God’s righteousness. As I stated, God exposes our sinful life through either “the law” or “conscience.”

However there’s one problem. God can’t legally bring “the curse of the law” [the 2nd death] on those who didn’t know of the law. This is taken care of in the judgment after the 1000 years.

So what’s the judgment about? It’s about Jesus defending believers from the accusations of Satan. If one persistently refuses Christ that person must face “the law”. What about those who didn’t know the law, yet rejected Christ through their conscience?

They will learn of it fully at the Great White Throne Judgment. It is at that time they take “the curse of the law”.

Sign In

"Glacier View" 25 yrs later

Recommended Posts

bevin

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

melvin mccarty

David Koot

melvin mccarty

Robert

benherndon

David Koot

melvin mccarty

David Koot

melvin mccarty

Gregory Matthews

Robert

melvin mccarty

Ron Lambert

Robert

Gerr

benherndon

Robert

benherndon

Robert

Robert

Robert

benherndon

benherndon

Robert

Join the conversation

Browse

Activity