Which Trumps Which?

[David Koot]

Having said that, I should add this caveat. Perhaps the best way to word this is the text of the official doctrinal statement, Fundamental Belief of SDA's #1:

"The Holy Scriptures are the infallible revelation of His will. They are the standard of character, the test of experience, the authoritative revealer of doctrines, and the trustworthy record of God's acts in history."

Human experience is NOT--repeat, NOT the infallible revelation of God's will, because we are sinners, and sin will taint our experience. Human experience is NOT the standard of character, nor the revealer of doctrine.

I gladly take my stand upon the statement in the Fundamental Beliefs, as it reads.

Dave

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:

jasd: Is it not that sometimes -- one person's "apostasy" is another's truth, yes? no?

Who apostasizes from whom?

Is it? Then what axioms may one rely on in coming to a study of the Word? Or, are there none? Is 'truth' auto-created? Is it subjective? Is it existential?

“auto-created”: we, in some not few cases, being receptive vessels, and in some few cases – tabulae rasae, if you will… sometimes, yes. Does not the HS ‘reveal’ truths in what might be seemingly perceived as auto-created? kinda like, ‘in night seasons’?

“subjective”: assuredly. There are those who accept ‘creation week’ as literal and immediately consecutive days. I suggest that that is subjective because of the articles used (and/or absent). Creation week would argue objectively for a definite article ‘day one’ (“Once upon a time…,” if I may) followed by days with determinate indefinite articles allowing spans of time between. (as memory serves...)

Heb 1:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Was the miracle of manna a thing of that which was brought forth from unseen realities? Does the author of Hebrews speak here of things subjective or objective? Is there an overt or implied – eighth day of creation? (…as was the Roman eight-day week

“existential”: depending, why not? Acts 8:6 And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which Philip spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did.

Joshua 24:15 … choose you this day…

Per the above three points: will, or can, a qualified ‘yes’ obtain?

Apostasy/apostacia: going with the present colloquial understanding of “falling away” or “forsaking” (together with its various inflections)… I ask, “apostatize from whom (or what, specifically”?

Given the tenor of my posts, would I not be considered by your .org to have apostatized from ‘the truth’?

Extemporaneously: if memory serves…, the etymology of apostacia leads to its militaristic origin and use. Simply, it is rebellion or revolution.

2 Thess 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Is the above text saying that there needs first occur a “falling away” from ‘the truth’? or does the text indicate that “that man of sin” – is hidden and is revealed by a peoples [militaristic] rebellion/revolution?

…and will the Bible support the posit that a man [in its singular usage] can be representative of many? (as when Gd speaks of those of Ephraim in the singular “he”)

[David Koot]

Monsieur,

I beg of you the indulgence of a little time in which to do justice to your post. The responsibilities of ministry here have taken something of a toll on my available time. I look forward to responding soon.

Best regards, Dave

[LifeHiscost]

One cannot hang a doctrine on one or two verses.

Well, that is for starters. Any thoughts?

Dave

I agree with almost all of your post, David, but I cannot agree with this particular bit of reasoning, at least not as far as making it a hard and fast rule. While you may have had the privilege of growing up among a plethora of Scripture texts, therefore making it appear as if there were innumerable texts necessary to arrive at hard and fast spiritual conclusions, my initial religious logic was based on a false doctrine (that of living in an eternal burning fire, despite Jesus' word that when you die, you're dead) which logic would seem to preclude God as Love, a single text.

However the text that spoke the Truth, (God is Love) believed, led to another single text believed correctly, because it was true, and it was pronounced worthy through the Person of the Holy Spirit. A single or group of truthful texts, believed as they speak the truth, will lead to further Truth until the false teachings fall by the wayside as totally unbelievable. The most serious threat to being deceived is not the amount of false doctrine available to confuse the soul. It is, rather, the unwillingness to put effort forth for following that which one knows to be Truth.

Three texts, each which can stand by themselves for understanding what is needed for salvation, are;

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life.

For God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world; but that the world should be saved through him.

He that believeth on him is not judged: he that believeth not hath been judged already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God. "

John 3:16-18 ASV

Each text believed will lead to another, that when finally put side by side with others, reveals Jesus Christ, the Giver of Life, of Which no man can take It away.

"If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself." John 7:17 KJV

Blessings!!

[jasd]

>>The responsibilities of ministry here have taken something of a toll on my available time.<<

Did you not proffer that you make cold-calls in attempting to share Christ? I believe you did. If so,

major kudos...

Re posts: A thousand posts, eh? Let it be but earnest against ten-thousand and a thousand more: con brio, molto.

[jasd]

QR frame:

Disabuse me: why should not Matthew 28:1 be a stand-alone text regarding the timeline of Christ’s resurrection; notwithstanding the comma placements in the corresponding passage that is found in Mark? Also,

this notion that Gd is both love and mercy – yet His concept of ‘justice’ requires Him to consign to oblivion the greatest portion of all mankind – requires that He

be no more than Gleaner… driven to collecting only the leavings along the fence-lines, corners, and, as I’ve noted – the leavings (or that not gathered) by an adversary.

I would suggest that He is somewhat more efficient and encompassing than we give Him credit.

Jas 5:15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. v16 ... The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

Umm, the "prayer of a righteous man availeth much"? as much as effectively having "sins ... forgiven him"? So,

if a man's sins are "forgiven him" -- what prevents his being saved?

[jasd]

The lunar year is approx 354 days long. That is approx 11 days short a solar year. So, saying that

the year as Noah knew it was approx 360 days (...it remaining the same after the deluge), and that the OT peoples intercalated an extra month when the barley harvest was inopportunely green (do I misspeak? and what of the necessary other intercalations?)…

what happened when there were several consecutive years of late harvests? Kinda skewdaddled, eh?

Add to that that the feast days were as ‘constellations’ in the calendar of the OT peoples, and the Sabbath was an adjunct element governed by the feast days… Did I say kinda skewd…,

yep it seems I did.

Speaking of feast days…,

why is it that all of them were date-fixed except Pentecost, which was day-fixed (always first day or Sunday to be exact)? …and why did Gd command that the loaves offered on that day were to be leavened?

No one else finds that quizzical?

[D. Allan]

Quote:

"The Holy Scriptures are the infallible revelation of His will. They are the standard of character, the test of experience, the authoritative revealer of doctrines, and the trustworthy record of God's acts in history."

Human experience is NOT--repeat, NOT the infallible revelation of God's will, because we are sinners, and sin will taint our experience. Human experience is NOT the standard of character, nor the revealer of doctrine.

Holy Scriptures are indeed a valuable guide. The Bible (it appears to me) is a record of human experience. Its is valuable when it quides one into a new experience. A divine-human experience rather than the usual human experience.

Now Abraham heard a voice and obeyed it by going into a land he new not of. Was this a human experience? We know he did not have the Bible available to consult about anything at all. We could say the same about the experience of Joseph, the dreamer of dreams. He didn't have a Bible yet he trusted the source of his dreams. Was he treading on "dangerous ground?" The same goes of Jacob, and for Moses. Yet we believe they were following God's will!

Maybe we need to reconsider something. Yes?

~d.allan

[D. Allan]

Quote:

Maybe we need to reconsider something. Yes?

Any thoughts on this? Seems to be very important. Hmm?

[David Koot]

The examples you cite did, indeed, occur as you have noted. However, I note three distinctions:

1) They all occurred before the advent of the written Word;

2) The men who experienced the guidance walked closely with God;

3) None of the examples deals with doctrinal or theological issues. Abraham, Joseph and Moses received God's guidance for personal life decisions.

Today as well, God gives guidance to His people about important life decisions. A good example is a call to the gospel ministry. That comes to the individual.

However, we test things by Scripture. I would expect that the patriarchs tested a sense of guidance by the Word--which was orally transmitted from Adam down the line of the patriarchs, until Moses and others recorded the truths for posterity.

Dave

[D. Allan]

Thank you for your reply, Dave. The main thing is to walk closely with God. It is the main purpose of Scriptures - to bring us into that close relationship of trust and love. If that doesn't happen - then all study of them is mere intellectual exercise - sort of a religious crosswords puzzle. Shouldn't our personal experience of walking with God, be more important to us than reading about someone else's experience?

~d.allan

[David Koot]

. Shouldn't our personal experience of walking with God, be more important to us than reading about someone else's experience?

Unfortunately, we are sinners, and our thoughts, our impressions, our perceptions, are tainted with sin. We cannot trust them. That is why it is imperative to test our impressions and perceptions by the written Word. While it is true, as you say, that without a living relationship with God the study of Scripture can be intellectual, on the other hand, without the rock solid foundation and safety check of Scripture, our relationship with God can be subjective and result in self-deception. Both are needed.

[Woody]

I trust the leading of the Holy Spirit in my life more than the professed experience of someone else's life.

I know the leading of the Holy Spirit to be true in my life. I have no way of knowing for sure what someone else's experience is of.

In addition ... The Holy Spirit leads each individual differently. There is not a generic Holy Spirit experience.

I would propose that the reading of scripture can be just as subjective as our personal experience because it involves our individual interpretation which can be very subjective. For any belief there are at least two interpretation based on scripture.

[D. Allan]

Quote:

What ever happened to that relationship with God if we don't trust Him to guide us? Do we really honour God by always asking other humans what is right and wrong? If we have a relationship with God, take it to Him. The only evidense we have from the OT is that people talked to God and asked His guidance. We, today, do not exhibit that type of faith and trust.

Yes, that is so true. It takes awhile for some of us to develop that trust. Even after the Holy Spirit has captured our hearts! There are negative effects from fellow believers who undermine our assurance. Mainly from conservative extremists and perfectionists. It has taken me over nine years since HE swept me off my feet until just recently I no longer care what other people may say about my beliefs. I've found that his staggering colossal love for me and his presence is absolutly dependable.

Jesus said, "Seek not the approval of men..... " Useful advice!

~d.allan

[D. Allan]

Quote:

While it is true, as you say, that without a living relationship with God the study of Scripture can be intellectual, on the other hand, without the rock solid foundation and safety check of Scripture, our relationship with God can be subjective and result in self-deception.

The Holy Spirit may use scriptures to guide us and teach us. If we are surrendered to Him. If not all the intellectual formulation of dogma/teachings is useless for our personal experience. It depends on how we understand subjective-objective dicotomy - but it maybe that our relationship with God is always 'subjective' - understanding that word to mean 'personal'. Not 'scientificly objective.'

The scriptures themselves may be 'objective', fixed unchanging words - but our interpretations of them are alway subject to being 'subjective'. And no less so then anything else we may do. So it seems to me.

~d.allan

[D. Allan]

Quote:

The scriptures themselves may be 'objective', fixed unchanging words - but our interpretations of them are alway subject to being 'subjective'. And no less so then anything else we may do. So it seems to me.

Is that good or bad? There may be times when the Holy Spirit speaks to us differently then to any one else - though the very same words of scripture. As Redwood said, we do not have a generic experience with the Holy Spirit - He tailors His influence and working to fit each one of us personally for we are each unique and special to Him.

~d.allan

[Clio]

Thank you for your reply, Dave. The main thing is to walk closely with God. It is the main purpose of Scriptures - to bring us into that close relationship of trust and love. If that doesn't happen - then all study of them is mere intellectual exercise - sort of a religious crosswords puzzle. Shouldn't our personal experience of walking with God, be more important to us than reading about someone else's experience?

~d.allan

I find little interest in crossword puzzles of any time. But most especially doctrinal crossword puzzles.

[Clio]

Quote:

The main thing is to walk closely with God. It is the main purpose of Scriptures - to bring us into that close relationship of trust and love. If that doesn't happen - then all study of them is mere intellectual exercise - sort of a religious crosswords puzzle.

I believe therein lies the problem. That would require a very strong trust in Gods leading of our lives. Today we are afraid of the type of walk OT persons had.

[jasd]

>>Speaking of feast days…,

why is it that all of them were date-fixed except Pentecost, which was day-fixed (always first day or Sunday to be exact)? …and why did Gd command that the loaves offered on that day were to be leavened?<<

...and why did Gd elect to baptize with fire upon the first day of the week? rather than upon

a day more in keeping with then orthodoxy?

[D. Allan]

Quote:

Quote:

Thank you for your reply, Dave. The main thing is to walk closely with God. It is the main purpose of Scriptures - to bring us into that close relationship of trust and love. If that doesn't happen - then all study of them is mere intellectual exercise - sort of a religious crosswords puzzle. Shouldn't our personal experience of walking with God, be more important to us than reading about someone else's experience?

~d.allan

I find little interest in crossword puzzles of any time. But most especially doctrinal crossword puzzles. -Clio

Its much more interesting to experience Him, isn't it. God has done some stupendously awesome things for me. In answer to disparate prayer woke me up to reassure me that He is with me; "Behold I make all things new," He said, meaning me. He sent me a dream to reassure me of salvation. He has whispered in my ear when worried about finances, "I will take care of you. I will take care of you." Two times, He said it. I guess he wanted me to be sure it was Him speaking. He took care of me! I do not doubt these experiences.

Blessings,

~d.allan

[David Koot]

Well, once again we see here a theme of personal, subjective guidance as trump. The examples of Abraham and a few others are cited with approval--particularly in the sense that Abraham had no Bible to refer to.

If indeed that were true, then that very fact would contrast Abraham's experience with ours today. We DO have a Bible to refer to, and we are specifically instructed by God to DO so, to test our impressions and our experiences by the written Word.

However, KIM that Abraham DID have instruction handed down the generations of patriarchs, straight from Adam. Later, this was recorded in the book of Genesis. This instruction was diligently taught to each new generation. This, once again, was the objective Word of God, orally transmitted, against which experience and impressions could be tested. Neither Abraham nor anyone else was a law unto himself.

What would make this particularly fascinating for me, would be if some of those who emphasize the personal, subjective guidance of God have left the Adventist church, in response to their belief in God's guidance. Now THAT would make for an interesting study. Anyone have that experience?

[Woody]

The Bible doesn't have everything. For instance if we need to know the rules for Sabbath observance ... we need to make a list of rules like the Jews did. No ... The Bible is purposefully vague so that we can base it on our relationship with God and the prompting of the Holy Spirit. The Bible has the general principles like CoAspen says. Then we have to depend on our relationship with the Holy Spirit to guide us individually.

[LifeHiscost]

I'm not suggesting you need this, CoAspen, but thought it would be appropriate to make the observation here.

Faith is not believing something that is untrue until it becomes true, for Truth is. Faith is fastening our hope on that which is true until we're satisfied,without equivocation, of it's truthfulness. And even then we need to place our platform of Truth before God, to fasten it upon Him Who is all Truth. Then, and only then, will we be safe to trust the underpinnings of our belief, to keep or to relenquish according to His Divine plan.

" But Peter said unto him, Although all shall be offended, yet will not I." Mark 14:29

What Peter thought to be true.

"And Jesus saith unto him, Verily I say unto thee, that thou to-day, even this night, before the [censored] crow twice, shalt deny me thrice." Mark 14:30

What Jesus knew to be true.

Regards!!

""

[LifeHiscost]

The Bible doesn't have everything.

I perceive this comment to be written by a person who has found the Bible to be inadequate to meet all their needs. True?

If so it does not reflect the experience of everyone who reads the Word. Nor does it seem to see the Word as a necessary part of the Godhead in arriving at Truth.

"Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us,

just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word,

it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order..." Luke 1:1-3 NASB

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. " John 1:1,2 NASB

"But He answered and said, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.’ Matt 4:4 NASB

If one can find a sufficiency elsewhere, it follows that the results will be according to the veracity of the source.

Regards!!

[David Koot]

It has many general principles for us, but does not answer our thousand and one questions. We must develope a relationship with God so that He can guide us into understanding the answeres to our questions.