Ellen White believed the OT revealed the character of God just as clearly as the NT. She "The Saviour is revealed in the Old Testament as clearly as in the New." This insight seems to refute what Tom is saying about the NT.

It is the voice of Christ that speaks through patriarchs and prophets, from the days of Adam even to the closing scenes of time. The Saviour is revealed in the Old Testament as clearly as in the New. It is the light from the prophetic past that brings out the life of Christ and the teachings of the New Testament with clearness and beauty. The miracles of Christ are a proof of His divinity; but a stronger proof that He is the world's Redeemer is found in comparing the prophecies of the Old Testament with the history of the New. {DA 799.2}

Tom, you wrote that you agree with Teresaq's view of the plagues (the ones described in Rev 15 and 16). Please tell me in your own words what that view is. Thank you.

Hi Teresa:

I am not question what you are say, though you seem to think that I am doing so.

My point is that in the OT the people were given an image of God that was really far different than who He really was. Once people open the OT they see the same God as they see in the NT. The both sides of God's character to create is revealed as HIs ability to destroy as well, after all He is God.

The details of what, when and how can be picked at as much as everyone wants to do so, but the bottom line for me which is very simple is that God is God and it is within His power to create and destroy according to His own will.

The contrast I was showing is that the image of a lamb creature shown to us in the NT and symbolic in the OT reflect a contrast to the image of that same Lamb that has wrath and makes war.

PS - Tom, I have no idea what you believe about the plagues, so please be clear in your explanation. Thank you.

liane, the war being fought is not one won by force, but by truth. The sword which Christ uses to vanquish His enemies is not a literal sword, but the word of God.

When the wicked cry for the mountains to fall upon them, it is because they cannot bear to see the face their redeemer, the One who died for them, just as Judas couldn't. But what was the face which Judas saw? It was the same one Peter saw, a face full of love and compassion.

It's too bad that you think that one says that God does not act violently that you take this of depriving God of something. I think it's possible for God's wrath to be manifest, and for Him to take vengeance, without acting violently. Do you think that's a possibility?

What is it Tom is saying about the NT?



She did just fine.



I'm fine with what teresa's been saying. She's offered a number of times to go through the plagues one by one. She's attempted to do so a number of times.

Did you read my analogy of my complete account of my twin brother, endorsed by an inspired writer? Did you read what I wrote regarding Piaget? Did you understand the points I was making? I don't recall any comments regarding these posts. I believe these are important points I was making. I'd like to know if they are being read and understood.

If you understand the points, and disagree with them, I'd like to know why.

Regarding the whole Bible testifying of Christ, I've made this point many times. He is the crimson thread that ties the Bible together. I've said exactly this.

In fact, we've had rather lengthy discussions regarding this point, where you were unable to grasp that the cross was explained by Moses, remember? What did I say? I said that the Gospel was clearly explained by Moses, didn't I? And you took the other side?

So your all of a sudden shifting to the other side now seems a bit strange to me.

However, if one does not understand the Gospel, or rightly interpret Christ's life and teachings, what chance does one have of rightly interpreting the Old Testament?



Given the "whole purpose" of Christ's earthly mission was "the revelation of God," one wonders why Christ would have come at all, if it were really true that God had already been revealed as clearly as Christ would reveal Him.



Please notice what this says:

1.The earth was dark through misapprehension of God.
2.His character must be manifested in contrast to the character of Satan.
3.This work only one Being in all the universe could do.
4.Only He who knew the height and depth of the love of God could make it known.

Isn't it clear from this that only Christ could do this work, and before He did it, it hadn't been done?

What is the Gospel of John is about, if not that Jesus Christ revealed God for us?

Hi Tom:

I guess I am coming from the issue of two events. The one that takes place before the thousand years in which yes the people will die the way described by you. Christ will come in all his glory and justice and mercy follows Him. There will be no action by Christ regarding the wicked. The natural order of things will end their lives by the destruction that goes on around them.

Only those that look upon their Redeemer and are counted worthy of the Lamb will rise up to be with Him for a thousand years. The rest die where they stand to await the coming of God after the books have been opened and the records have been seen.

Before that though is the plagues brought on by the wrath of God upon those that had rejected His mercy and love and truth. They will be counted as wanting and sealed their fates by taking the mark of the beast. Since there will be only two groups left then all those that are not sealed by the mark of God by obedience will have been sealed by the mark of the beast.

But after the thousand years will be by the hand of God. This is found in Revelation:

20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

I do not see all these wicked people willing to jump into the lake of fire of their own accord. Clearly the word "cast" means something to me.

If I remember it said to me and this is what I understand of Revelation is that the chapters are like a revolving door as it turns each chapter unfolds along with the other chapters as is one whole piece together within that door.

Some parts are in the past and is a review. Some are combined and are connected and others are just about the end. When we see that we begin to see the whole picture of Revelation and what God is telling us about the last days.

What a blessing edit, Whew!

i think, my brother, that it has to do with how one reads it. she is very clear that Christ had to come and be seen as He is and lives.

this quote and the numerous ones like it, as well as what the bible says, is that the sanctuary system, and such pointed to Christ. it described what He would do and how He would be. but none of the prophecies and object lessons were Him.

there is a statement from ellen white that the adventist people will be in the exact same state before the second advent as the jews were before Christs first advent.

what kind of messiah were the jews looking for? what prophecies had they ignored?

My point has never been that the revelation of God comes only from Christ's life and character, but only exactly what the quote actually says, which is that all that man can know of God was revealed in the life and character of His Son.

Now what is the logical consequence of this? If all that can be known of God was revealed by the life and character of His Son, then nothing can be known of God which was not revealed by the life and character of His Son. This follows as surely as 2 + 2 = 4.

So what I've said is that if we *think* we know something of God which was not revealed in the life and character of His Son, we must be in error. This is simple logic.



She is saying that all that man can know of God was revealed in the life and character of His Son. Other things may also reveal what Christ revealed, but nothing which reveals God will reveal things *other* than that which Christ revealed.



I want to see if I'm understanding you correctly. Is it your position that the revelation of Christ's life and character, was not necessary?

Tom, do you have SOP statements to verify Teresaq's view of the plagues?

Also, I'm happy to hear you believe the OT is just as clear as the NT regarding the character of God. However, you have yet to prove from the Pentateuch that Moses clearly and plainly said the Son of God would one day come and give His life as a ransom for the souls of men.