Dear Friends,

I have been reading and giving further thought to all that have posted.

quote:

---

Matthew
7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

---

Now I will share my question of the heart which I had many years ago:

"Where are the fruits of God's remnant? Where are those that stand for Christ Jesus? Why cannot I see them in the church that proclaims they are the remnant?"

In order for people to know God they must taste truth living in us. They must see God working in us order to have faith.

Regardless of our opinion, we will be known by our fruits (which is God's power perfecting us). While it is true that we are not to look to man, it is man that is to be the example of the believer!

I personally like the questions, and their observations. They make my heart smile for God is working in their hearts!

May everyone here enjoy the blessed Savior and may we learn to be of one accord for Christ Jesus is coming very soon.

Your Sister in Christ Jesus,
Cheri Fritz

I also don’t think it is accurate to assume that Restin has a heart full of legalism.

That is a judgement that only God can truly make as He alone knows the heart.

Let us, therefore, be slow to make such judgemental remarks.

I agree with what Daryl said. Instead of beating people over the head with the Bible and doing the devil's work, why not dig a little deeper, study abit more about it. Understand that not everyone see's things your way.
My understanding of perfection is that through Jesus Christ I can do all things, and one that really puts things in perspective:

quote:

---

1 Corinthians 10:13
There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.

---

We can overcome sin, but we are not sinless..No one can say "Hey I'm sinless" cause then you have been deceived, but if by faith we trust that God will hand us the victory over our sins, whether you like saying bad words, watching porn, steal or whatever the case may be.. Giving it to God is the first step you can make and the only step you need to take.

God Bless,
Will

I appreciate this DenBorg. Everything thing you state in the above post is quite legitimate. LK

DenBorg,

I also appreciate what you are posting in response to what others are posting in this topic.

If, what somebody states comes across as legalistic, then that statement should be challenged, and again I appreciate your doing just that, however, we should be careful in stating that the person who posted it is also legalistic.

If we can keep this in mind, then there shouldn't be any problem discussing whatever it is that is being discussed.

We are all legalistic. Calling someone else legalistic probably isn't very helpful, however.

It's useful to be tactful when speaking to others. For example, instead of saying, "You're heart is full of legalism" one can say, "What you are saying appears to me to be legalistic." That communicates the same thought, but isn't so sharp.

Denborg, I appreciate your apology as a very Christian, considerate quality. Never easy to do, I know. I'm sorry too, if I've been too harsh to you or any others as well. However, I do have so-called "strong shoulders", and often test myself by coming back to the forum when I know I've said something "triggering". I even feel it's a test of my own spiritual maturing to be able to take some argument without getting all insecure and mortally threatened, as I used to do in the past. I give the Holy Spirit/God all the credit for the inner strength I have now that was so pitifully lacking in my early years. But I still have a long way to go, to be ready for the last day on earth. I've been concerned for some time about our SDA assumptions about the real meaning of Jacob's Trouble.

I'm glad that we all can "debate" in these issues without it falling into a shouting match.

But I was sounding legalistic only because I was trying to mirror the legalistic comments here about perfection. And that perfection is about the time of the end when (the SDA believe) we have to attain perfection to be ready for the time of trouble. It's about the belief that when Jesus leaves the Most Holy place, He supposedly leaves us to our own resources then. I was attempting to show how deep and broad is the concept of perfection, and that we fail to see how much it includes when we claim that we can/must attain it in our lifetime. I'm saying the struggle of Jacob is over his perfect relation to Christ, not his own literal, absolute perfection. I say it because, even tho God admonishes us to be perfect (as His wish) He knows we won't do it. We just don't know how very much is included when we must be perfect, to be ready for the end time. I think we always need Christ's righteousness up to the end of the last day on earth, to cover our shortcoming.

Mainly, I'm suggesting that Christ's mere bodily absence from the Most Holy place doesn't mean His coverage goes out the door with him. I just don't think that's what EGW means about Jacob's Trouble. I don't think she means we have to stand on our own merits alone without Christ. That's what I've tried to convey.

I've learned from all the comments on it here. I believe we need to shake up these issues and think about topics so important. Maybe the best result of this discussion is that it really would be best to read anew the book of Romans. As I said, that's what I'm doing this week.I think that would be more acceptable to Jesus, in the pursuit of perfection, than anything else I could present here.

For my and maybe even others benefit, could someone draw the outlines of what Jacobs Trouble is all about? What does it mean, what is it based upon, where does it lead?

In the verses posted so far by Larry, as far as I can tell none of them point to a distant God, except possibly for the rev 22 verse towards the ones who will continue in error. In the others, as trouble increases the troubled and God draw closer to eachother.

In reading Isaiah there is the picture of God desperately asking, "how many times must I shake your comfort for you to remember Me? how much trouble can you take before realiseing that you must trust only in Me?"

But maybe I have missunderstood what this is about. Maybe it doesnt say that in the end Gods people would have to fend for themselves alone.

/Thomas