Forums118
Topics9,232
Posts196,219
Members1,326
|
Most Online5,850 Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
7 registered members (Karen Y, Daryl, dedication, daylily, TheophilusOne, 2 invisible),
2,469
guests, and 13
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: "God destroys no man" explained
[Re: Mountain Man]
#130981
02/17/11 02:03 PM
02/17/11 02:03 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2024
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,512
Midland
|
|
Personally, I cannot think of "very bad things, which are not God's will" that Spirit-filled, born-again believers do ignorantly while under the control of the Holy Spirit. Examples of "very bad things, which are not God's will" that come to mind are things like murder, rape, robbery, etc. That's not to say that things like pride and neglecting to help the poor and needy are not also "very bad things, which are not God's will." It sounds like you do not consider worshiping the beast a "very bad thing". I limited my comment to believers who ignorantly violate the Sabbath, which, in my opinion, is not a "very bad thing" like rape, murder, robbery, pride, neglecting the poor and needy, etc. Is worshiping Sunday ignorantly the same as ignorantly worshiping the beast? I considered so. In GC page 449, Ellen White says that there are true Christians who honestly believe Sunday is the Sabbath. She goes on and says: The most fearful threatening ever addressed to mortals is contained in the third angel's message. That must be a terrible sin which calls down the wrath of God unmingled with mercy. Men are not to be left in darkness concerning this important matter; the warning against this sin is to be given to the world before the visitation of God's judgments, that all may know why they are to be inflicted, and have opportunity to escape them. Prophecy declares that the first angel would make his announcement to "every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people." The warning of the third angel, which forms a part of the same threefold message, is to be no less widespread. It is represented in the prophecy as being proclaimed with a loud voice, by an angel flying in the midst of heaven; and it will command the attention of the world. {GC 449.2} Sounds to me like it is a very bad thing that Spirit-filled, born-again believers are doing. Unless you say that it is only bad after they have been warned. But, is it a very bad thing to transgress God's law?
|
|
|
Re: "God destroys no man" explained
[Re: Mountain Man]
#130986
02/17/11 04:43 PM
02/17/11 04:43 PM
|
OP
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
M: Tom, when the specific atheists I defined earlier on this thread (i.e. learned about Jesus in the best light but concluded God does not exist) work alongside the best of Christians helping to feed, clothe, and shelter the poor and needy - How would you characterize their help? Good? Bad? Please explain your answer. Thank you.
T: Regarding people doing good things, as I've said before, if anyone is doing something good, it is because they are responding to the Holy Spirit. Do you think the atheists I specified above are doing good things? If so, do you think it's because they are "responding to the Holy Spirit"? Also, what is the difference (so far as the good works are concerned) between the Holy Spirit dwelling inside the best of Christians empowering them to do the good things named above and the Holy Spirit dwelling outside the atheists named above "responding to the Holy Spirit" doing the same good things?
|
|
|
Re: "God destroys no man" explained
[Re: Tom]
#130987
02/17/11 05:01 PM
02/17/11 05:01 PM
|
OP
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
M: Tom, if you're going to ignore my question, why not cite the heathens . . . I'm not sure what kinds of things Tom has in mind when he says Spirit-filled, born-again believers ignorantly do "very bad things, which are not God's will" nowadays while under the control of the Holy Spirit. He took exception to "nowadays", so perhaps he believes it doesn't happen any more since the days of Luther. I don't know.
T: Me? I answered your question. In answer to your question, I asked why nowadays was important, and gave Luther as an example of someone who did things which were wrong, even though he was under the influence of the Holy Spirit. However, you didn't address why question as to why "nowadays" is important. In regards to Luther, the anti-Semetic things were what came to mind.
M: A lot has changed since Luther's attitude about the Jews in the 1500's. Can you provide us with modern day examples of "very bad things" which Spirit-filled, born-again believers do ignorantly nowadays "while under the control of the Holy Spirit"? The reason it is important to me for you to give up-to-date examples is because I want to know what you believe is current and relevant now. I would greatly appreciate it if you would simply provide the examples I requested. Thank you.
T: I'd like to know what your response to Luther's situation. As a modern day example, I don't see why there wouldn't be people nowadays who were anti-semetic, as Luther was. Was being anti-semetic in Luther's time OK? But now it's not? Is this the idea? What has changed since 1500 that's relevant to this point? Like GC, I do not believe Luther's ungodly thoughts and feelings about Jews were the result of the Holy Spirit dwelling within him. Nor do I believe Luther was under the influence of the Holy Spirit whenever he indulged such ungodly thoughts and feelings. Do you agree? So, what was the origin and source of Luther's ungodly thoughts and feelings? I believe whenever Luther indulged such ungodly thoughts and feelings he was under the control and influence of Satan. Do you agree? Ellen wrote: When the soul surrenders itself to Christ, a new power takes possession of the new heart. A change is wrought which man can never accomplish for himself. It is a supernatural work, bringing a supernatural element into human nature. The soul that is yielded to Christ becomes His own fortress, which He holds in a revolted world, and He intends that no authority shall be known in it but His own. A soul thus kept in possession by the heavenly agencies is impregnable to the assaults of Satan. But unless we do yield ourselves to the control of Christ, we shall be dominated by the wicked one. We must inevitably be under the control of the one or the other of the two great powers that are contending for the supremacy of the world. It is not necessary for us deliberately to choose the service of the kingdom of darkness in order to come under its dominion. We have only to neglect to ally ourselves with the kingdom of light. If we do not co-operate with the heavenly agencies, Satan will take possession of the heart, and will make it his abiding place. The only defense against evil is the indwelling of Christ in the heart through faith in His righteousness. Unless we become vitally connected with God, we can never resist the unhallowed effects of self-love, self-indulgence, and temptation to sin. We may leave off many bad habits, for the time we may part company with Satan; but without a vital connection with God, through the surrender of ourselves to Him moment by moment, we shall be overcome. Without a personal acquaintance with Christ, and a continual communion, we are at the mercy of the enemy, and shall do his bidding in the end. {DA 324.1} "We must inevitably be under the control of the one or the other of the two great powers that are contending for the supremacy of the world." "There is no middle ground. If not in harmony with the divine will, it must be Satanic." {ST, March 2, 1882 par. 12} Again, can you provide us with modern day examples of "very bad things" which Spirit-filled, born-again believers do ignorantly nowadays "while under the control of the Holy Spirit"? Do you think there are Spirit-filled, born-again believers "nowadays who are anti-semetic"? If so, do you think they are "under the control of the Holy Spirit" while they are in the very throes of indulging such ungodly thoughts and feelings?
|
|
|
Re: "God destroys no man" explained
[Re: Mountain Man]
#131003
02/17/11 09:19 PM
02/17/11 09:19 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
M: Tom, when the specific atheists I defined earlier on this thread (i.e. learned about Jesus in the best light but concluded God does not exist) work alongside the best of Christians helping to feed, clothe, and shelter the poor and needy - How would you characterize their help? Good? Bad? Please explain your answer. Thank you.
T: Regarding people doing good things, as I've said before, if anyone is doing something good, it is because they are responding to the Holy Spirit.
MM:Do you think the atheists I specified above are doing good things? If so, do you think it's because they are "responding to the Holy Spirit"? I feel like deja vu. It seems to me I've addressed this several times, so I'll be brief. I don't think the atheists you are specifying exist. Also, what is the difference (so far as the good works are concerned) between the Holy Spirit dwelling inside the best of Christians empowering them to do the good things named above and the Holy Spirit dwelling outside the atheists named above "responding to the Holy Spirit" doing the same good things? I don't know what you mean here.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: "God destroys no man" explained
[Re: Tom]
#131005
02/17/11 09:26 PM
02/17/11 09:26 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Like GC, I do not believe Luther's ungodly thoughts and feelings about Jews were the result of the Holy Spirit dwelling within him. Nor do I believe Luther was under the influence of the Holy Spirit whenever he indulged such ungodly thoughts and feelings. Do you agree? This wasn't the question. I agree with what you wrote. This is self-evident, isn't it? I mean, what would the alternative be? That the Holy Spirit was influencing Luther to have ungodly thoughts? I'm really not understanding why you're writing this. So, what was the origin and source of Luther's ungodly thoughts and feelings? I believe whenever Luther indulged such ungodly thoughts and feelings he was under the control and influence of Satan. Do you agree? Are you thinking Luther had these thoughts sometimes but not other times? That he wasn't sure what he thought of Jews, or vacillated on these thoughts? Or that Luther was always under the control of Satan? Is it clear why I'm asking these questions? If not, I'll elaborate. Again, can you provide us with modern day examples of "very bad things" which Spirit-filled, born-again believers do ignorantly nowadays "while under the control of the Holy Spirit"?
Do you think there are Spirit-filled, born-again believers "nowadays who are anti-semetic"? If so, do you think they are "under the control of the Holy Spirit" while they are in the very throes of indulging such ungodly thoughts and feelings? It seems to me we're doing fine discussing Luther. What would be the difference between someone having anti-Semitic thoughts now, as opposed to when Luther had them? What I'm getting at is that Luther was a man used by God (I believe), but he wasn't perfect. For example, he had anti-Semitic ideas. I don't believe these anti-Semitic ideas came and went, but he had them as long as he had them, and they were due to ignorance on his part. However, this ignorance did not prevent God from using him.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: "God destroys no man" explained
[Re: Tom]
#131014
02/17/11 10:53 PM
02/17/11 10:53 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2021
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,003
The Orient
|
|
GC, I wrote this: Ok, thank you for the explanation. How about Luther's antisemitism? Do we say that Luther was under the control of Satan whenever he had antisemitic thoughts or made antisemitic statements? But under the control of God when he was doing other things, like leading the Reformation? This was the sort of thing I had in mind when I asked my question previously. I'm interested in your response to these questions. GC:So in other words, the act of giving offerings to God cannot be said to be always good. One can give, and the giving be bad. Is that what you're saying? It depends upon what you mean by "giving." Was what the Pharisees did an "act of giving"? It sounds like you are saying that it is not the act that counts, but the heart behind the act (i.e. motivation). Would you characterize your understanding this way? No, they are both important. That I said "the ends do not justify the means" should make clear that the means are important as well. Tom, It seems your answer of "it depends..." is rather typical for any given question. Even if I ask you directly if you are on one side or another of an issue, "it depends." There are some things, Tom, that one simply cannot have both ways! Is there any portion of this current topic where you would feel comfortable being definitive about something that you firmly believe where "it depends" would not apply? Can you provide us a solid, immovable point of reference? I've done some survey work, and in the job we must always start from a certain point of reference and then build out other reference points from there. The accuracy of all the other points of reference depend upon the accuracy of the starting point. I guess that's what I'm looking for here, Tom. I am not yet able to find any starting point with you. Please help me and give me something solid that can be a reference point in understanding your perspective. I don't know what question to ask anymore, perhaps you would volunteer something upon which I might base the discussion from here out. Blessings, Green Cochoa.
We can receive of heaven's light only as we are willing to be emptied of self. We can discern the character of God, and accept Christ by faith, only as we consent to the bringing into captivity of every thought to the obedience of Christ. And to all who do this, the Holy Spirit is given without measure. In Christ "dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in Him." [Colossians 2:9, 10.] {GW 57.1} -- Ellen White.
|
|
|
Re: "God destroys no man" explained
[Re: Green Cochoa]
#131033
02/18/11 04:16 PM
02/18/11 04:16 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2024
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,512
Midland
|
|
Why would depending upon the questioner's definition of a word be objectionable? Just try talking to evolutionists and they change the definition mid-sentence. Clarifying what one is asking seems like a very responsible thing to do. Why not provide an immovable point of definition to the term being asked? I've done some survey work, and in the job we must always start from a certain point of reference and then build out other reference points from there. The accuracy of all the other points of reference depend upon the accuracy of the starting point.
Exactly. What is the point of reference to the definition of "giving"? (Honestly, I suspected that your question was trying to get him to say something that he wasn't. Maybe it was from past experience with others, but if true, a cautionary response would be in order)
|
|
|
Re: "God destroys no man" explained
[Re: kland]
#131049
02/18/11 09:17 PM
02/18/11 09:17 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
GC, you didn't answer my question. I asked if what the Pharisees did was an act of giving. If you'll answer my question, I can answer yours, as it will give me a frame of reference as to what you mean by "giving."
Also, I've written quite a lot already. I've written several paragraphs of explanation, without reference to any questions, to give a frame of reference of what I have in mind. I think that should be helpful.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: "God destroys no man" explained
[Re: Tom]
#131051
02/18/11 10:00 PM
02/18/11 10:00 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2021
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,003
The Orient
|
|
Tom,
To my view, acts are not defined by motives. Therefore, if the Pharisees gave, yes, those were "acts of giving," regardless of their reasons for having given. Even if they made a big pretense of it, and gave for the applause of men, it was still an "act of giving." Albeit, it may also have been an "act of pride." One act does not cancel another act. A motive may cancel the reward, however. God will reward each act, not on the basis of the act itself, but on the basis of the heart behind the act.
That is my perspective. What's yours?
Blessings,
Green Cochoa.
We can receive of heaven's light only as we are willing to be emptied of self. We can discern the character of God, and accept Christ by faith, only as we consent to the bringing into captivity of every thought to the obedience of Christ. And to all who do this, the Holy Spirit is given without measure. In Christ "dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in Him." [Colossians 2:9, 10.] {GW 57.1} -- Ellen White.
|
|
|
Re: "God destroys no man" explained
[Re: Green Cochoa]
#131112
02/21/11 03:19 AM
02/21/11 03:19 AM
|
OP
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
I´m away on assignement. Will be back March 2nd.
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|