Forums118
Topics9,217
Posts195,975
Members1,324
|
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
|
|
|
Re: Why or why not accept Mrs. White as a prophet?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#151827
04/13/13 09:58 PM
04/13/13 09:58 PM
|
|
Following this thread with a great deal of interest, therefore, let us keep to the intent of this thread as much as possible.
|
|
|
Re: Why or why not accept Mrs. White as a prophet?
[Re: Daryl]
#151829
04/13/13 10:24 PM
04/13/13 10:24 PM
|
|
In relation to what is being discussed here in this thread, what do you all think of the following statement?The Bible does not teach partial inspiration or degrees of inspiration. These theories are speculations that rob the Bible of its divine authority.
|
|
|
Re: Why or why not accept Mrs. White as a prophet?
[Re: Daryl]
#151831
04/13/13 10:45 PM
04/13/13 10:45 PM
|
FORMER-SDA Active Member 2018 Banned
Senior Member
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 663
Canada
|
|
In relation to what is being discussed here in this thread, what do you all think of the following statement?The Bible does not teach partial inspiration or degrees of inspiration. These theories are speculations that rob the Bible of its divine authority. I am unaware of any teaching at all in Scripture regarding inspiration except the usual quotes such as "all Scripture comes from God," and "it is not of any private interpretation." This is not to say there isn't any. But I would like to look at passages that deal with it. And, even though the point of this thread is to discuss EGW, I think a discussion of inspiration generally is a necessary introduction.
Last edited by JAK; 04/13/13 10:46 PM.
"All that is Gold does not Glitter, Not all who Wander are Lost." (J.R.R.T.)
|
|
|
Re: Why or why not accept Mrs. White as a prophet?
[Re: JAK]
#151832
04/13/13 11:04 PM
04/13/13 11:04 PM
|
|
As far as I am concerned, this thread is mainly between you and Green Cochoa, therefore, the direction you both wish to go with this thread is OK with me.
|
|
|
Re: Why or why not accept Mrs. White as a prophet?
[Re: Daryl]
#151833
04/13/13 11:06 PM
04/13/13 11:06 PM
|
|
As far as that statement I quoted goes, will need to do further research regarding that.
|
|
|
Re: Why or why not accept Mrs. White as a prophet?
[Re: Daryl]
#151834
04/13/13 11:36 PM
04/13/13 11:36 PM
|
FORMER-SDA Active Member 2018 Banned
Senior Member
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 663
Canada
|
|
As far as that statement I quoted goes, will need to do further research regarding that. I would find that quite helpful, Daryl. I am also looking into it.
Last edited by JAK; 04/13/13 11:36 PM.
"All that is Gold does not Glitter, Not all who Wander are Lost." (J.R.R.T.)
|
|
|
Re: Why or why not accept Mrs. White as a prophet?
[Re: JAK]
#151837
04/13/13 11:57 PM
04/13/13 11:57 PM
|
OP
SDA Active Member 2021
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,003
The Orient
|
|
To me, "private interpretation" means the placement of one's own opinions or ideas into the interpretive process relative to the scriptures such that God's Word and His Holy Spirit are not allowed to interpret the scriptures to us themselves. I agree with this understanding as the secondary interpretation of the passage, the primary meaning being that the prophet/writer did not come up with the ideas themselves. Therefore, the correct interpretation of a passage is that interpretation to which the Spirit leads the honest seeker. (Correct?) I agree with your last sentence, but have questions about the first part. To me, what you are thinking should be the primary meaning is given explicitly in the following verse from the one which speaks of "private interpretation." In fact, Peter is using the logic that no scripture is to be understood by "private interpretation" on the basis of the fact that scripture was given by the Holy Spirit and not by men. In other words, we can't apply a private interpretation to that which is given us by God. (If we did, how would we know our interpretation was what God intended?) Question: Can the seeker arrive at the correct conclusion on his own, meaning without the aid of others eg:the church, (Catholic or otherwise) the pastor, EGW, or is the correct understanding only arrived at by committees? (This is really a secondary question bordering on a side-track. You may ignore it if you want.) A seeker can frequently arrive at a correct conclusion with God's help alone. But, frequently the help of another individual is either necessary or time-saving in one's journey to truth. For example, I happen to know of a Buddhist monk who recently read God's Word in his own language but could not understand it. The translation may not be the best to start with. It is excruciatingly difficult to properly translate the Bible into some of the Asian languages. But the monk was interested in what the Bible taught. A friend of mine took some time away from his translation work to assist the monk in understanding the Bible. The monk said to him, "I understand it now, now that you have helped me. I just couldn't see those things until you showed them to me." (The things he was shown had much to do with the overall plan of redemption and the great controversy.) If you have no background in it, you will have a difficult time of arriving at the truth. God can, and often does, step in and open our understanding. But God frequently allows us humans the privilege of instructing our neighbors. This has much to do with God's chosen methods in disseminating the truth. He has tasked us with evangelizing the world. Speaking of "all scripture is inspired," I understand this to mean that God's Word is always inspired by Him. I do not believe this statement has any relationship to the quantity of scripture nor to the sum of it. If it did, the "scripture" the text refers to is specifically that of the Old Testament. We would then have nothing to verify the inspiration of the New Testament. Agreed. Good points. In fact Peter was refering to the OT when he made this statement, since there was no NT. How we got THAT is another discussion which I don't have the time resources to pursue at the moment. I recognize that this does leave the door open for EGW to "be" Scripture... I'm glad that we have the inspiration of the Bible as common ground. I personally accept the entire Bible as inspired. I do not see that there are parts that are less inspired than others. You have mentioned the "begats" as being less useful to you. Perhaps they are not your interest. They have been very helpful to me. I have, by them, understood the times in which we are living. The genealogies are inspired just as much as other portions of scripture, but they may not be given us for the same purposes as texts like John 3:16. As Paul would have put it, the Bible gives us both "milk" and "meat." The Bible has something for child and scholar alike. But the milk and meat are not necessarily given in the same verse. You still have not presented your reasons for not accepting Mrs. White. Are we ready for those, or are there still points we should cover relative to inspiration in general or to interpretation? 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: Why or why not accept Mrs. White as a prophet?
[Re: Green Cochoa]
#151858
04/14/13 03:25 PM
04/14/13 03:25 PM
|
FORMER-SDA Active Member 2018 Banned
Senior Member
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 663
Canada
|
|
I agree with this understanding as the secondary interpretation of the passage, the primary meaning being that the prophet/writer did not come up with the ideas themselves. I agree with your last sentence, but have questions about the first part. To me, what you are thinking should be the primary meaning (2 Peter 1:20-21)is given explicitly in the following verse (v. 21) from the one which speaks of "private interpretation." In fact, Peter is using the logic that no scripture is to be understood by "private interpretation" on the basis of the fact that scripture was given by the Holy Spirit and not by men. In other words, we can't apply a private interpretation to that which is given us by God. (If we did, how would we know our interpretation was what God intended?) So, here is a summary as I understand it of the above discussion: I think that 2 Peter 1:20-21 applies mainly to the manner in which Scripture was given, and you think it applies mainly to the manner in which we interpret Scripture. I feel that the Greek supports my view, and also the SDA Commentary. I'm sure you feel the same about your view. The critical aspect here is that we differ. Mark this post, because we will need to reference it later.
"All that is Gold does not Glitter, Not all who Wander are Lost." (J.R.R.T.)
|
|
|
Re: Why or why not accept Mrs. White as a prophet?
[Re: Green Cochoa]
#151859
04/14/13 03:32 PM
04/14/13 03:32 PM
|
FORMER-SDA Active Member 2018 Banned
Senior Member
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 663
Canada
|
|
Just a side-note. If I have not addressed an aspect of your posting it has not been intentional. Please bring it to my attention by asking about it or repost the question or comment.
"All that is Gold does not Glitter, Not all who Wander are Lost." (J.R.R.T.)
|
|
|
Re: Why or why not accept Mrs. White as a prophet?
[Re: Green Cochoa]
#151860
04/14/13 03:35 PM
04/14/13 03:35 PM
|
FORMER-SDA Active Member 2018 Banned
Senior Member
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 663
Canada
|
|
I'm glad that we have the inspiration of the Bible as common ground. I personally accept the entire Bible as inspired. I do not see that there are parts that are less inspired than others. You have mentioned the "begats" as being less useful to you. Perhaps they are not your interest. They have been very helpful to me. I have, by them, understood the times in which we are living. The genealogies are inspired just as much as other portions of scripture, but they may not be given us for the same purposes as texts like John 3:16. As Paul would have put it, the Bible gives us both "milk" and "meat." The Bible has something for child and scholar alike. But the milk and meat are not necessarily given in the same verse. Perhaps we are not so far apart after all.
"All that is Gold does not Glitter, Not all who Wander are Lost." (J.R.R.T.)
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|