You make it sound so easy.

As I reminded Green in another thread: God told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. That was contrary to God's teaching. Abraham could have refused to obey because he knew that God would never tell him to do such a thing. But he knew the voice of God, because he had a close relationship with God.

Jesus had a relationship with the Father and He discerned error when it was presented to Him.

Nadi's discernment is impressive.

I would ask, how did Christ discern who was 'honest' and true angel of God in the wilderness verses the 'tempter'. That discernment is available to us today...
Matthew 4:10-11 King James Version (KJV)
10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
11 Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him.

You make it sound so easy.

As I reminded Green in another thread: God told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. That was contrary to God's teaching. Abraham could have refused to obey because he knew that God would never tell him to do such a thing. But he knew the voice of God, because he had a close relationship with God.

Was it "contrary to God's teaching" that His own Son was killed on the cross? God does not tell us to do anything "contrary to His teaching." Not sure how you would prove otherwise

God did NOT kill His own Son. Sin killed His Son.

Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. (Isa 53:12)
For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.(Heb 9:26)

He who knew no sin became sin for us, He died for us on Calvary. His death shows the wonderful love of God for man, and the immutability of His law. . . . {AG 80.3}

The Son of God stepped down from his royal throne, and for our sakes became poor, that we through his poverty might be rich. He became "a Man of sorrows," that we might be made partakers of everlasting joy. "He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed" God permitted his beloved Son, full of grace and truth, to come from a world of indescribable glory to a world marred and blighted with sin, shadowed with the shadow of death and the curse. He permitted him to leave the bosom of his love, the adoration of the angels, to suffer shame, insult, humiliation, hatred, and death. And Jesus bore all this untold sorrow, that we might be changed to his divine image, and become the sons of God. John exclaims, "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us." Is there not a response of gratitude in your hearts? Are you not lost in wonder and adoration as you contemplate the theme of redemption? {RH, February 28, 1888 par. 2}

What scripture would you recommend to prove that?

Just to clarify, in my comment re Jesus being "killed" I did NOT say that God killed Him. I simply said that "Jesus was killed." And my question was simply, was THAT "contrary to God's teaching?"

ProdigalOne, I really think what JAK was intending with this was that EACH PERSON should ASK THEMSELVES if they are part of the problem or solution.

So to hypocritically claim that JAK is part of the problem immediately makes you......part of the problem.

The now-banned poster "JAK" was no more part of the problem than you or HCH or APL or Alchemy or dedication or anyone else who posts here. IMO he was a lot more honest than most, although he didn't use the best language to express it.


So...I don't see YOUR name anywhere.

Everyone has their reasons for participating on this (and other) forums and many times those reasons include inquiry in a safe environment. And by "safe" I mean "anonymous," because the SDA church really does not tolerate questioning The Prophet or The Doctrines.

So as part of the solution everyone, Nadi included, should let their responses sit for a bit and come back and read them and then ASK THEMSELVES:

Does this response address the post or the poster?
Is the tone of the response polite and inquiring or inflammatory and sarcastic?
Is this a response that will help others see the beauty of Jesus?
Does this response show the joy and character of being an SDA?

Just sayin'

The sacrificial offerings were ordained by God to be to man a perpetual reminder and a penitential acknowledgment of his sin and a confession of his faith in the promised Redeemer. They were intended to impress upon the fallen race the solemn truth that it was sin that caused death. {PP 68.1}
 
If to save the body from death, the foot or the hand should be cut off, or even the eye plucked out, how much more earnest should the Christian be to put away sin, which brings death to the soul! {AA 312.2}
 
Expel sin from your hearts, for sin caused the death of the Son of God. {RH, July 22, 1884 par. 9}
 
Cease to cherish and excuse sin; for sin caused the death of the Son of God. {GW92 466.2}
 
Keep before the people the cross of Calvary. Show what caused the death of Christ--the transgression of the law. Let not sin be cloaked or treated as a matter of little consequence. It is to be presented as guilt against the Son of God. Then point the people to Christ, telling them that immortality comes only through receiving Him as their personal Saviour. {6T 54.1}
 
He will see that it was the transgression of the law that caused the death of the Son of the infinite God, and he will hate the sins that wounded Jesus. As he looks upon Christ as a compassionate, tender High Priest, his heart will be preserved in contrition. {TM 220.1}
 
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." While it is a disgrace to sin, it is no disgrace to confess sin, and to forsake it, as the hateful thing it is,--that which caused the death of the only begotten Son of God. {RH, December 9, 1890 par. 4}
 
Satan, the author of sin and all its results, had led men to look upon disease and death as proceeding from God,--as punishment arbitrarily inflicted on account of sin. Hence one upon whom some great affliction or calamity had fallen had the additional burden of being regarded as a great sinner. {DA 471.1}

I use ProdigalOne to avoid confusion, since I have the same name as another member.

The love of a holy God is an amazing principle, which can stir the universe in our behalf during the hours of our probation and trial. But after the season of our probation, if we are found transgressors of God's law, the God of love will be found a minister of vengeance. God makes no compromise with sin. The disobedient will be punished. The wrath of God fell upon His beloved Son as Christ hung upon the cross of Calvary in the transgressor's place. The love of God now reaches out to embrace the lowest, vilest sinner that will come to Christ with contrition. It reaches out to transform the sinner into an obedient, faithful child of God; but not a soul can be saved if he continues in sin. {1SM 313.1}

Sin is the transgression of the law, and the arm that is now mighty to save will be strong to punish when the transgressor passes the bounds that limit divine forbearance. He who refuses to seek for life, who will not search the Scriptures to see what is truth, lest he should be condemned in his practices, will be left to blindness of mind and to the deceptions of Satan. To the same degree that the penitent and obedient are shielded by God's love, the impenitent and disobedient will be left to the result of their own ignorance and hardness of heart, because they receive not the love of the truth that they may be saved. {1SM 313.2}