|
Forums118
Topics9,232
Posts196,213
Members1,325
| |
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
|
|
|
9 registered members (daylily, TheophilusOne, dedication, Daryl, Karen Y, 4 invisible),
2,502
guests, and 5
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Are we transgressing the 1st commandment or not?
#77383
08/03/06 03:46 AM
08/03/06 03:46 AM
|
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Ontario
|
|
Tom, Here is something that EW wrote: DA21
But turning from all lesser representations, we behold God in Jesus. Looking unto Jesus we see that it is the glory of our God to give. "I do nothing of Myself," said Christ; "the living Father hath sent Me, and I live by the Father." "I seek not Mine own glory," but the glory of Him that sent Me. John 8:28; 6:57; 8:50; 7:18. In these words is set forth the great principle which is the law of life for the universe. All things Christ received from God, but He took to give. So in the heavenly courts, in His ministry for all created beings: through the beloved Son, the Father's life flows out to all; through the Son it returns, in praise and joyous service, a tide of love, to the great Source of all. And thus through Christ the circuit of beneficence is complete, representing the character of the great Giver, the law of life.
In heaven itself this law was broken. Sin originated in self-seeking. Lucifer, the covering cherub, desired to be first in heaven. He sought to gain control of heavenly beings, to draw them away from their Creator, and to win their homage to himself. Therefore he misrepresented God, attributing to Him the desire for self-exaltation.
This is completely in harmony with scripture and with what I wrote on ‘self-existence’.
So, let us turn from all lesser representations.
In relation to 'crucial thought concepts'; they will define their own reality.
"I do nothing of Myself," said Christ; "the living Father hath sent Me, and I live by the Father." "I seek not Mine own glory," but the glory of Him that sent Me. John 8:28; 6:57; 8:50; 7:18. In these words is set forth the great principle which is the law of life for the universe.
That is a crucial thought concept.
The question is, is there a way of measuring truth?
I think I have clearly presented the issue of 'self-existence' and its contrariness to the ministry and life of Christ whether on earth or in Heaven.
|
|
|
Re: Are we transgressing the 1st commandment or not?
#77384
08/03/06 05:28 AM
08/03/06 05:28 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
I'm sorry John, but I'm not seeing how your post is addressing my questions. That's one of my favorite passages you cited, BTW.
It sounded to me like you were saying that the idea which Ellen White presented was diametrically opposed to Scripture. That is what you said, isn't it? Now you are using her own words to prove she was wrong?
I'm trying to get a grasp of how you understand inspiration, both in regards to her, and Scripture. In particular, do you see inspiration working different in regards to her writings as in Scripture?
I also asked if a crucial thought concept presented in words which are not in Scripture, and which cannot be presented by language which is Scripture, and thus present an idea which is not found in Scripture is possibly simply non-Scriptural (not found in Scripture) as opposed to diametrically opposed to Scripture.
That is, if I assert XYZ, a crucial thought concept, and XYZ cannot be expressed by words which are in Scripture, then XYZ is not a Scriptural concept. This is what I understand you to be asserting. Is XYZ necessarily *contrary* to Scripture, or might XYZ be a true concept, but just one which was not presented in Scripture?
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: Are we transgressing the 1st commandment or not?
#77385
08/04/06 10:01 AM
08/04/06 10:01 AM
|
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Ontario
|
|
Quote:
The question is: how is it possible to know this kind of love and to have this love in your heart when you are all alone?
The question is answered by the fact that God did create a being that was able to appreciate and love that agape-love. That he was able to create so, shows that it was in his heart. That God did take a risk – knowing that such could turn against him; not knowing whether such would turn against him; but willing to suffer and bear the cost; who then of a free will responded to his love by faith, and thus was born of his Father’s spirit, and became his Son.
Having so established ‘eternal life’ from the beginning between the Father and the Son; the relationship of love and faith; the Father’s love now flowing through his Son, working through him, creating the rest of creation.
The Father and the Son gave such powers to the creation so that they stood at risk and hurt from it, yet were willing to suffer and bear the cost.
Quote:
Unselfish love I believe could only exist and experienced when there is some one to love, when there is an object to love, to make this object happy.
It takes unselfish love to create one capable of that love. But it can only find expression in the creation of, and ongoing relationship.
Quote:
There is always a question unanswered within me, what is the purpose of creation, when God knows before hand that Lucifer would sin, that Adam would sin?
Neither the Father nor the Son knew before hand that Lucifer ‘would” sin, that Adam “would” sin. They knew that they “could” sin. But they took the risk, because they loved. It was not for the purpose of testing each other’s love, but rather the outworking of agape-love. How great is that love? The cross tells us; it is stronger than death.
But the creation was never meant to remain just creation. It was created for the purpose of them becoming Sons of God. But it is only of their own free will, by faith, that they can be born and become Sons. Here we stand today being invited to that fellowship and oneness that is between the Father and the Son.
|
|
|
Re: Are we transgressing the 1st commandment or not?
#77386
08/04/06 10:20 AM
08/04/06 10:20 AM
|
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Ontario
|
|
Quote:
I'm sorry John, but I'm not seeing how your post is addressing my questions. That's one of my favorite passages you cited, BTW.
I am glad it is one of your favorite passages as we have occasion to consider its import greatly.
Quote:
It sounded to me like you were saying that the idea which Ellen White presented was diametrically opposed to Scripture. That is what you said, isn't it? Now you are using her own words to prove she was wrong?
I said that there are things found in her writings that are contrary to scripture, and I have shown from her own words that that is so.
Quote:
I'm trying to get a grasp of how you understand inspiration, both in regards to her, and Scripture. In particular, do you see inspiration working different in regards to her writings as in Scripture?
The question is not the credibility of EW. The question is the credibility of the reader. Are we to take blindly something just because of the label? Is that not great opportunity for the enemy to sow tares? What is the credible position of the reader? So as I asked: Is there a way of measuring truth?
|
|
|
Re: Are we transgressing the 1st commandment or not?
#77387
08/04/06 11:41 AM
08/04/06 11:41 AM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
Quote:
I said that there are things found in her writings that are contrary to scripture
Inspiration cannot contradict inspiration. Should we infer from your words that you don't consider her to be inspired?
|
|
|
Re: Are we transgressing the 1st commandment or not?
#77388
08/04/06 12:59 PM
08/04/06 12:59 PM
|
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Ontario
|
|
Quote:
I also asked if a crucial thought concept presented in words which are not in Scripture, and which cannot be presented by language which is Scripture, and thus present an idea which is not found in Scripture is possibly simply non-Scriptural (not found in Scripture) as opposed to diametrically opposed to Scripture.
That is, if I assert XYZ, a crucial thought concept, and XYZ cannot be expressed by words which are in Scripture, then XYZ is not a Scriptural concept. This is what I understand you to be asserting. Is XYZ necessarily *contrary* to Scripture, or might XYZ be a true concept, but just one which was not presented in Scripture?
What I answered is that such ‘crucial thought concepts’ will define their own reality. To establish rules one way or the other is detrimental to the credibility of the reader. We need to have understanding. There is no safety in ‘words’. But it also is obvious that when a concept cannot be expressed in language of Scripture, then it is definitely telling something else. I cannot think of one doctrine using unscriptural expressions that is true, and they all teach and work against the gospel. I do not see any room for neutral ground; it is either in harmony with the revelation of Christ, or it is not.
As you have also many times stated; all that is needed for salvation, has been revealed in Christ. So then, it stands that nothing more needs to be revealed, but much of what has been revealed needs to be understood. Of all that I have seen, ‘all’ the unscriptural ‘concepts’ have been amiss of understanding what has been revealed.
|
|
|
Re: Are we transgressing the 1st commandment or not?
#77389
08/04/06 01:03 PM
08/04/06 01:03 PM
|
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Ontario
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I said that there are things found in her writings that are contrary to scripture
Inspiration cannot contradict inspiration. Should we infer from your words that you don't consider her to be inspired?
Mat 13:24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
Mat 13:25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
Mat 13:26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
Mat 13:27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
Mat 13:28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this.
|
|
|
Re: Are we transgressing the 1st commandment or not?
#77390
08/04/06 02:29 PM
08/04/06 02:29 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
John, it appears that you are seeing inspiration differently in terms of Ellen White and Scripture. I'm asserting this on the basis of the comment that some things in her writings are contrary to Scripture. I'm guessing that you wouldn't say that there are some things in Scripture which are contrary to Scripture. Therefore there is a difference in EGW and Scripture.
It appears you are saying that any crucial thought process must be opposed to Scripture, if it cannot be expressed in Scriptural language. Is this a process which ended with Revelation?
What I'm asking is this. When the first book was written, let's say Job, there was no Scripture written, so all crucial thought concepts were expressed in language which was not in Scripture, since no Scriptural language existed. When Genesis was written, there were new crucial though concepts communicated in language which was not Scriptural. This would apply to all the books of the Bible, ending with Revelation.
So until Revelation was written, it was possible to express crucial thought concepts with non-Scriptural language which were not contrary to Scripture. After Revelation was written, this is no longer possible. This seems to me to be the logical conclusion of what you have been sharing.
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: Are we transgressing the 1st commandment or not?
#77391
08/04/06 02:30 PM
08/04/06 02:30 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
I agree with John on his comments regarding risk. It is not possible to create beings with free will without assuming risk.
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: Are we transgressing the 1st commandment or not?
#77392
08/05/06 01:52 AM
08/05/06 01:52 AM
|
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Ontario
|
|
What I answered is that such ‘crucial thought concepts’ will define their own reality. To establish rules one way or the other is detrimental to the credibility of the reader. We need to have understanding. There is no safety in ‘words’. You keep trying to establish hypothetical rules and I have no such interest. Crucial thought concepts are crucial though concepts by the fact that they are paradigms.
"I do nothing of Myself," said Christ; "the living Father hath sent Me, and I live by the Father." "I seek not Mine own glory," but the glory of Him that sent Me. John 8:28; 6:57; 8:50; 7:18. In these words is set forth the great principle which is the law of life for the universe.
That is a crucial thought concept; this crucial though concept declares the “Law of life” for the universe; not the law of life for this world only, or for the fallen world; but the Law of Life for the universe. This Law of Life is the Life as is in the Son of God. It is not an arbitrary or temporary Law. It is the life as it is in God. This life is irreconcilably contrary to self-existence, and establishes that self-existence is sin. Love and self-existence are mutually exclusive.
‘Crucial thought concepts’ define their own reality. They speak for themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
