|
Forums118
Topics9,234
Posts196,242
Members1,327
| |
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
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
5 registered members (dedication, Karen Y, Daryl, 2 invisible),
2,513
guests, and 16
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the fall
#9981
09/23/03 01:19 PM
09/23/03 01:19 PM
|
OP
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,163
Muncie, IN
|
|
Here is God's response in Gen. 3:16, 17. 16 To the woman he said, quote:
"I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing;
with pain you will give birth to children.
Your desire will be for your husband,
and he will rule over you."
17 To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, 'You must not eat of it,'
"Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat of it
all the days of your life.
Only to Adam does He make reference to the command. Considering the totality of the account, I think this is significant.
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the fall
#9982
09/23/03 01:46 PM
09/23/03 01:46 PM
|
|
|
Darius JDPhD we are not talking about infallability. You are. We are talking about authority. You are not. Your authority is human reason. That is why you are at war with the clear words of this statement. I can imagine Satan using this very argument. "Yes, Jesus is authoritative, but is He infallible?" Reading your posts over a period of time it seems to me that infallability really is an important question for you, since it has appeared that you consider yourself to have it. As one reading the lines of your posts, watching the flow of your argumentation, this is my personal opinion. JDPhD, you have invested much personally in human reason. I have news for you. Human reason was never infallable, and after the fall its conclusions are vastly less reliable than even before.
Your trend of reasoning is bankrupt. You argue not against men but God. You have clearly demonstrated by your previous posts at this forum and by your specific reaction to the question here about fundamental belief #17 that you are fundamentally outside the Adventism upheld in the fundamental beliefs of the world church.
A church member, completely unaware of your existence made the following comment to me two days ago. He observed that as a general rule, when liberals argue they are vague in their answers, while conservative persons are specific. I think he is right. Doubtless ther are exceptions and peopel who react in a spectrum of different ways, but as a general point I believe it is true. Your reaction was at first vague and then asserting that you hold to the whole belief, even as you highlighted one portion, ignored another, and brought up an issue wwe had not even been dealing with (infallability). When the issues are plain, you blur them.
We are not buying. You have revealed what you presently are. You are exposed.
have a nice day.
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the fall
#9983
09/24/03 02:04 AM
09/24/03 02:04 AM
|
OP
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,163
Muncie, IN
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Larry Kirkpatrick:
We are not buying. You have revealed what you presently are. You are exposed.
have a nice day.
That's great news. What a pity you are only left with appeals to emotion. BTW, when did humans invent reason. I suggest you dispense with meaningless phrases like "human reason."
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the fall
#9984
09/23/03 03:05 PM
09/23/03 03:05 PM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Darius, the Bible clearly says Eve was deceived. And yet you insist she wasn't. Who am I to believe? you or the Bible?
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the fall
#9985
09/23/03 03:15 PM
09/23/03 03:15 PM
|
OP
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,163
Muncie, IN
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mike Lowe:
Darius, the Bible clearly says Eve was deceived. And yet you insist she wasn't. Who am I to believe? you or the Bible?
The gist of my entire discussion is based on the fact that Eve was deceived, so how can you possibly claim that I have denied that Eve was deceived? If she was told first-hand then she could not claim to be deceived. The fact that she was deceived, both her claim and Paul's commentary as well as God's response, is prima facie evidence that she was not told first-hand.
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the fall
#9986
09/23/03 04:24 PM
09/23/03 04:24 PM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Darius, I stand corrected. Thank you. Now I remember the gist of your idea. However, whether first or second hand warning, she was completely informed and convinced regarding God's will and prohibition concerning the forbidden tree.
So, I don't see how her deception and fall indicates whether she was warned first or second hand. Since she was 100% clear, since she was completely convinced, what does it matter if she was warned first or second hand?
The other issue here - the accuracy of Sister White - is important too. I am completely convinced that her insights on this matter are perfectly correct. I rejoice in her gift, especially where she fills in missing details. Her additional details makes the Bible come alive for me.
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the fall
#9987
09/24/03 05:36 AM
09/24/03 05:36 AM
|
OP
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,163
Muncie, IN
|
|
There is an essential difference between an action that is undertaken because of persuasion and the same action undertaken because of deception. Persuasion means that, as much as you desired, your faculties were engaged, you considered the evidence and came to a logical decision. Whether your logic was sound is not an issue here. On the other hand, deception means that you were led to accept as true something that was false and made your decision based on that faulty evidence. So, even though you thought you were acting rationally, the deceiver had circumcumvented your reasoning processes.
When Eve engaged the serpent in conversation she was convinced that it was God's will that she not eat of that tree. By the time she came to the end of the conversation she was no longer convinced that this was the case. But that was not the only condition under which she could have eaten the fruit. It was possible for her to remain convinced that it was not God's will for her to eat of the fruit yet decide that God was not worthy of her obedience. Her actions would be the same but the implications would be different. In the first case she would be in a state of obedience while in the second she would be in a state of disobedience.
As to your unflinching acceptance of whatever EGW has written I can only express dismay that you do not see the danger of blind devotion to an individual. You have decided to conclude that of all humans EGW is the only one who was immune from diversion from that to which she was ordained. In this discussion you agree that in her perfection Eve strayed from her ideals, but you think EGW is above that. You accept that the Bereans were noble for refusing to treat Paul's writings/saying in the way you treat EGW's writings, yet do not see the inherent contradiction in your attitude towards EGW.
I have chosen to search the biblical Scriptures and have found, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that EGW's comment on the fall fall short. This is in line with her ministry and with what the Bible presents as a standard. However, it in no way diminishes her ministry, unless you are prepared to state that there is a biblical standard which determines a prophets validity based on whether he/she got the details about the fall correct or not.
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the fall
#9988
09/26/03 02:29 AM
09/26/03 02:29 AM
|
Charter Member
Active Member 2014
Most Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,019
Northern CA
|
|
Well.....I started at the beginning of this topic and read it all the way through. While reading it I had the thought of clicking on your profile Darius to see if you were a Seventh-day Advintist christian..but I did not as I thought for sure you were not since you did not seem to belive in the Spirit of Prophecy on this issue..then at the end of this topic I did click on your profile to find out that you are a Seventh-day Adventist. Was I also mistaken or did I read in one of those other posts here that you are a pastor? I must be wrong in that too as since you are a Seventh-day Adventist that would make you a Seventh-day Adventist pastor would it not? My mistake. I am very sorry. Pastor Lowe you are very correct in that Moses and the Spirit of Prophecy are correct. I have been doing a search in the Spirit Of Prophecy about this and it seems you have already given most of the ones I have found. I found a few that told how the Holy Angels had told Adam AND Eve about all this BEFORE Eve strayed from Adam's side. quote:
Holy angels often visited the garden, and gave instruction to Adam and Eve concerning their employment and also taught them concerning the rebellion and fall of Satan. The angels warned them of Satan and cautioned them not to separate from each other in their employment, for they might be brought in contact with this fallen foe. The angels also enjoined upon them to follow closely the directions God had given them, for in perfect obedience only were they safe. Then this fallen foe could have no power over them.
Satan commenced his work with Eve, to cause her to disobey. She first erred in wandering from her husband, next in lingering around the forbidden tree, and next in listening to the voice of the tempter, and even daring to doubt what God had said, "In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." She thought that perhaps the Lord did not mean just what He said, and venturing, she put forth her hand, took of the fruit and ate. It was pleasing to the eye and pleasant to the taste. Then she was jealous that God had withheld from them what was really for their good, and she offered the fruit to her husband, thereby tempting him. She related to Adam all that the serpent had said and expressed her astonishment that he had the power of speech. {EW 147.2}
Praise God for His Words to us Amen
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the fall
#9989
09/26/03 02:37 AM
09/26/03 02:37 AM
|
OP
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,163
Muncie, IN
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Avalee:
I found a few that told how the Holy Angels had told Adam AND Eve about all this BEFORE Eve strayed from Adam's side.
I know you understand that the Bereans were commended because after they heard what Paul said they went home and compared it with the totality of the Scriptures to see whether what he said agreed with the teaching of Scripture. They did not automatically assume that because he had that tremendous experience on the road to Damascus that made him immune from influence.
Please tell me why you automatically assume the what EGW wrote in commentary about Gen. 2 and 3 must be correct and ignore what Paul wrote in commentary? Why do you refuse to follow the example of the Bereans?
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the fall
#9990
09/26/03 02:44 AM
09/26/03 02:44 AM
|
OP
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,163
Muncie, IN
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Avalee:
quote:
The angels warned them of Satan and cautioned them not to separate from each other in their employment, for they might be brought in contact with this fallen foe. Satan commenced his work with Eve, to cause her to disobey. She first erred in wandering from her husband, {EW 147.2}
Praise God for His Words to us Amen
I love Early Writingss, but did you stop to consider what this quotation really says? It implies that BEFORE Lucifer even spoke to Eve, Eve transgressed by disobeying the instruction of the angels not to separate herself from her husband. This would mean that Eve sinned BEFORE sin entered the garden.
Even if we accept the first sentence, it does not say that God told Eve. It says that the angels told Eve. We know from Gen. 2 that God told Adam. This point is clear. Why does EGW say the angels told Eve if, as Mike and you would suggest, God told Eve?
EGW warns us against being mere reflectors of other men's thoughts. That would include her thoughts. If you quote her without carefully considering the implication of the quotation you are in violation of her clear instruction.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
