HOME CHAT ROOM #1 CHAT ROOM #2 Forum Topics Within The Last 7 Days REGISTER ENTER FORUMS BIBLE SCHOOL CONTACT US

Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine Christian Family Fellowship Forums
(formerly Maritime SDA OnLine)
Consisting mainly of both members and friends of the Seventh-day Adventist Church
Welcomes and invites other members and friends of the Seventh-day Adventist Church to join us!

Click Here To Read Legal Notice & Disclaimer
Suggested a One Time Yearly $20 or Higher Donation Accepted Here to Help Cover the Yearly Expenses of Operating & Upgrading. We need at least $20 X 10 yearly donations.
Donations accepted: Here
ShoutChat Box
Newest Members
ekoorb1030, jibb555, MBloomfield, Dina, Nelson
1323 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums118
Topics9,189
Posts195,525
Members1,323
Most Online5,850
Feb 29th, 2020
Seventh-day Adventist Church In Canada Links
Seventh-day Adventist Church in Canada

Newfoundland & Labrador Mission

Maritime Conference

Quebec Conference

Ontario Conference

Manitoba-Saskatchewan Conference

Alberta Conference

British Columbia Conference

7 Top Posters(30 Days)
kland 15
Rick H 15
Daryl 4
March
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
Member Spotlight
Kevin H
Kevin H
New York
Posts: 625
Joined: November 2004
Show All Member Profiles 
Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
Live Space Station Tracking
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
Last 7 Pictures From Photo Gallery Forums
He hath set an harvest for thee
Rivers Of Living Water
He Leads Us To Green Pastures
Remember What God Has Done
Remember The Sabbath
"...whiter than snow..."
A Beautiful Spring Day
Who's Online
3 registered members (Karen Y, 2 invisible), 3,150 guests, and 5 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 31 of 105 1 2 29 30 31 32 33 104 105
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: APL] #131667
03/11/11 02:20 AM
03/11/11 02:20 AM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
Originally Posted By: APL
It is only eisegesis if the Bible does not support it in other places.


You need to produce this purported Biblical support and, as mentioned next, the verses you have claimed thus far are exegetically not supportive of this “genetic” extent.

Originally Posted By: APL
Can I absolutely prove it? No. But Matthew 13 sure hints at it, and Romans 5:12, 18, and Psalms 51:5.


-Matt 13:28 could easily attribute this symbolized harm indirectly, i.e., merely through influences, to Satan, through His temptation and not by active interject.

-I have already responded to Rom 5:12 in this post. Verse 18 contextually continues along these lines and is not necessarily implicating anything “genetical.” As I understand it thus far, Christ’s sacrifice spiritually deals with the sin problem in order to allow God to later make the physical fixes and this will be mostly done by the wholesale replacement of our fallen bodies (1 Cor 15:53. 54; cf. 1 Tim 6:16 on the “immortality” issue.). As I Theologially understand it, the only tweaking that will be done with what will continue to exist from this fallen age will be with out “psyche” (= our characters - a.k.a soul), as God will excise and purge out all that is not Sanctified/Godly/Holy and fitted for life in Heaven and the New Earth.

I have already done an exegetical analysis of David’s statement in Psa 51:5 in this forum post.

Though absolutely proof may not be achievable, as with many Biblica topic, I personally would need more exegetical proof, rather than ones that ignore these exegetical anchors and imposes an external meaning/reading on the text, and thus also the actual intent of the author, indeed “in his context.”

Originally Posted By: APL
John 8:44 AKJV You are of your father the devil...

Is the devil a father? Does he have offspring? Or, could this be interpreted in another way with respect to genetics?


You are here also jumping over the exegetical implications of this statement to directly go to your genetical hypothesis. Both Jesus and these Jews had Abraham as their father, so Jesus was here not referring to a literal, even genetic ancestor but to a Spiritual one. As clearly stated by Jesus in that context vss. 39-47, the issue here was which spiritual nature they were following. As he concluded: ‘they were not of God’ (vs. 47b).

Originally Posted By: APL
Question - is God arbitrary? Is God ever arbitrary? When God said, do not eat of the tree, was this an arbitrary test of obedience on the part of God?


A main, exegetically learned tenet to my Theological foundation is that God is absolutely not arbitrary and everything that He says and does, has a tangible, practical and absolute necessary underlying reason.

Originally Posted By: APL
Originally Posted By: EGW

The fruit itself was harmless. If God had not forbidden Adam and Eve to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowledge, their action in taking it would not have been sinful. Up to the moment of God's prohibition, Adam might have eaten of the fruit of that tree without realizing any harm. But after God had said, Thou shalt not eat, the act became a crime of great magnitude.{ST, January 23, 1879 par. 14}

Did God arbitrarily forbid the eating of the fruit?


Is it only me, but I clearly see that this SOP quote completely disprove your ‘genetical misinformation injection through the forbidden fruit’ hyposthesis as it relates that the fruit itself was completely harmless. The pivotal issue here was that eaten of it would concretely prove a decided and deliberate disobedience to God. And the harmful consequence of this would come to be physically realized by God having to banned such a now sinful man from eating of the Tree of Life. So as I continue to see it, the harm that occurred in man and nature came from this withdrawal of the ‘supernaturally empowered’ Fruit of Life from their system, which caused it to become self-corrupt.

As EGW says elsewhere, ‘the fruit was not poisonous’ and if something had been injected it from the time when God had banned it, then I think EGW would correspondingly have been given such a revelation, just as she was spiritually impressed, if not directly “shown”, that it was ‘harmless’ and ‘not poisonous’.


“Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.” Matt 25:45 NJK Project
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: APL] #131668
03/11/11 02:21 AM
03/11/11 02:21 AM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
Quote:
Originally Posted By: NJK Project

To me the “working of the arts” merely involve sensorily influential things and not any direct physical interference or injection.


Originally Posted By: APL
Is this not eisegesis? This is your opinion.


It really is neither eisegesis, nor mere opinion and was only tentatively expressed because I chose not to do a more thorough study on the issue here before responding.

As I logically and lexically suspected, the word “arts” in the writings of EGW refers to ‘external demonstrations’ and not, scientifically, to your supposed “surgical injection and genetic tampering”. The Devil can indeed do enough damage to the human who shapes their mentality mainly through the 80% sensorial intake achieved by the eyes. Much more damage can also be done by the devil from thoughts which largely play on what we have allowed our eyes to intake. (cf. Psa 101:2-4). So this was really an informal, semi-exegetical deduction on my part.


Quote:
Originally Posted By: NJK Project

In regards to nature, it came to be affected because of Man’s fall which cause the agent that preserved its perfection to be removed, thus allowing it to become self-corrupted.


Originally Posted By: APL
Genesis 3:22 says that the Tree of Life would have caused man to life forever. Are you saying that if Man had not been barred from the Tree of Life, that out nature would have remained perfect?


For some reason, you have clouded, even misconstrued, my straightforward, and straight-flowing, statement here. I clearly, at least to me, said that Man (first) fell and then, as a “caused” result, the Tree of Life, which would maintain his physical perfection, was removed thus allowing for this physical/genetic self-corruption. So clearly I had implied and actually explicitly expressed that ‘their nature had become fallen/“imperfect” before that removal.’

Quote:
Originally Posted By: SOP
Originally Posted By: {ST, November 19, 1894 par. 2}
Satan sought to correct the law of God in heaven, and to supply an amendment of his own.


Originally Posted By: APL
HOW would Satan correct the law of God in Heaven? How could supply an amendment? The real question is, what is God's law?


The SOP context for that statement is indeed doubly clear of the GC context and “law understanding” of that statement as it said:

Originally Posted By: SOP ST, November 19, 1894 par. 2

Through the pope of Rome the same work has been carried on here on earth as was carried on in the courts of heaven before the expulsion of the prince of darkness. Satan sought to correct the law of God in heaven, and to supply an amendment of his own. He exalted his own judgment above that of his Creator, and placed his will above the will of Jehovah, and in this way virtually declared God to be fallible.


So it is only through an eisegetical mindset that the Law of God in this context could be understood as anything else than ‘the legislative law of God as found in the 10 Commandments.’ So, furthermore, since this is the “law of God in heaven”, and this “amendment of Satan” had occurred before man was created, then how does it affect, even involve Man that would only later be created later, and that in a Spiritually and physically perfect state???


“Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.” Matt 25:45 NJK Project
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: Mountain Man] #131670
03/11/11 03:02 AM
03/11/11 03:02 AM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
Originally Posted By: Mountain Man
The idea that "there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain" can be interpreted to mean sin and death will continue to play out in the New Earth is hard to swallow. Ellen wrote:

"But we desire to enter heaven, for there, there is no disappointment, no sorrow, no sin, no one who shall say, "I am sick." There, there is no burial train, no mourning, no death, no parting, no broken hearts; and Jesus is there, peace is there. {ST, February 8, 1892 par. 4}

If, as you say, sin and death will continue to play out in the New Earth, why, then, did Ellen say, There will be "no sin . . . no disappointment . . . no parting"?


I think you are overstating my view here with you manifest ‘playing out’ understanding. I am not saying that sin will be a normative development in Heaven, as this implies. To the contrary, I am saying that, indeed unlike the past 6000+ year GC, it will not at all be allowed to “play out” anymore. It will instead be “nipped in the bud” indeed even at the (mentally) “devising stage” as stated in Nahum 1:9 as God can easily expose anyone who chooses to engage in such thoughts as Lucifer had done, to God’s knowledge, before beginning to express them out loud (PP 37.1; cf. Ezek 28:15).

So I do not see EGW’s statement here as preventing this Theologically-realizable, ever possible, reality. Indeed, Theologically-speaking, there can, and will, always be the possibility that ‘there will be one who desires to pervert the freedom that God had granted to His creatures.’ (PP 35.1).

As you should also properly know and understand, EGW is not the final arbitrator in matter of Theological understanding or Biblical Truth, and she indeed did not understand, at least for most of her ministry, the full Truth about ‘God and the Future.’ So this Theological understanding may have never come to her mind as with many other “fuller” and even correct truths. Notice, also that EGW’s emotional and exhortational statement, which may thus all be “by permission and not commission” is saying, with specifications, much more than it was revealed in Rev 21:4. The fact that God will then work to nip any of these possible rebellions in the bud will indeed assure that “distress” and any such adverse resulting feelings from again becoming the norm.

Also notice the rest of what EGW interestingly says in that Signs article:

Originally Posted By: SOP ST, February 8, 1892 par. 4
Oh, we must be with him, for in his presence is fullness of joy, at his right hand there are pleasures forevermore! And it is here that we must behold him, and become changed into his image. "We all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." Oh, it is important that we behold him here by the eye of faith, that we may be made like him, but what will it be to behold him as he is without one dimming veil between?


Note: She is also here (merely!) calling us to, prepatorily, do “in faith” what we will manifestly do and have to do, once we get to Heaven.

That all supports the Theological point that I had advance earlier in this post that, many will be saved despite not having had formed full/perfect Christlike/Christian characters but will have a chance to improve them in heaven, however with their sinful characters having been excised and expunged from their “psyche”. However it is pointedly because of such, effectively, “half-baked”/incomplete, even Christian characters which they will have to freely improve, indeed as they, yet still by choice, behold the glory and perfection of Christ, as EGW describes here, that a “base devising of evil ways” can occur. So this “hazardous” “growing up in Christ” may be done during the period of the Millennium and maybe even beyond, especially as we are return to this very same planet and now have to build up our lives and livelihood, freely, i.e., out of our own planning and organization, sharing and allocating the variety resources that God has provided for us. (If our history means anything, as it significantly does in this GC, some “half-baked” (Protestant) Christians will probably, once again, staunchly-recommend Capitalism!!)

This all accords with the Biblical/SOP related fact that not everyone who God will justly/righteously redeem, will have reached the same full Christian character, knowledge and/or development.


“Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.” Matt 25:45 NJK Project
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: NJK Project] #131678
03/11/11 01:47 PM
03/11/11 01:47 PM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
Originally Posted By: NJK Project
As you should also properly know and understand, EGW is not the final arbitrator in matter of Theological understanding or Biblical Truth,...


As (another) case in point that EGW was not inerrant in what she stated “by permission,” (i.e., based upon her understanding, even when based upon a vision), I have just posted on my blog a correction, from her own writings which substantively showed that she wrongly placed the vision of the Ascension of Christ at the end of DA instead of between Chapters 82 & 83 when Christ first ascended to Heaven after his resurrection. See Note #14 in this post.


“Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.” Matt 25:45 NJK Project
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: NJK Project] #131682
03/11/11 02:40 PM
03/11/11 02:40 PM
Tom  Offline
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
Originally Posted By: NJK
T:Had Satan and his host then been left to reap the full result of their sin, they would have perished; but it would not have been apparent to heavenly beings that this was the inevitable result of sin. A doubt of God's goodness would have remained in their minds as evil seed, to produce its deadly fruit of sin and woe.

NJK:This “full result” in context speaks of the immediate destruction of Satan and his host for having sin by opposing the government of God, prior to sin having been allowed to fully develop.


No it doesn't. If you read the paragraphs in question, it can be seen to be saying the reverse. She writes over and over again, some 9 or 10 times, that the destruction of the wicked is NOT due to something being done to them by God, but is the result of their own choice. She could not have made the organic connection any clearer here. For example:

Quote:
This is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God.


Again:

Quote:
The rejecters of His mercy reap that which they have sown.


One more:

Quote:
God is the fountain of life; and when one chooses the service of sin, he separates from God, and thus cuts himself off from life.


And she continues along this line.

The context is an organic relationship, rather than something artificially imposed by God as a punishment.

Quote:
There is no mention or implication here at all by the SOP that “It took the cross to make the connection between sin and death clear.”


This is missing both the point in the immediate context, and of the chapter as whole. The entire chapter, "It is Finished," is about what the cross accomplished. It explains this for 7 pages or so. The last page discusses the destruction of the wicked in the context of understanding what the cross accomplished. One of the things the cross accomplished was making clear what happens at death. The paragraph that speaks of the angels not understanding this makes this point clear. That is, the angels didn't understand, until the cross, that Satan's demise would be due to sin, if God left Satan to reap the full result of his sin.

Quote:
It is simply how sin exactly, we fully develop, will bring about death, that is the issue here as explicitly stated in the preluding 763.4-764.1. (This is what I mean by eisogesis and not allowing the text to plain read for itself, but reading it through one’s own theological views.)


It seems only eisogesis could explain not perceiving that DA 764 and the rest is bringing out the organic relationship of sin and death, since the point is repeated so many times, and in so many ways, in such a short passage. DA 763.4-764.1 is simply quoting Scripture. It is following this that the Scripture is explained, and it is explained in terms of an organic relationship between sin and death.


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: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: Mountain Man] #131683
03/11/11 02:46 PM
03/11/11 02:46 PM
Tom  Offline
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
Quote:
APL:(quoting EGW)In order to possess an endless existence, man must continue to partake of the tree of life. Deprived of this, his vitality would gradually diminish until life should become extinct.(end quote)


Originally Posted By: Tom
Does this mean you think this passage is implying that entropy did exist before there was sin?


I personally see the EGW statement here pointedly saying that such “entropy” only began when man/nature would be “dperived” of the fruit of life.


Then man could not have been created in a condition to naturally die, since there was no entropy. One could say man was created in a condition in which he would die only if he disobeyed God.


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: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: NJK Project] #131686
03/11/11 04:12 PM
03/11/11 04:12 PM
APL  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2020

5500+ Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
Originally Posted By: NJK
Is it only me, but I clearly see that this SOP quote completely disprove your ‘genetical misinformation injection through the forbidden fruit’ hyposthesis as it relates that the fruit itself was completely harmless. The pivotal issue here was that eaten of it would concretely prove a decided and deliberate disobedience to God. And the harmful consequence of this would come to be physically realized by God having to banned such a now sinful man from eating of the Tree of Life. So as I continue to see it, the harm that occurred in man and nature came from this withdrawal of the ‘supernaturally empowered’ Fruit of Life from their system, which caused it to become self-corrupt.

As EGW says elsewhere, ‘the fruit was not poisonous’ and if something had been injected it from the time when God had banned it, then I think EGW would correspondingly have been given such a revelation, just as she was spiritually impressed, if not directly “shown”, that it was ‘harmless’ and ‘not poisonous’.
This does not prove it. The fruit itself was fine. But once God said, "do not eat of it", it became a grievous crime. Was this an arbitrary command of God? I think not.

I agree that the fruit of the Tree of Life was necessary to sustain life. And probably will in the world to come (Rev 2:7).

It is clear from EGW that other worlds had a tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil. See {EW 39.3}.

Satan was not out to kill Adam and Eve. He was out to win their allegiance. So it is fair to write "There was nothing poisonous in the fruit of the tree of knowledge itself, nothing that would cause death in partaking of it."{ST, February 13, 1896 par. 7} True statement! This does not disprove the genomic view hypothesis. It actually is in its favor, as TEs have their highest concentration in the genes that code for the CNS. What happened when Eve ate the fruit?
Originally Posted By: EGW
She ate, and thinking she felt the sensation of a new and more exalted life, she bore the fruit to her husband. The serpent had said that she should not die, and she felt no ill effects from eating the fruit,—nothing which could be interpreted to mean death, but, instead, a pleasurable sensation, which she imagined was as the angels felt. Her experience stood arrayed against the positive command of Jehovah, yet Adam permitted himself to be seduced by it. {CTBH 42.2}
A pleasurable sensation - just like drugs can cause a pleasurable sensation leading to addiction. Addictions cause interesting changes in gene expression but I digress. Satan was out to take man captive. 2 Timothy 2:26 AKJV "And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will."
Originally Posted By: EGW
She expressed greater, higher love for him than before her disobedience, as the effect of the fruit she had eaten. He saw in her no signs of death. She had told him of the happy influence of the fruit, of her ardent love for him, and he decided to brave the consequences. He seized the fruit and quickly ate it, and, like Eve, felt not immediately its ill effects. {ST, January 23, 1879 par. 1}
This statement does not say there were no ill effects. It says that the effects were not immediately felt. It very well could have been a long time coming. They soon felt they were naked. There sure were no other people around to embarrass them. And very soon after, the love they expressed for each other was thrown out and Adam blamed God and "the woman" Genesis 3:12. Adam and Eve's allegiance had changed.

The problem I see with the idea that sin is only in the mind, is that then how do you explain from the Bible, why there are thorns and thistles? Genesis 3:18. EGW explains this and I think I already quoted, that it was via genetic engineering.
Originally Posted By: EGW
All tares are sown by the evil one. Every noxious herb is of his sowing, and by his ingenious methods of amalgamation he has corrupted the earth with tares. {16MR 247.2}
I think there is no doubt that Satan can do genetic engineering. All creation groans and pains under sin, Romans 8:22. Another example of engineering:
Originally Posted By: EGW
Satan gathered the fallen angels together to devise some way of doing the most possible evil to the human family. One proposition after another was made, till finally Satan himself thought of a plan. He would take the fruit of the vine, also wheat, and other things given by God as food, and would convert them into poisons, which would ruin man's physical, mental, and moral powers, and so overcome the senses that Satan should have full control.
Some of the yeasts that are used in making alcohol have lost metabolic pathways such that they produce alcohol, and great expense to themselves. And what has caused this? Transposable genetic elements... You can't blame the travail of all nature to the removal of the Tree of Life alone. No where does it say that animals were required to eat of the tree, and certainly not plants. But plants and animals have all infested by transposable elements.


Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: NJK Project] #131688
03/11/11 04:18 PM
03/11/11 04:18 PM
APL  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2020

5500+ Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
Originally Posted By: apl
I asked:
Are you saying that if Man had not been barred from the Tree of Life, that out nature would have remained perfect?

to which you responded:
Originally Posted By: NJK
For some reason, you have clouded, even misconstrued, my straightforward, and straight-flowing, statement here. I clearly, at least to me, said that Man (first) fell and then, as a “caused” result, the Tree of Life, which would maintain his physical perfection, was removed thus allowing for this physical/genetic self-corruption. So clearly I had implied and actually explicitly expressed that ‘their nature had become fallen/“imperfect” before that removal.’

I guess I'm confused by your reaction to my question, which you did not answer! Let me rephrase the question, if the Tree of Life was NOT removed, and the Adam was allowed to eat of it, would his nature have been restored to perfection?

Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: NJK Project] #131690
03/11/11 05:30 PM
03/11/11 05:30 PM
Mountain Man  Offline OP
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019

20000+ Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
Originally Posted By: NJK Project
Originally Posted By: Mountain Man
The idea that "there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain" can be interpreted to mean sin and death will continue to play out in the New Earth is hard to swallow. Ellen wrote:

"But we desire to enter heaven, for there, there is no disappointment, no sorrow, no sin, no one who shall say, "I am sick." There, there is no burial train, no mourning, no death, no parting, no broken hearts; and Jesus is there, peace is there. {ST, February 8, 1892 par. 4}

If, as you say, sin and death will continue to play out in the New Earth, why, then, did Ellen say, There will be "no sin . . . no disappointment . . . no parting"?


I think you are overstating my view here with you manifest ‘playing out’ understanding. I am not saying that sin will be a normative development in Heaven, as this implies. To the contrary, I am saying that, indeed unlike the past 6000+ year GC, it will not at all be allowed to “play out” anymore. It will instead be “nipped in the bud” indeed even at the (mentally) “devising stage” as stated in Nahum 1:9 as God can easily expose anyone who chooses to engage in such thoughts as Lucifer had done, to God’s knowledge, before beginning to express them out loud (PP 37.1; cf. Ezek 28:15).

So I do not see EGW’s statement here as preventing this Theologically-realizable, ever possible, reality. Indeed, Theologically-speaking, there can, and will, always be the possibility that ‘there will be one who desires to pervert the freedom that God had granted to His creatures.’ (PP 35.1).

As you should also properly know and understand, EGW is not the final arbitrator in matter of Theological understanding or Biblical Truth, and she indeed did not understand, at least for most of her ministry, the full Truth about ‘God and the Future.’ So this Theological understanding may have never come to her mind as with many other “fuller” and even correct truths. Notice, also that EGW’s emotional and exhortational statement, which may thus all be “by permission and not commission” is saying, with specifications, much more than it was revealed in Rev 21:4. The fact that God will then work to nip any of these possible rebellions in the bud will indeed assure that “distress” and any such adverse resulting feelings from again becoming the norm.

Also notice the rest of what EGW interestingly says in that Signs article:

Originally Posted By: SOP ST, February 8, 1892 par. 4
Oh, we must be with him, for in his presence is fullness of joy, at his right hand there are pleasures forevermore! And it is here that we must behold him, and become changed into his image. "We all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." Oh, it is important that we behold him here by the eye of faith, that we may be made like him, but what will it be to behold him as he is without one dimming veil between?


Note: She is also here (merely!) calling us to, prepatorily, do “in faith” what we will manifestly do and have to do, once we get to Heaven.

That all supports the Theological point that I had advance earlier in this post that, many will be saved despite not having had formed full/perfect Christlike/Christian characters but will have a chance to improve them in heaven, however with their sinful characters having been excised and expunged from their “psyche”. However it is pointedly because of such, effectively, “half-baked”/incomplete, even Christian characters which they will have to freely improve, indeed as they, yet still by choice, behold the glory and perfection of Christ, as EGW describes here, that a “base devising of evil ways” can occur. So this “hazardous” “growing up in Christ” may be done during the period of the Millennium and maybe even beyond, especially as we are return to this very same planet and now have to build up our lives and livelihood, freely, i.e., out of our own planning and organization, sharing and allocating the variety resources that God has provided for us. (If our history means anything, as it significantly does in this GC, some “half-baked” (Protestant) Christians will probably, once again, staunchly-recommend Capitalism!!)

This all accords with the Biblical/SOP related fact that not everyone who God will justly/righteously redeem, will have reached the same full Christian character, knowledge and/or development.

I'm sorry, but you lost me. Ellen wrote:

Quote:
But we desire to enter heaven, for there, there is no disappointment, no sorrow, no sin, no one who shall say, "I am sick." There, there is no burial train, no mourning, no death, no parting, no broken hearts; and Jesus is there, peace is there. {ST, February 8, 1892 par. 4}

What is your opinion of this insight? Did she overstate the point and misrepresent truth?

Regarding the completion of the investigative judgment, John quoted Jesus when he wrote, "He that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still." There is no indication they will sin again in the New Earth.

Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: Mountain Man] #131692
03/11/11 06:16 PM
03/11/11 06:16 PM
Tom  Offline
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
Originally Posted By: APL
The problem I see with the idea that sin is only in the mind, is that then how do you explain from the Bible, why there are thorns and thistles? Genesis 3:18. EGW explains this and I think I already quoted, that it was via genetic engineering.


This is what I have thought. She uses the term "amalgamation," but it's difficult to think of what else this could be referring to, if not what we would call "genetic engineering."


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.
Page 31 of 105 1 2 29 30 31 32 33 104 105

Moderator  dedication, Rick H 

Sabbath School Lesson Study Material Link
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
Most Recent Posts From Selected Public Forums
Seven Trumpets reconsidered
by Karen Y. 03/27/24 09:35 AM
Are the words in the Bible "imperfect"?
by Kevin H. 03/24/24 09:02 PM
The Story of David and Goliath
by ProdigalOne. 03/23/24 08:06 PM
Global Warming Farce
by kland. 03/22/24 10:17 AM
Carbon Dioxide What's so Bad about It?
by kland. 03/21/24 12:34 PM
The Value of Bible Types
by TruthinTypes. 03/17/24 06:22 PM
Orion Which Every One on the Globe Can See
by Rick H. 03/16/24 06:26 PM
'Prophet' Summons UFOs
by ProdigalOne. 03/16/24 02:19 AM
Will You Take The Wuhan Virus Vaccine?
by dedication. 03/11/24 06:31 PM
Get That Razor Wire Up!
by kland. 03/05/24 12:49 PM
Messages for This Time
by ProdigalOne. 03/04/24 05:54 AM
The Lake of Fire is Hell
by Rick H. 03/02/24 05:01 PM
Adventist Agriculture
by kland. 02/29/24 12:33 PM
Most Recent Posts From Selected Private Forums of MSDAOL
The Wound Is Healed! The Mark Is Forming!
by Rick H. 03/27/24 10:36 PM
Are we seeing a outpouring of the Holy Spirit?
by Rick H. 03/24/24 06:50 PM
Time Is Short!
by Rick H. 03/24/24 06:45 PM
Climate Change and the Sunday Law
by Rick H. 03/24/24 06:42 PM
WHAT IS THE VERY END-TIME PROPHECY?
by Rick H. 03/23/24 06:03 PM
Digital Identity Control
by Rick H. 03/23/24 02:08 PM
A.I. - The New God?
by Rick H. 03/23/24 01:59 PM
Christian Nationalism/Sunday/C
limate Change

by ProdigalOne. 03/16/24 08:38 PM
Perils of the Emerging Church Movement
by Rick H. 03/16/24 06:30 PM
Is There A Connection Between WO & LGBTQ?
by Kevin H. 03/12/24 09:20 PM
A Second American Civil War?
by Daryl. 03/04/24 06:14 PM
Forum Announcements
Visitors by Country Since February 11, 2013
Flag Counter
Google Maritime SDA OnLine Public Forums Site Search & Google Translation Service
Google
 
Web www.maritime-sda-online.com

Copyright 2000-Present
Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine (formerly Maritime SDA OnLine).

LEGAL NOTICE:
The views expressed in this forum are those of individuals
and do not necessarily represent those of Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine,
as well as the Seventh-day Adventist Church
from the local church level to the General Conference level.

Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine (formerly Maritime SDA OnLine) is also a self-supporting ministry
and is not part of, or affiliated with, or endorsed by
The General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists headquartered in Silver Spring, Maryland
or any of its subsidiaries.

"And He saith unto them, follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men." Matt. 4:19
MARITIME 2ND ADVENT BELIEVERS ONLINE (FORMERLY MARITIME SDA ONLINE) CONSISTING MAINLY OF BOTH MEMBERS & FRIENDS
OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH,
INVITES OTHER MEMBERS & FRIENDS OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD WHO WISHES TO JOIN US!
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1