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
ProdigalOne
ProdigalOne
Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,168
Joined: June 2015
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), 2,970 guests, and 5 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 2 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Re: Are there contradictions in the writings of EGW? [Re: Mountain Man] #132477
04/08/11 08:26 PM
04/08/11 08:26 PM
K
kland  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2024

5500+ Member
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,416
Midland
Originally Posted By: Mountain Man
Originally Posted By: kland
E: "Think ye that the Father yielded up His dearly beloved Son without a struggle? No, no. It was even a struggle with the God of heaven, whether to let guilty man perish, or to give His beloved Son to die for him."

N: Of course Mountain Man, we don’t know exactly why Jesus was pleaded with the Father and why He made three appearance to do this pleading but it can be logically inferred. First of all. I have the foundational exegetical approach that God does not “play act”. So I believe that all that was being done here was candid and genuine.

K: Exactly. If God and/or Jesus knew the future as "already played out", then it can only be concluded these three times was an act, a pretending, a farce. However, I don't agree completely with your pleading part. Joh 16:26 "In that day you will ask in My name, and I do not say to you that I shall pray the Father for you; 27 "for the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved Me, and have believed that I came forth from God." Pleading could mean something more than God is wanting to kill us, but Jesus steps in and convinces Him of something different. Pleading could mean pleading together as a cohesive unit for a solution to pardon man.

I also agree the Godhead does not play act for the benefit of uninformed FMAs. However, they do sometimes role play. For example, Jesus isn't literally the Son of the Father. But they use such terms for our benefit.

I also agree the Son didn't plead 3 times with the Father to persuade Him not to "let guilty man perish" as if the Father was less inclined, determined to save and redeem mankind. I believe the Father was torn between His love for Jesus and His love for mankind. He loved them equally and could not bear the thought of losing either one. This does not, however, imply neither the Father nor the Son knew with certainty the outcome. That is, they both knew with absolute certainty Jesus would most surely succeed on the cross.




Quote:
I also agree the Son didn't plead 3 times with the Father to persuade Him not to "let guilty man perish" as if the Father was less inclined, determined to save and redeem mankind.
Is that to "role play" so that we can feel he made an effort or hard decision? Because, if they both knew with absolute certainty, then neither could be torn nor at risk for failure. But you did say "most surely" as if there were some doubt.?

Re: Are there contradictions in the writings of EGW? [Re: kland] #132503
04/09/11 11:23 AM
04/09/11 11:23 AM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
Originally Posted By: kland
Exactly. If God and/or Jesus knew the future as "already played out", then it can only be concluded these three times was an act, a pretending, a farce.


Also from what I Theologically know and understand on this topic I rather say: ‘if the even actually existed.’ God’s plan of the future is what a computerized 3D simulation model is to the actual construction when it will be built.

I actually did not want to involve this Theological issue here as I do not see it as crucial to the understanding here. This direct SOP revelation is enough. Indeed I only see that this only speaks against the classical view of foreknowledge and that vision is what actually sealed the understandings that I was getting from the Bible about the Foreplanning view.

Originally Posted By: kland
However, I don't agree completely with your pleading part.

Joh 16:26 "In that day you will ask in My name, and I do not say to you that I shall pray the Father for you;
27 "for the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved Me, and have believed that I came forth from God.

Pleading could mean something more than God is wanting to kill us, but Jesus steps in and convinces Him of something different.


I did not say, nor mean, that ‘God wanted to kill us.’ He, knowing of the great risk here, without any certainty of success, much more preferred to let man die than risk Christ. Just think of the great risk in needing a sinless life as also 100% man living 4000 years after the Fall. Indeed, as it transpired in history, how many people believed in Christ at the Cross. Barely a handful and apparently on John from his own disciples. God knew here that the faith based method that were shown in Christ incarnate life and ministry would be indispensably necessary for this atonement to be acceptable. As the angel said God’s weighed choices were “whether to let guilty man perish, or to give His beloved Son to die for him.” (EW 153.1)

Originally Posted By: kland
Pleading could mean pleading together as a cohesive unit for a solution to pardon man.


I think EGW would have expressed that distinct notion. E.g., ‘and they were pleading together to accomplish this...’ No need to “plead” in such a common endeavor as there would be not opposition. If they both wanted to do this would would, especially in that enclosed seclusion be telling them otherwise.

Indeed the word “plead” also has its pointed, one sided meanings of: ‘appeal or request earnestly; Offer as an excuse or as a humble request for help from someone in authority; an answer (by the accused party) indicating why a legal matter should be dismissed. [In this case Christ was pleading why the sin of man should be given this opportunity to be atoned for.

Also the statement by the angel asking: “Think ye that the Father yielded up His dearly beloved Son without a struggle? The word “yield” pointedly means: “end resistance, as under pressure or force; give over; surrender or relinquish to the physical control of another; give in, as to influence or pressure; move in order to make room for someone for something; cause to happen or be responsible for (by giving in); be willing to concede; be (fatally) overwhelmed; be flexible under stress of physical force; cease opposition; stop fighting; consent reluctantly.. These are all notions of even two equal sides having one side give in to the other. So that all unequivocally says to me that there were two opposing, and equally matched, views here. That is then seen with Jesus twice leaving and then returning to continue to “plead.” Seems to me that God was showing Jesus how incredibly risky this was going to be and momentarily convincing him.

Furthermore, as stated in the SOP, there was an eternal cost whether successful or not to this plan:

Originally Posted By: SOP 7ABC 456.4
In taking our nature, the Saviour has bound Himself to humanity by a tie that is never to be broken. Through the eternal ages He is linked with us.... He gave Him not only to bear our sins, and to die as our sacrifice; He gave Him to the fallen race. To assure us of His immutable counsel of peace, God gave His only-begotten Son to become one of the human family, forever to retain His human nature. ... God has adopted human nature in the person of His Son, and has carried the same into the highest heaven.--Ibid., p. 25.


“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: Are there contradictions in the writings of EGW? [Re: Mountain Man] #132504
04/09/11 11:32 AM
04/09/11 11:32 AM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
Originally Posted By: Mountain Man
I also agree the Godhead does not play act for the benefit of uninformed FMAs. However, they do sometimes role play. For example, Jesus isn't literally the Son of the Father. But they use such terms for our benefit.


Maybe they are indeed not “acting”, nor “role playing” anything. That is, Jesus in now His physical incarnate form became a Son of God by becoming a Son of Man. Humans are also called Son of God, even unfallen ones. So by that tangible position that He took Jesus also became just like a Son of God, at least in material form.

Also show me in the Bible/SOP where Jesus, before his incarnation is called the “Son of God” (of course outside of prophecies) In the OT, I see that He is called Michael and “the Angel of the Lord”.

Originally Posted By: Mountain Man
I also agree the Son didn't plead 3 times with the Father to persuade Him not to "let guilty man perish" as if the Father was less inclined, determined to save and redeem mankind. I believe the Father was torn between His love for Jesus and His love for mankind.


As explained above to kland, I do not see, especially the words, “yield” and “plead” to be two sided with Jesus’ offer being opposed by God.

Originally Posted By: Mountain Man
He loved them equally and could not bear the thought of losing either one.

vs.

This does not, however, imply neither the Father nor the Son knew with certainty the outcome. That is, they both knew with absolute certainty Jesus would most surely succeed on the cross.


That is Theo-logically and logically self contradictory. I don’t see Biblical support for the Future-knowledge certainty assumption/belief. (It’s telling to me that you only state maxims and truism and not Scripture for your view.)

The (as I understand from an 8 B.C. birth) 38 years of Jesus’s Life before the Cross were also a great risk.


“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: Are there contradictions in the writings of EGW? [Re: kland] #132547
04/10/11 02:40 PM
04/10/11 02:40 PM
Mountain Man  Offline
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019

20000+ Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
Originally Posted By: kland
E: "Think ye that the Father yielded up His dearly beloved Son without a struggle? No, no. It was even a struggle with the God of heaven, whether to let guilty man perish, or to give His beloved Son to die for him."

N: Of course Mountain Man, we don’t know exactly why Jesus was pleaded with the Father and why He made three appearance to do this pleading but it can be logically inferred. First of all. I have the foundational exegetical approach that God does not “play act”. So I believe that all that was being done here was candid and genuine.

K: Exactly. If God and/or Jesus knew the future as "already played out", then it can only be concluded these three times was an act, a pretending, a farce. However, I don't agree completely with your pleading part. Joh 16:26 "In that day you will ask in My name, and I do not say to you that I shall pray the Father for you; 27 "for the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved Me, and have believed that I came forth from God." Pleading could mean something more than God is wanting to kill us, but Jesus steps in and convinces Him of something different. Pleading could mean pleading together as a cohesive unit for a solution to pardon man.

M: I also agree the Godhead does not play act for the benefit of uninformed FMAs. However, they do sometimes role play. For example, Jesus isn't literally the Son of the Father. But they use such terms for our benefit. I also agree the Son didn't plead 3 times with the Father to persuade Him not to "let guilty man perish" as if the Father was less inclined, determined to save and redeem mankind. I believe the Father was torn between His love for Jesus and His love for mankind. He loved them equally and could not bear the thought of losing either one. This does not, however, imply neither the Father nor the Son knew with certainty the outcome. That is, they both knew with absolute certainty Jesus would most surely succeed on the cross.

K: Is that to "role play" so that we can feel he made an effort or hard decision? Because, if they both knew with absolute certainty, then neither could be torn nor at risk for failure. But you did say "most surely" as if there were some doubt.?

I do not believe the Father and Son were role playing when they met three times to discuss implementing the plan of salvation, the redemption of mankind. Knowing the outcome does not in the least lessen or eliminate the emotional and physical stress. As I assisted my wife with the birth of our 3 children, knowing the pain they were experiencing would eventually end did not in the least lessen their pain or my emotional stress.

Re: Are there contradictions in the writings of EGW? [Re: Mountain Man] #132548
04/10/11 02:44 PM
04/10/11 02:44 PM
Mountain Man  Offline
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019

20000+ Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
NJK, we do not see eye to eye as it relates to God's knowledge of the future.

Re: Are there contradictions in the writings of EGW? [Re: Mountain Man] #132559
04/10/11 09:01 PM
04/10/11 09:01 PM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
Originally Posted By: Mountain Man
I do not believe the Father and Son were role playing when they met three times to discuss implementing the plan of salvation, the redemption of mankind. Knowing the outcome does not in the least lessen or eliminate the emotional and physical stress. As I assisted my wife with the birth of our 3 children, knowing the pain they were experiencing would eventually end did not in the least lessen their pain or my emotional stress.


It seem that you are implicitly contradicting you previous views, Mountain Man, without any explanation! I.e.:

Originally Posted By: Mountain Man
I also agree the Godhead does not play act for the benefit of uninformed FMAs. However, they do sometimes role play. For example, Jesus isn't literally the Son of the Father. But they use such terms for our benefit.


When in this SOP vision were they ‘role playing’ then, as implied by that comment made here?

It also is comical to me, as repeatedly and patently done before in my various discussions, that whenever someone argument is countered and defeated with a Biblical response, the default reaction is vexatiously indifferent silence!?? (cf. e.g., Matt 22:46; Luke 20:26 - especially considering that it was you al who started this thread to question/challenge my view here!? Or should I just assume Luke 20:39, 40). Yet ‘a dense forest is still being seen and claimed’?!?

Given that the “innate and most passionate” wrath/anger of God for sin had to be inflicted on Christ in this Sacrifice, but as that God Himself revealed:

Originally Posted By: Bible (cf. NASB)
But the LORD (=Yahweh) was pleased/delighted to crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the LORD (=Yahweh) will prosper in His hand. (Isa 53:10)


It is clear to me that the suffering that God would have to inflict on Jesus was not the issue, since He was ‘(passionately) pleased/delighted’ to do it. Using your example, that would be as self-contradictory and irrational as you expressing to your wife and your friends that you are pleased/delighted to make your wife suffer in her delivery and indeed doing so. As the Bible also says: ‘God does not need to ‘put on a disguise [#08132], (=in order to ‘put on an act’)’’. (Mal 3:6) I.e., especially in such a “planning” application, He says what He (always) means, and meant, for that Wise (Prophetic) Plan.

In your Classical Foreknowledge view, to say here that ‘He was/will be pleased/delighted’ which He always knew He would be makes it’s a hypocritical lie to say/express/play act at anytime in the past that ‘He was not pleased/delighted in this.

Perhaps Jesus, when made aware of these necessary detailed became e.g., ‘troubled’. By this process of Biblical elimination, it then seems to me that it was instead the great risk involved leading up to, and through the cross that was the issue at hand. (Cf. my blog post on this).


“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: Are there contradictions in the writings of EGW? [Re: Mountain Man] #132560
04/10/11 09:02 PM
04/10/11 09:02 PM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
Originally Posted By: Mountain Man
NJK, we do not see eye to eye as it relates to God's knowledge of the future.


This is actually not a matter of seeing ‘eye to eye’. I have yet to see any Scriptural and Direct SOP Revelations support for your view, but indeed simply “maxims and (supposed) truisms”. Your view most logically, outrightly and innately stands against what you are claiming for this SOP Direct Revelation.


“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: Are there contradictions in the writings of EGW? [Re: Mountain Man] #132571
04/11/11 12:25 AM
04/11/11 12:25 AM
Tom  Offline
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
Originally Posted By: Rosangela
I don’t think this shows that the plan of salvation was established after the fall of man. What I see here is that (1) it was communicated to the angels after the fall of men, and (2) the moment of its implementation was a very difficult one, particularly for the Father.


The passage doesn't merely indicate that the implementation was very difficult, but points out that the decision itself had not been made. This is clear by a couple of things.

First of all, the angel points out the decision was a struggle. It could only have been a struggle if God was seriously considering an alternative, indicating that His mind hadn't been made up about it.

Secondly, the way the scene is itself related makes this clear. Jesus Christ went in three times to see the Father, at first His (Christ's) countenance showing distress and agitation. After the third time, His countenance changed. This indicates that something had happened to cause His countenance to change, and the thing that happened was that the Father decided to go through with the plan.


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 there contradictions in the writings of EGW? [Re: Tom] #132572
04/11/11 01:21 AM
04/11/11 01:21 AM
Rosangela  Offline OP
5500+ Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
I disagree.

Ephesians 1:4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him.

Quote:
First of all, the angel points out the decision was a struggle. It could only have been a struggle if God was seriously considering an alternative, indicating that His mind hadn't been made up about it.

No, it was a struggle because, although the decision had already been made, it could have been reversed.

Re: Are there contradictions in the writings of EGW? [Re: NJK Project] #132573
04/11/11 01:24 AM
04/11/11 01:24 AM
Mountain Man  Offline
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019

20000+ Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
Originally Posted By: NJK Project
M: NJK, we do not see eye to eye as it relates to God's knowledge of the future.

N: This is actually not a matter of seeing ‘eye to eye’. I have yet to see any Scriptural and Direct SOP Revelations support for your view, but indeed simply “maxims and (supposed) truisms”. Your view most logically, outrightly and innately stands against what you are claiming for this SOP Direct Revelation.

I've seen what happens when someone tries to discuss opposing views with you. You are convinced beyond doubt you are right. You are also convinced beyond doubt I am wrong. I see no value in continuing this discussion with you.

Page 2 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Moderator  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