Not really, not in the context of this discussion. What I'm trying to show is that each person decides WHO their authority will be. The very act of doing thus makes them their own authority. Therefore that makes them the highest authorhity.

As Christians, we choose to submit our authority to God. By quoting Scripture, Rosangela has demonstrated that she accepts God and his word as authoritative, and has submitted her authority to his.

There is a biblical principle that the word of God could not be contained in all the books of earth.

I do not accept anything but the word written in scripture as divinely inspired, except what God teaches us through the Spirit of Prophecy, and this is not limited to Ellen White.

Jones and Waggoner had the Spirit of God testifying through them for half of their mistry. Mrs White said she was inspired through their words to learn more of God. That is powerful. Many prophets of God are not even mentioned by name or written in scripture. But what we need, to find grace, is.

Even the flaws of scripture translation were permitted by God for a purpose. But when the Spirit of truth comes, the flaws in the translations disappear. The truth is revealed and we don't see those roadblocks any more.

Paul says things like "Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before, This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;... Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh". God wants us to experience the LIVING word, not just what is in the book but what Jesus wants to tell us NOW which will by no means contradict what He has already shown.

"And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him."

The Holy Spirit witnesses the things in the Fathers heart and reveals them to us in His time. If we didn't even have a book (like the Apostles didn't) God could still reveal more to us than what is written in scripture and it would be perfect, no need for translation. The Holy Spirit through Faith reveals God's word directly to our hearts. The bible is a written tool to get us there. There is no other standard. It is the proof that all led by God are speaking in His will. If it is not according to this word there is no light in it. But that does not mean we will find every single utterance recorded there exactly. There is a lot of information in condensed form in scripture. He sent people like Mrs White to expound upon His word so we can see the depth, but she is not going to be the final word on the matter. The elements she was shown will not be contradicted, EVER. We get to witness what God revealed through her and the prophets and He will build from that platform upwards.

The clues we need to get there are in scripture, but everything God wants to reveal to us is not spoon fed to us through the bible. We have to receive the Holy Ghost in order to even see what scripture represents in truth. How else could there be so many different doctrines that are claimed to be supported by scripture?

My point is, Mrs White was divinely permitted to witness the things she testified about, and after being corrected and submitting to the Spirit, her writings are in perfect harmony with the truth.

There can only be one truth. But it is a revelation, and even the Apostles had to learn to let go of their preconceived notions. The ones who did not were not permitted to see the deep things of God. Where is Thomas mentioned after the ascension? He would not believe and Jesus said blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.

I can tell you by experience (and I don't care who believes me) that the moment I saw the word of God and accepted His word as truth, I was permitted to go further in faith.

He will not let us see things that we are not ready for.

It is all about faith. The greatest gift we can receive is the faith that Jesus had, to believe God's word and put our souls in His care, totally relying upon His guidance. This is true faith not just a confession of words.

When we get to the door and open it, Jesus walks in and gives us more of His mana. Then we are tested to prove we have received it.

Then comes the next revelation. This can happen in a moment or a lifetime depending upon our reliance on His word; faith.

Reposted by me after being delayed till it was buried.

JAK, I'm just using my free will to accept the Word of God and, ultimately, God Himself as my authority. Do you equate free will with authority?

JAK,

I've been unable to participate in this discussion recently, and see now that there is much that has been commented here since I last posted. The direction seems to have adjusted to focus upon errors in the Bible and/or whether or not the Bible is fully inspired. I hope we do not ultimately decide that our authority includes choosing how much of God's Word is God's Word. (If it isn't inspired, it isn't from God, right?)

As for the "murder/kill" text you brought out, anyone who looks at the Hebrew will know that the KJV mistranslated that word to "kill" when it should have been "murder." The Bible itself further defines/distinguishes the two concepts. "Murder" is a special class of killing that is done out of hatred. If it is pre-meditated, it is "murder." If it is done strictly out of compliance with God's law and without hatred, it is not murder, simply killing. Such was the condition in cases of capital punishment, war, or the avengement of blood as commanded by God. The "avenger" (the nearest of kin to the one who was killed/murdered (note that this was to be determined by a judge, with at least two or three witnesses, as to whether the one killed had been "murdered" or was accidentally killed)) was asked to kill the one who had slain his relative without hatred, lying in wait, or pursuit. He was to execute the killing as an act of justice if/when he chanced to meet the killer of his kin. If he did so out of hatred or by pre-meditation/lying in wait, then he was a murderer and himself must face capital punishment. The cities of refuge were setup for those who killed, and they must live there to the death of the high priest if their case was not one of murder. If it was a murder, the judge in that city delivered him up to capital punishment.

It's a bit involved to explain the whole system in one paragraph, but the fact is, the Bible defines "murder" and "killing," and we have no need to presume to interpret the Bible based on our own opinions. As the Bible puts it, scripture is not of any "private interpretation." It defines itself.

That is what inspiration is all about.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

JAK, certain passages are too plain to require private interpretation. In such instances no one can justify odd or original conclusions.


Fortunately passages having to do with saving truths are among the ones that are too plain to be misunderstood.

So He allowed errors.
I could agree with that.

What, the errors? Or the Bible?

Ok. Errors not inspired.

The fact is what is inspired. The fact that errors are in the Bible is what is inspired? (Have you ever stopped to think that perhaps what YOU think are errors may not be errors?)

This kind of reasoning is starting to remind me of the one who basically said:
God is not the destroyer because He is the destroyer.


Speaking of....
D. Don't kill humans unless God tells you to.
=D. Yes.

Something is wrong to do unless God tells you to do something that is wrong.



Here's a good one:
I always tell the truth.
I am lying to you.

Does it? Wish you would show that. Seems like you've had a hard time demonstrating such in the past.

But wait. I thought you said it was done out of hatred. Now you introduce pre-meditated. Do you intend all pre-meditated killing is hatred?

Does God's law require killing?

Wait. What about this pre-meditated?

Ahhh. That's why you dropped the pre-meditated bit.


But with pre-meditation.
How does one not have hate towards one who killed your family member?

How does one go about killing someone without pursuing them? I could see that they could just drop the idea, but then when they appear in front of them, in brings up such hate they whack their head off. But then there's your contradiction again.

Wow. That is an incredible feat you expect! Is that supported by the Bible?

As long as it was not pre-meditated delivery.

I guess so!!!

So you claim. Maybe sometime you can show it?

Yes, opinions we've seen plenty of here.

This is what I have been trying to state.

Not precisely, and not in every instance, but they are closely related.

When we accept someone's interpretation of Scripture as being "true" we accept them as an authority. That person (or institution, as in the case of the church) could be wrong. The only REAL authority is God. But he has chosen to reveal his will through Scripture. Which, as pointed out earlier, is open to interpretation. Interpretation is a continuum, from totally wrong to absolutely correct, ie: TRUTH.

Our free will allows us to choose who our authory will be.

Welcome back. I hope your trip was productive, with just enough adventure to make it interesting.

We have side-tracked a little into the topic of authority, which I think is helpfull along the lines of accepting EGW as an authority. The overall tone of the discussion has remained extremly positive, and I appreciated this and the respect to varying views being shown.


I would need to know what you intend by this phrase before agreeing or disagreeing.

This text was used for illustrative purposes to show how many variations in interpretation there are. Which one is correct, and who determines that?

It looks like we may have to have a discussion regarding this phrase. It has been used several times recently. I don't disagree with it, but I think perhaps it is being applied incorrectly.

I agree with that 100%. There are some passages I take at absolute face value and there is (essentially) no discussion.