Will Eve be in Heaven?

She was deceived into sin through her weakness toward flattery and her desire for a higher position than that which God had designed her to have. Her sin capitulated the entire planet into following her lead, beginning with Adam and continuing with her descendants.

There are but four named-references to "Eve" in the Bible (using KJV). Two of these are in the Old Testament, and two are in the New. None of them speaks to Eve's salvation specifically.

The term "Adam" at times encompasses Eve as well. At other times it refers specifically to the male half of "Adam." We are told that "Adam" will be in Heaven. But I have not found any mention of Eve being there.

This may be a speculative study, as the facts are few. But hopefully it is somewhat thought-provoking to consider the strong possibility of Eve's absence from Heaven--at least until I am shown otherwise from someone who has found such an answer.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Here are the four named mentions of "Eve" in the Bible. There are peripheral mentions such as when she is called Adam's wife. But these also are few.



Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Here is the passage which I read that caused me to wonder if Eve will be saved.



It is noteworthy that, while giving such detail about this reunion in Heaven, Ellen White makes no mention of Eve. In fact, the usage of "Adam" appears to be in the singular form here, such as when he casts his "crown" at Jesus' feet. If Eve were with him, and included in the term "Adam," would there not be two crowns?

Food for thought.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Whose sin was worse? Eve's or Adam's? You say Eve's sin brought down the planet. Is not Adam more responsible? Eve was deceived. Adam was not. Adam is then ultimately responsible for taking down the human race. If Adam had not sinned, we would not have been in this mess. Yet Jesus would have died to save Eve. And is not Eve spoken about being saved? Yes!

1 Timothy 2:13-15 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

EGW was discussing the two Adams.

If EGW had been discussing Christ and Mary, she might have mentioned Adam and Eve.

APL,

Eve is not unambiguously addressed in the Timothy passage. To the contrary, there is strong evidence that the antecedent of the pronoun "she" harks back to "woman" in verses 9-12. Having once mentioned "Eve," Paul speaks of "the woman being deceived." This helps us know that he is speaking in the context of women in general, and not Eve only.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Gregory,

Why not two crowns? Why only one? Why is there never any place in Mrs. White's writings or the Bible that would indicate Eve's presence in Heaven?

The silence speaks volumes. Eve was the first human sinner. It would seem only natural for Mrs. White to have made at least one mention of her final state in Heaven if she were to be found there.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Who was the worst sinner - Eve? Or Adam???

Do you green read this to say Eve is lost, totally ruined? Why do you even ask the question of Eve's salvation? Me thinks there is an agenda here...

APL,

This question is not on topic to this thread, it happens to be irrelevant to the thread, and I will not speculate as to its answer. There is no way of knowing this side of heaven.

Adam lived 930 years. We do not know how long Eve lived, only that it must have been less than 1000 years--for God had promised them they would die "the day" they ate of the fruit. We are told precious little about their sinful lives beyond the garden of Eden. We do not know whether Eve may have turned bitter toward God during the course of those years or not.

Eve may have put a lot of blame upon herself. She may have felt too unworthy of God's love or attention--as many people today are tempted to feel as well. We do not have any positive indication that she will be in Heaven that I have yet found.

This thread deals with this end result and not the beginning that you may be wishing to look at. If you like, start another thread on that.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

APL,

There is no special agenda. It was a sincere question. I had not laid eyes upon that statement. Thank you for finding that. Perhaps that gives us a good clue.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

While John was contemplating the scenes of Horeb, the Spirit of Him who sanctified the seventh day came upon him. He contemplated the sin of Adam in transgressing the divine law, and the fearful result of that transgression. {SL 75.1}

Sin is the transgression of the law. If the sin of Adam brought such inexpressible wretchedness, requiring the sacrifice of God's dear Son, what will be the punishment of those, who, seeing the light of truth, set at nought the fourth commandment of the Lord? {4T 251.2}

I presented before my hearers the sin of Adam in the transgression of the Father's express commands. God made man upright, perfectly holy and happy; but he lost the divine favor and destroyed his own happiness by disobedience to the Father's law. The sin of Adam plunged the race in hopeless misery and despair. {4T 293.2}

God has seen fit plainly to present in His holy word the consequences of the sin of Adam, which opened the flood-gates of woe upon our world, that men might be warned not to do as did Adam. The penalty of sin is death; and to listen to the deceitful temptations of Satan, to venture in the path of transgression, is to imperil the soul. We are not to follow the words of men, however wise they may appear to be, unless their testimony is in harmony with a "thus saith the Lord." Temptations will come to us in the most seductive guise, but it is at our peril that we turn from the plain command of God to follow the assertions of men. {BEcho, December 17, 1894 par. 2}

Our first parents by their disobedience opened the floodgates of woe to the race, and notwithstanding we have before us their sad experience in transgression, and the terrible result, we do not cease to sin; but while we deplore the sin of Adam, which was attended with such fearful consequences, we follow in the same course and realize the penalty of our own sins; for which suffering we alone are accountable. The providence of God is not responsible for the woes of man; his own course of action brings the sure result. {FPR, March 30, 1879 par. 5}

The sin of Adam brought a deplorable state of things. {RH, February 24, 1874 par. 22}

Though the moral image of God was almost obliterated by the sin of Adam, through the merits and power of Jesus it may be renewed. Man may stand with the moral image of God in his character; for Jesus will give it to him. Unless the moral image of God is seen in man, he can never enter the city of God as a conqueror. {RH, June 10, 1890 par. 6}

In how short a time from the first sin of Adam did sin increase and spread like the leprosy. It is the nature of sin to increase. From generation to generation sin has spread like a contagious disease. {ST, December 20, 1877 par. 2}

I presented before my hearers the sin of Adam in the transgression of the Father's express commands. God made man upright, perfectly holy and happy; but he lost the favor of God, and destroyed his own happiness by disobedience of the Father's law. The sin of Adam plunged the race in hopeless misery and despair. {ST, August 1, 1878 par. 6}

Funny how all these quotes only mention Adam. Why do you think that is?

APL,

My opening post would answer that question. Go back and read it carefully, and if you still don't understand, study Genesis 5:2.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Adam chose to sin. And repeatedly, Adam's sin is the one pointed to that brought down the race. Adam could have stopped the problem, but chose to propagate it. Do you not find that interesting?

I think EGW has given you the answer.

Actually, it is. If Adam's sin was worse, and if He would be in heaven, why wouldn't Eve, who was deceived and did not sin fully knowing what she was doing? If Adam will be in heaven, we can be sure Eve will be, too.

Now that may not be on topic. And you have little support, if any.

kland,

Perhaps you are not aware that the sin of eating the forbidden fruit would not have been the only reason to keep either Adam or Eve out of Heaven. Unconfessed, unforgiven, unrepented of sins surely would, and may have followed in the wake of their original sin.

As for crimes of greater magnitude, consider murderers like David who will be in Heaven. Surely, kland, you do recognize that killing someone is more egregious than eating a piece of fruit.

Or are you under the mistaken impression that Adam and Eve only sinned in eating the fruit, and never sinned again afterward?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Was the ban on eating the fruit and arbitrary ban? Why is it that Adam's sin, eating the fruit, is presented to us as being so egregious?

To the contrary.



Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

This does not answer the second question. And it does not say WHY God banned the fruit.

I considers APL's citation to be of value.

Heaven is given, not based on the smallness of one's sin, but on the bigness of one's Savior. Even one infinitesimal sin is enough to bar one from heaven, so in this case, size does not matter.

The question to ask is not if Adam's sin was worse than Eve's, but if Eve's repentance was as deep as Adam's.

Thank you, Arnold, for putting this thread into its intended perspective.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Oh? So the issue is not whether or not one repented. It is whether we can measure the depth of one's repentance. If Eve did not repent as much as Adam repented, she will not find the salvation that was given to Adam?

Where in the Bible are we given a standard by which we can measure the depth of another's repentance?

Where in the Bible are we told that such is our task?

Where in the Bible are we told that salvation depends upon us reaching some pre-determined level of repentance?

How is that scale measured? Is it a scale from one to ten? Is it a scale from one to 1,000?

I will suggest that Biblically salvation depends more on what Christ did at Calvary than on what I do in repentance.

Yes, it is the work of Christ (the Holy Spirit) that produces repentance in me. So, if I do not reach that level of repentance, does that mean that Christ (the HS)is ineffective?

I'm sorry, but I think I inadvertently confused you there. I was contrastring the need for repentance over the need to measure the relative size of the sin of Adam and Eve. Read my sentence again and you'll see the A vs B structure. Let me rephrase it simpler: Don't focus on sin, but on repentance.

You must have missed the posts comparing the sins of Adam and Eve, and implying that their magnitudes were indicative of the certainty of salvation. Given the vehemence with which you tore into the idea of the depth of repentance, a concept frequently taught by the SOP BTW, I'm sure you would have demolished the idea that our salvation can be gauged by how bad our sins are, had you noticed.

Your gracious example of repentance is accepted and you are forgiven as the magnitude of your repentance meets the requirement.



NOTE: Please take this as my sometimes perverted sense of humor.

Good catch. However I thought he was suggesting that God did not forgive Eve. Or the level of forgiveness! How does one determine that?

I sense you are trying to lure off-topic.

What if someone kills someone for a 'good' reason?

You are as confused as Gregory was. Sorry about that.

The problem is the idea that since Adam will be in heaven, then it must mean that Eve will be in heaven because her sin was "less bad" than his. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the plan of salvation.

...and a fundamental misunderstanding of sin.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

True. While sins are not all of the same magnitude, all sin earns eternal death. The only escape is not in comparing our sins with another sinner's, but in comparing our righteousness to Christ's, leading to confession, repentance, and conversion.

Regarding the original post, I'm wondering why would anyone want to speculate on something as trivial to our own salvation as this. I hate to judge anyone's motives, but this behavior is a hallmark of the kind of pride that leads people to always be trying to find something strange and new in order to garner attention to themselves.

Your accusation is baseless. Perhaps you will be happy to know this so that your fears are alleviated.

I was intrigued by the Ellen White account that mentioned only Adam, and so I began to wonder about it. I am still wondering, as that statement provided by APL is not fully clear about the end result.

Are you not interested in this? If not, please feel under no obligation to participate in this topic.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

The gospel was first preached to Adam and Eve in Eden. They sincerely repented of their guilt, believed the promise of God, and were saved from utter ruin. {ST, April 22, 1886 par. 2}

That seems pretty clear that both Adam and Eve "were saved from utter ruin."

But what exactly is "utter ruin" to mean? for which life is it to be applied? It does seem to speak to their eternal destiny, but I'm not sure if that is the only application that might fit.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

They sincerely repented of their guilt, believed the promise of God, and were saved from utter ruin.

Repent, believe -> saved from utter ruin
Let's compare the two possibilities.

Temporal: Repentance and belief are not necessary for temporal success. In fact, sin is more successful in the short run. True, sin always comes with suffering, but it's temporal advantages often mitigate the pain. Furthermore, repentance and belief often lead to temporal ruin. Consider the faithful whose heads have been lopped off. Yes, an argument can be made both ways, but there will be an argument.

Eternal: In this sense, everything fits perfectly. Utter ruin is guaranteed without repentance and belief. Salvation from utter ruin is guaranteed by repentance and unbelief. There is no argument.

I'm not saying this is more plausible than your interpretation, Arnold, because that does seem pretty solid, but what about the fact that Adam and Eve did not die that literal day, and only can be said to have died in one of God's "millennial days" as defined in 2 Peter 3:8? Would that have been a saving from "utter ruin" at that time?

I guess, for me, it's still the time element that seems open to other understandings. Furthermore, I'm still confused as to why Ellen White speaks so strongly of Adam, the patriarch of the human family, being in Heaven, but breathes not a word of Eve, the first human sinner and mother of all mankind after the first couple. It just seems like there is a void in her statement about Adam in Heaven. Where is Eve? Why is she not mentioned?

Could it be that Eve is not mentioned in Heaven for another reason, if indeed she is to be there? Perhaps this is to highlight for us the fact that in Heaven, marriage will cease to be a part of our relationships.

It just seems that inspiration always has a reason for saying things and for omitting things. Sometimes those omissions are fraught with meaning.

Still wondering...

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

It has not been revealed to us, why do you continue to speculate? Why do you make so much of Eve being the first sinner? Adam could have stopped the problem, but he CHOSE to propagate the problem. As it is written Romans 5:12 Why, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed on all men,...

I'll remember this the next time you speculate about DNA.


I didn't say she was the first sinner. If I did, I apologize. She wasn't the first sinner.


First of all, "Adam" means the first man and woman, as Genesis 5:2 so well informs us. Secondly, "man" in Romans 5:12 very probably refers to EVE. Its Greek word is "anthropos," meaning man or woman. Since you might give more credence to the Bible lexicon, I'll quote it.



Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Green, if you sincerely repent of your guilt, believe in the promise of God, and are saved from utter ruin, does that mean you may be lost?

There's been thing said which has brought on accusations of something against women in the past, though it was denied.

I believe I've seen enough evidence. I'm ready to vote. I'm casting mine with the, "there's an agenda here".

There is. And God said there would be. If you read Genesis 3, you find three curses. Gen_3:14, the snake would crawl on its belly? Did God cause this to happen? No. Gen_3:17-18, the ground was cursed. Did God cause this to happen? No. These were the results of sin. Gen_3:16 is the one now in question here: Gen_3:16 To the woman he said, I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; in sorrow you shall bring forth children; and your desire shall be to your husband, and he shall rule over you. Is this God setting up some "gospel order" of man over woman? No. This was what was going to happen with men being the stronger sex ruling over the woman who was the weaker sex. One wonders if there was much difference in strength before sin, but we have as much information on that as we do whether Eve will be in heaven. The fact remains, that God just declared what was going to happen in Gen_3:16 as he did in verses 14, 15, 17 and 18. The plan of redemption envisions the restoration of all of mankind, back to where all has equal share in the Kingdom, where there is no differentiation between Jew or Greek, free or slave, male or female.

kland,

Can one sincerely repent of his or her guilt and yet apostatize from the truth later? Would Adam's salvation constitute being "saved from utter ruin," even if Eve were not saved? In other words, perhaps "utter ruin" could mean that ALL was lost. But if Adam were saved, all would not have been lost--only part.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Other than the argument of SILENCE (meaning no information is given) what makes you think Eve is lost? Neither scripture nor EGW indicate any such thing.

The depiction of Adam restored, is built on the same premise as Romans 5

5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
5:17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

We could start a whole thread arguing that death and sin came by ONE MAN, namely Adam, and that Eve's sin didn't have any bearing on the whole race going down.

Eve is not mentioned by Paul in this situation.
He doesn't say it was Eve who plunged the world into sin and death, it was Adam.
Adam stood at the head of the human race, he was the representative of this world, until he sold out to satan.
Adam lost the inheritance for the whole human race.
Christ won back that inheritance for the human race by taking Adam's place at the head of the human race and taking Adam's punishment and being victorious where Adam failed.
When Adam is restored it is symbolic of the whole of the redeemed human race being restored by Christ.

Dedication,

You appear to not have read the whole thread. I've already addressed the points you are asking about in your above post. Please read through again, and if you don't find where I have addressed these things, perhaps I'll take time to reiterate them.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

And do you have evidence that Eve apostatized from the truth later?

Nope. I only have the statement that omits any mention of Eve in heaven, while singularly referring to Adam being restored to his Eden home. But who else lived there? Is Adam to be there alone in Heaven? These are merely questions. You might call them "speculations." I am not speculating. I am just asking questions. Speculating is when people make a claim to something for which there is no evidence. I am not claiming that Eve will not be in Heaven. I do not know any more than what I am reading tells me. But the material I read leaves big questions in my mind about this.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I have read the thread, and I saw others write similar to what I just wrote in my last post, yet you have never addressed the issue as far as I can see. You see the quote by EGW as simply a welcome party for Adam, (minus Eve) not as the symbolic continuity with Romans 5:12-17

Why didn't Paul in Romans 5:12-17 mention Eve?

Why do you believe Paul didn't speak of Eve? I brought this up earlier in the thread, but perhaps as it was not addressed to you you didn't focus upon it. Romans 5:12 does not speak of the man Adam. It speaks of "anthropos," meaning "human." Certainly, Eve was human. So it could easily be understood here that Paul refers specifically to Eve, as she was the first sinner among humans, and Paul has used the word in singular form, coupled explicitly with the word "one," i.e. "one human."

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

It seems several of us got the idea you were saying Eve was not going to be in heaven.

But if you are going to speculate on what's that which is not written, then you should also consider other ones not specifically mentioned. Have you looked for Able, Seth, Noah, etc. being specifically mentioned?

Yes, verse 12 speaks of one generic person. However, verse 14 specifies Adam as the starting point of death. It seems that either Eve's sin did not earn death, or Adam is the representative for Eve.

Eve did not bring death on all humans, Adam did. Adam could have stopped it. He did not. Eve was deceived, Adam was not. The "one human", was Adam.

In the midst of Eden grew the tree of life, whose fruit had the power of perpetuating life. Had Adam remained obedient to God, he would have continued to enjoy free access to this tree and would have lived forever. But when he sinned he was cut off from partaking of the tree of life, and he became subject to death. The divine sentence, "Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return," points to the utter extinction of life. {DD 14.2}

Immortality, promised to man on condition of obedience, had been forfeited by transgression. Adam could not transmit to his posterity that which he did not possess; and there could have been no hope for the fallen race had not God, by the sacrifice of His Son, brought immortality within their reach. While "death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned," Christ "hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel." Rom_5:12; 2Ti_1:10. {DD 14.3}

If Adam did not sin, would Eve had died anyway?

what say the scriptures?

Paul said that the wages of sin is death. So if Eve had sinned, then she should have died.

Yet, Paul seems to have also said that death started with Adam. So until Adam sinned, there was no death.

That's both from Scripture. But it's not quite as obvious as a billboard. This will need some digging.

C'mon APL, step your game up. You didn't think there would be a question if it was obvious, did you?

Adam was the son of God. Luke 3:38
He stood at the head of the human race and he took down the whole human race with him.

For our redemption Christ became human
and as our elder brother now stands at the head of the human race, offering life to all who will accept Him.



"Adam’s sin in Eden plunged the human race into hopeless misery. But in the scheme of salvation a way has been provided for all to escape if they comply with the requirements. {CTr 215.2}

"In the fullness of time He (Jesus Christ) was to be revealed in human form. He was to take His position at the head of humanity by taking the nature but not the sinfulness of man (ST May 29, 1901).

"Christ laid aside his royal robe and kingly crown, and clothed his divinity with humanity, that he might stand at the head of the human race. In man's behalf Christ volunteered to pass over the ground where Adam fell, and, by living a life of perfect obedience, place the race on vantage-ground. {RH, November 3, 1904

"The Lord Jesus ... passed over the ground where Adam fell, but He was steadfast. He resisted the devil, and in behalf of the human race was Conqueror.

"He was passing over the ground where Adam fell. He was now where, if He endured the test and trial in behalf of the fallen race, He would redeem Adam’s disgraceful failure and fall, in our own humanity. {CTr 213.4}

Christ was now to stand where Adam stood, bearing humanity and overcoming in behalf of the race where Adam fell. Manuscript 11, 1886. {CTr 216.5}

Yes, but given an infinite number of iterations of the scenario, Adam would have chosen Eve every time. Adam LOVED Eve; just as God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son: over an infinite number of iterations? EVERY TIME!

Maybe that's simply because Adam's sin made all humans sinners. Had Adam sinned first, then Eve's sin would have completed the fall of the human race.

Had Adam not sinned, God could have replaced Eve.

He did not realize that the same Infinite Power who had from the dust of the earth created him, a living, beautiful form, and had in love given him a companion, could supply her place. {PP 56.2}

had Adam stayed true to God--
and only Eve sinned, she would be separated from Adam and die.
But death would not reign over the human race. She alone would die.

Paul was talking about death reigning from Adam to Moses.

Had Adam remained true, death would not be reigning over the human race.
Adam would have continued to live as the head of the human race. (probably God would give him another companion)

But Adam fell, thus he brought in death for the human race.
Christ brought life to the human race.

HELLO ASYGO - - The ANSWER IS OBVIOUS. It is very clear. And what Paul was talking about was the whole human race.

It does seem that way.

You're right. It is obvious. I see it clearly now. You've been very helpful. Thanks.

Yes, Arnold, Adam represents Eve. Genesis 5:1-2 tells us the following truth:



When people automatically equate "Adam" to only the male half of the human species which God created and named Adam, they ignore the more beautiful half.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

kland, I think you are missing the point. You seem so intent on finding wherewith to accuse me that you have lost sight of common decency in assuming the best of intentions in someone until proven otherwise. I am not resonating on the frequency of this post of yours. To help you understand the difference between your question and mine, let us suppose the following scenario:

Suppose that Mrs. White specifically mentions Noah's wife being in heaven and looking at the history of the Flood from the heavenly vantage point--but no mention is made of Noah in her account of the vision. Would you wonder if Noah would be there?

I would.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Maybe you're right. Maybe Eve wasn't exactly "human." She wasn't important. Or she just wasn't worth saving. Jesus wouldn't have had to die for her, since she would have just died by herself if Adam had not joined her and she would have been replaced with a lovelier creature--who was perfect again.

Is this really what you would like people to believe?

I'm glad I believe in a different God than that. I believe in a God with such love for us that He would have died for Eve too, not just for her husband. God would have died for just "one," and Eve was "one." She was not less than human. She was the "one" that introduced all of mankind to sin.



Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Well spoken, James. I appreciated that thought. Mrs. White agrees with the principle of it as well.



Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

You make an interesting jump. Were we not discussing what make all the human race sinners? You are claiming it was Eve, but Adam could have stopped it. It was Adam's sin that brought down the entire human race. Then you make the leap that Eve was not human, is that your view of women?

What is the wages of sin? That is the answer to your question on the fate of Eve. And the plan of salvation would have been implemented for one human, even Eve. But the whole human race would not have fallen, and THAT is the point.

To quote EGW "In consequence of Adam's sin, death passed upon the whole human race." {GC 544.2}.

APL,

"Adam" means both Eve and her husband. She sinned, and brought sin into the human race.

Actually, this thread might be more easily resolved if "Adam" were not so singularly "singular" in Mrs. White's account of his reunion with Christ in Heaven. There seems to be no mention of his other half at that point. This was what caused my wonderment at the beginning, and prompted me to start this discussion. The discussion really has nothing to do with who sinned first or how, or what it meant for the human race afterward--somehow that is apparently important to those who surmise I have an "agenda." The problem is, this sidetrack was not on my mind at all when I began this topic. So, who has the agenda?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

It is your agenda. The fact has been pointed out that it really was Adam's sin that plunged the human race into this mess. You think EGW was speaking of Adam and Eve in her quote. I don't. And there are many more like that. It was you that tried to show that because Eve was the first to sin, that it was she that was responsible. EGW says the Eve was spared total ruin. That should be enough evidence.

Matt. 10:37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
10:38 And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.


Adam's choice should not be upheld as the noble choice.
He should have trusted in God to provide for His future, and He should have entrusted Eve to God as well.

The acknowledgment that Eve alone would have died had Adam chosen to trust God, does not mean a plan of redemption would not be offered to her (it quite possibly would have) what it does mean is that death would NOT have gained dominion over the whole human race.

Yes, can you imagine what might have happened if Adam instead of coming up with his own solution had said to Eve: We have a problem. Let's go to God and see if there's a solution? He could have always eaten the fruit later, if he didn't like God's solution.

As has been pointed out more than once here, this topic is not about who gets blame for eating the forbidden fruit. Nor is it about who's sin was worse. Even the smallest sin, unrepented of, is sufficient to prevent one's salvation.

The topic addresses whether or not Eve will be in Heaven. Simple as that. So far, we have at least one statement speaking of Adam, but notably omitting any reference to Eve, in Heaven, and one statement speaking of them repenting and avoiding utter ruin. Here is the fuller context of that statement.



Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

And as has been pointed out, the specif omission of something does not mean it is not true.

Then there's the issue of a specific mention of them avoiding utter ruin.

Will Adam be in heaven? Will Eve be there? What about Noah, Solomon, any Pope or modern-day televangelist? What about William Miller or Ellen White, Harold Camping?

Three times JESUS CHRIST, a person no less that the Son of the living God, warned us NOT to enter into stupid and uncalled-for speculations, of things beyond our purview.

No.1
"But to sit on my right hand and on my left hand IS NOT MINE TO GIVE; but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared." (Mark. 10:40)

No.2
"But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, NEITHER THE SON, but the Father." (Mark 13:32)

No.3
"AND HE SAID UNTO THEM, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power." (Acts 1:7)

Is it right therefore for men and women to speak saying, "I saw this or that in heaven, that this or that will be saved, that such and such will be there"? It is the devil's own work to come in the quiet of the night, whispering in the ear of the gullible, "You are as God, and can see thinks wrapped in impenetrable darkness, things which pique the interest and desire of common men."

It is written, "The secret things belong unto the Lord our God:but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law." (Deut. 29:29)

.....
...

No, James, it is not speculation to speak of Adam in Heaven. We know he will be there. We also know William Miller will be there, and I think we have pretty solid evidence that Mrs. White will be there too.

I wouldn't try to claim any popes will be there.

Certainly, you are right, there are some things that are not revealed to us. It is true that we are not to merely speculate about everything. On the other hand, there is no harm in thinking about some things that are not doctrinally important. We are not obligated to omit from our thinking every non-salvific thought. There is no harm in seeking knowledge of all kinds. One may not know everything, but there is no harm in trying to know more. Not everything is revealed to us directly by God, for He also endowed us with intellect and ability to seek after knowledge ourselves.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

And the Biblical evidence for this is .... ?


Thank you.
...
..

Here's what we have for William Miller:



Of course, the Bible was not written after Miller's time, so we could not expect the Bible to tell us this about him.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

William Miller was like H.W. Armstrong and Harold Camping among others in our recent history. They were blind-sided by the express word of the Son of God. Told NOT to do something, they believe they had better knowledge and they ran ahead of God .... and fell.

Of them God says, "But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak ... even that prophet shall die." (Deut. 18:20) Interestingly now, however and IN SPITE OF THAT, you come along, bluntly contradict even that word (even after seeing their mistake) and declare William Miller will be in heaven. It's like God has given up on you and you begin to imagine your eyes were opened and you have become wiser than Daniel.
...
..

James,

What was Miller told not to do? In fact, you speak as if you do not know him. Have you read his writings? He never claimed to be a prophet. He was merely preaching the prophecies of the Bible. He did not have any prophecies to tell save those contained in the Bible itself.

Now, let's get....

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

James:

Green and I, in recent times, have often disagreed and I have spoken quite frankly about this. I do not agree with some of what he has said in this thread.

But, I must say that your responses to him have not treated him fairly and do not speak well of you.

Here is a partial example of what I am speaking of:



The above is simply not fair to Green.

He was just like H.W. Armstrong and Harold Camping. They never claimed to be prophets, but went about speaking of conclusions they had "discovered" in the Bible, of things contrary to the warning of Jesus Christ. And you ask "what was Miller told not do to"? You cannot see their error, can you? (John 9:41)

Will Eve be in heaven? That indeed is the topic of the thread; but even after seven pages of back and forth, there is no agreement on the subject. Therefore there is no Biblical indication of her salvation. To step into the gap, therefore, and seek to set her there or otherwise, is attempting to "sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: to ascend above the heights of the clouds; to be like the most High." (Isaiah 14:13-14) Are you the Judge of men?

.....
...

As I am reading this thread now, the quote supplied by APL tells me that Eve also repented and, therefore, should also be in heaven.

Here is another EGW quote that leads me to believe that Eve will also be in heaven:

Thank you Daryl. This whole thread has been chasing wind.

From your quote, what does disparaging the law include? Just the Sabbath? I think not. The whole law will come under attack.

After what I posted here in my two posts, and by the sudden death of this thread after my two posts and APL's response, are we consequently in agreement that Eve will be in Heaven?

Agreed.

I think the whole silence of Eve, in scripture and the testimonies, is because she was the first sinner. And I also believe, since God is the perfect redeemer, since this was the case, He would make a particularly important gesture in the rectification.

Since sin came into the lives of men through a woman, God gave directions to make a very important mysterious sacrifice using a miracle birth female all red heifer. Even the horns and hoofs were red, just as every inch of the body of Jesus was covered in blood when He sweat in Gethsemane to pay for the first sin of Eve.

Only seven Red Heifers were officially recognized after the rebuilding of the temple, but I only recognize six of them because Jesus was the seventh perfect sacrifice. The last officially recognized Red Heifer was in 70 AD just before Rome destroyed Jerusalem. Sounds like that one wasn't accepted.

The Red Heifer was a sign from God in the perfect order of the brazen serpent. They both point to the propitiation; the moment Jesus became sin for us, walking in our shoes in the judgment.

Jesus sweat blood at the exact place the Red Heifer was to miraculously walk without leading, out the gate, over the bridge, to the garden without a man touching her or guiding her (like Eve in the Garden). This was a sign that God was leading in the fulfillment of cleansing service. Every accepted sacrifice of God was granted a sign. In the Atonement the red cord would turn white if God accepted the offering etc...

The exact place Jesus sweat blood in the Garden, for over a thousand years the blood of the Red Heifer would land on that exact spot, from the finger of the priest at the Mikphad altar up the hill.

The Red Heifer is a symbol of Jesus dying our 2nd death in Gethsemane. The service was administered if you touched the dead.

The service pointed to the Most Holy Place in the sanctuary, and the veil was lifted every year at Yom Kipur/ Atonement in the time of the first temple a shaft of light like a spotlight would beam out of the Most Holy place and illuminate that spot in Gethsemane and the altar for the red Heifer Mikphad the place of numbering (144,000).

But these very important images are almost not mentioned in scripture... Mystery.

There was a laver there at the Miphkad altar. The laver in the court of the temple symbolized baptism. This laver on the mount of Olives symbolizes second baptism. Jesus had the second sign of the dove after His torment in Gethsemane, only found in the Testimonies of Ellen White. I believe she was shown things beyond the bible, but in the perfect Harmonie of scripture.

God's last great servant was a woman.

That's not true. It is written, "I will send the prophet Elijah to you before that great and dreadful day of the Lord comes." Mal. 4:5 Elijah was a man, wasn't he?

About Adam and Eve, where the Bible is silent, we should keep our mouths shut.

/

Let's continue the discussion on Elijah the prophet at the following link:

http://www.maritime-sda-online.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=158142#Post158142

The point I was trying to make Mr Peterson is that Ellen White was given the honor of being the "Servant of the Lord". Her role was greater than that of most prophets. I believe her ministry was in the order of Moses, because many times she stood in the Spirit in the presence of Christ in heaven. God used her to give His testimonies.

"My commission embraces the work of a prophet, but it does not end there." (Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 36, 1906)

In fact all of the prophets looked forward to the time God shared with Mrs White and beyond to the 144,000 who would be refined by the message God gave her in the Spirit of Elijah.

God gave knowledge to the prophets of Old, who wrote it down, then He sent Mrs White to explain the messages to us in these last days.

The Spirit of Elijah was manifested in the writings of Mrs White and every man who will be prepared for the last last days will be influenced by and embrace the writings God gave her. So He has given a woman one of the greatest honors ever given to any member of the human race since Eve fell.

No other woman in the history of men has ever had the divine privilege of doing what Mrs White did. So my statement stands, "God's last great servant was a woman"... whose writings will lead the 144,000 in the Spirit of Elijah to stand in the last day. Mrs White's devotion through the Spirit of Christ was the antithesis of Eve's sin.

I believe that because God used Mrs White to deliver the true end time message to the church, in a very small way Mrs White is a symbol of the woman who delivers the man child of Rev 12. Mrs White delivered the unadulterated truth of the story of Christ to the world for the last days.

*** Christians already have THE definitive and final Testimony of Jesus Christ, the Book of Revelation. It begins this way: "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants — things which must shortly take place. And He sent and signified it by His angel TO HIS SERVANT JOHN, who bore witness to the word of God, and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, to all things that he saw. Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of THIS PROPHECY, and keep those things which are written in it; for the time is near." (Rev. 1:1-3)

///

*** John the Baptist was the Elijah to the Jews of the First Advent. THE CHURCH (since the day of Pentecost) is the Elijah to the world of the Second Advent. Just before He ascended, Jesus said, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age. Amen." (Mat. 28:19-20) This was the very commission given John the Baptist now transferred to the Church.

///

*** The witness of the Apostles and their contemporaries is sufficient.

///

*** Your belief does not make it true. The Mormons have their prophet, and the Jehovah's Witnesses too; just as you do. But the saints of God have John the Apostle's message of the Testimony of Jesus Christ: the Revelation.

///

*** It is obvious that you know neither who are the 144,000 nor what it means to come in the spirit and power of Elijah the prophet.

///

*** Would you like a Bible study on Rev. 12?

///

So you are here to slam on anyone who believes that Ellen White was sent by God?

I love scripture and I read it every day. I don't think I would want to be given a bible study about Revelation 12 from someone who does not respect the Spirit of Prophecy Mr Peterson.

I feel impressed by God to say it again. Why would someone who does not believe in the Spirit of Prophecy come to a website like this to deride those who do believe in the Spirit of Prophecy?

That sounds like something the Catholic Church would do, send their wicked little emissaries to muddle up communications for the true remnant.

If you don't believe in the Spirit of Prophecy you are not a Seventh Day Adventist so why even come here?

James, there are many who don't like Ellen White. Indicating Catholics would be the only ones is incorrect. I believe a good portion of Adventists don't like Ellen White.

NO

///

OK. By the way, it would be more correct to say "Ellen White" instead of the "spirit of prophecy".

///

Are you comparing me to Jesus Christ and SDA to the Sanhedrin in Jesus' day? I feel honoured to have come at a time when the Church has fallen away, to shed light in the darkness.

///

SDA made one fatal mistake in 1980: they elevated the work of Ellen White to scripture (FB #18). They therefore effectively sealed themselves off into a dark corner much like the Jews did in the days of Christ when the scribes and Pharisees held great sway over the people and would throw anyone out of the synagogue for holding a different point of view.

///

Speaking of Adventists who don't like EGW. I once got into a BIG debate with someone who joined the SDA church through profession of faith, but had never accepted EGW in any way, shape or form.

This individual came to their position after researching websites critical of the Spirit of Prophecy. Was I wrong to have taken a positive stand of support for the validity of EGW's role?

Eventually this person left the church, partly over not wanting to be involved with a group who "worshipped" her.

While I'm not sure I was the only one who stepped on this person's toes, did I play the part of the Pharisees, who were pushing people out of the synagogue, by expessing my respect and support for the gift that, I am convinced is from God?

You keep using the word "they" when referring to Seventh Day Adventists, so by your own words you prove you do not associate your faith with Seventh Day Adventists, claiming we are sealed off in a dark corner.

Your own words prove you do not claim to be SDA yet here you are on a SDA website taking on anyone who mentions Ellen White like it is your duty to.

Are you here to be a sheep stealer? Are you here to bring glory to God inside the SDA church?

If I hated the message of Joseph Smith and the Mormons would it be a good use of my time to site and snipe at them on every website I could find?

You obviously have intentions of discrediting the Spirit of Prophecy Mr Peterson. So why are you congregating with a church who believes in the Spirit of Prophecy being alive today?

The absolute truth is that anyone who comes to the SDA church who does NOT believe in the writings of Mrs White as divinely inspired, THEY are like the Sanhedrin who denied the message of John the Baptist, who was in the Spirit of Elijah. So you have it backwards. The fact is, anyone who rejects the Spirit of Prophecy is NOT a Seventh Day Adventist, so why are you here?

You hate our teachings, yet you become a full member of a Seventh Day Adventist website, bent on distracting any conversation that includes praise of the Spirit of Prophecy?



The messages of Mrs White were inspired by God, and anyone truly within our church believes in her messages as such.

No Ma'am you did not push that person out, they should have never been in our church in the first place. It is a great sin that many of our pastors only look for numbers to fill the books and the collection plates, and not genuinely converted souls for God's kingdom.

I have met so called SDA pastors who do not fully believe Mrs White was divinely instructed. These same pastors sided with others to not allow the Messages of Mrs White be taught in our Sabbath school. They took away the quarterly because they claim they are too influenced by the writings of Mrs White, and when I objected they used their influence against me.

I have found that every person who does not see the divine origin of the Writings are those who have some unconvinced sin that they are holding on to that she spoke against OR they have some contradictory interpretation of prophecy OR they come to cause disruptions.

These men are trying to convert others to their image. They are the Pharisees who will be extremely ashamed when Jesus fulfills his prophecy against the Olive tree with leaves and no fruit. They will be dried up from the roots.

Everyone claiming to be SDA who speaks against the Spirit of Prophecy will have the words "weighed in the balance and found wanting" written on their garments in the last days and they will howl in agony for their leading others to accept their lies.

Point blank, if you do not believe Mrs White was sent by God with the end time message that is found inside of scripture and amplified by prophetic utterance, then you will not be a part of the loud cry of the Three angels Messages.

This is a message from our Father. Accept it or perish.

We should always remember "the wheat and tares grow together until the harvest” but why would God want tares to be in the church? He does not delight in the destruction of the wicked, and we should do everything we can to correct an exhort those who have fallen or have not found the path. We are not supposed to rip them out before the harvest, but God never said we are to accept them or their teachings either.

It's not like God is saying "we should make peace with the tares", we are to acknowledge they are going to be there until the end, and we are supposed to warn them. It is our duty to warn them, but so many people have become numb to what should and should not be accepted in our church.

In some congregations the tares have taken over, but the true remnant church is not forsaken, those who sigh and cry for the abominations done in the sanctuary will be those who are empowered in the last days to warn the world.

It is not a sin to defend our faith or the words given to our prophet. It is a sin to speak against the Spirit of Prophecy. Those who claim to be leaders or teachers in our faith who do not accept the testimonies to the church are going to suffer like no one else in the end, so it is our duty to warn them.

Peace.

The testimonies are the Spirit of Prophecy. They are the unique message of the church that fulfilled the great disappointment. The Spirit of Prophecy is the testimony of Jesus.

I know I'm out on a limb here, but does no one else see this as a bit self-serving? -- "I am the testimony of Jesus, and if you ignore what I say God will cast you out of his kingdom."

It seems more like a way of controlling the adherents than a message from God.

I remember pointing this out to a friend long ago. I saw that this is a very convenient "prophecy" for EGW. If you believe her, great. If you don't believe her, you should repent because her prophecies came true. It's definitely a win-win.

However, that does not make the statement false. Consider this statement: Those who are bad at math will question my statement that e^(i^i) is a real number. Either a person believes that I know what I'm talking about, or they will not believe me and prove that what I said is correct. Either way, I "win." Nevertheless, my statement is true.

But your paraphrase is not correct. She didn't say, "If you ignore what I say God will cast you out of his kingdom." She said, "Whoever Satan deceives will give up the testimonies." It's a matter of cause and effect, and is a crucial distinction.

We should always view the matter from the perspective of God. What more could He have done to warn and correct the world?

He truly loves us so much, even though we have all gone astray, even though every one of us has persecuted and abused the Son of God who has already come as the perfect example.

God gave His word to the world and we all could have received the understanding if we prayed and asked for His wisdom then in faith received forgiveness of sins and wisdom from above. But He saw how many would not understand because of the darkness and confusion that would fill the church, so He sent a messenger who could interpret the sticky points that God saw Satan using to distract and confuse.

Mrs White was not an intellectual genius, she admitted to not even understanding many of the things in scripture that her husband could understand, but as soon as the elders ran into an obstacle that could have been a dividing point among the brethren, God would give Mrs White a vision or dream that would interpret the scripture for them. This is the same today for the true remnant.

I was looking for the promise God gave me in 1995, but because of my past I was confused and God saw the need to give me direction in truth, so He gave me a direct sign that the Sabbath was the true day of rest. No man did it for me, only His Spirit through scripture and His unction led me to the truth. The same day He led me to the SDA church. A week later I was fully embracing the writings of Ellen White because God showed me that she was guided by the same Spirit that led me to the Sabbath.

No man could ever change my mind about the testimonies because of how God led me to her inspired writings. God gave me visions and dreams that were exactly like her writings, only I saw the dream first, then read her stuff and found those same images, like God used an established prophet to reach my soul deeper than any other way.

I had a dream of being on board a train heading to the end of the world, then I told it to a brother in the SDA church God had just led me to, and then he shows me EGW's dream of the whole world on board a train heading to the end of the world and it solidified the dream God gave me. I could never forget it if I tried.

God always sends a prophet to receive the truth that other prophets wrote about, to put it together, proving it through scripture so they can teach others. This is what God used Mrs White for. But Mrs White also received words from God beyond what scripture put into words. Everything in the Spirit of Prophecy (testimony of Jesus), the inspired writings of Mrs White, are in perfect harmony with scriptures earlier Spirit of Prophecy, but those words are amplified. God fills in the blanks that were not fully included in the bible. The Spirit of those inspired words is in scripture already, the foundation laid and main context illustrated so when we would receive the Spirit of Prophecy we would have all the proof we need to receive it as from God. God prophesied the handmaiden who would prophecy, and that was fulfilled during the time of the great disappointment when the sealed chapters of Daniel would be partially comprehended. God sent the handmaiden to comprehend what everyone else was stumbling over.

That is where the dividing comes. Most Men do not see the importance of rightly dividing the word of truth. They hold on to their superstitions or tradition and they try to fit God into their box. My God is begging to show us more than anyone has ever seen of His mercy. But men will not listen.

When men receive the words of truth with disdain and do not try to test the Spirit of Truth, they cut themselves off from the source of life. That is why Mrs Whites warns us about rejecting the testimonies.

Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God; correct? Every single person inside the SDA church who disputes the testimonies are approaching the issue like the words are from Mrs White. They say "Her writings"... But God is the one gave those visions and dreams, just like He gave John the book of the Revelation of Jesus. Would anyone here say those are Johns writings? They are from his pen, but God gave the words, just like He gave the interpretation of those words to Mrs White.

To me that is in perfect fulfillment of prophetic guidance.

Now I get the benefit of her being guided by the Spirit to find the meanings of scriptures I have a hard time understanding.

I believe her writings are from God so perfectly that if I had a belief that was contrary to her writings and it were shown to me, it would immediately change my perspective on the subject and I would repent. There is some room for debate over unfulfilled elements of the testimonies, but very soon there will be no room for debate. The fulfillment will have come and everyone who received the truth will see.

asygo, it matters not how one paraphrases it. The result is the same.

It matters a great deal. Eternal destinies hang in the balance when cause is confused with effect.

1. The obedient will have eternal life.
2. Those with eternal life will be obedient.

If you think the two are equivalent, I must disagree.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Wow that's strong language James. Have you tested the EGW 3 angels message thoroughly with all scriptures? If not, then you have failed you solemn duty as EGW and the Lord told us.

How did this discussion been diverted to EGW? Sorry I haven't followed this discussion.

What happen if Ellen White was sent to test all of us whether we would follow the Lord and be obedient to Him. This is one reason the Lord sents prophets according to what He said in Deut 13:1

If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, 2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; 3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him. 5 And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.

Notice the test of a prophet is NOT if the signs comes to pass or having visions, but to test whether we can distinguish if she or he talks according to what the Lord has previously reveal.

What happens if EGW was sent to test you and me if you will be obedient to the Lord in testing whatever she said against the word of the Lord. This is what Deut 13 says.

Let's be very honest....I haven't seen many being obedient to the word of the Lord by testing every word she has said. The Church leaders has not done this work either and even teaches to stone anybody that dare test the words of EGW. We teach in our church that virtually ALL the word of EGW are infallible. Even I have seen many uphold EGW writings above scriptures when it is in contradiction.

EGW and James told us not to quote her and that it was our solemn duty to test all things with scriptures.

Everything Mrs White wrote under inspiration of God was in light of the present truth of her day.

There will be many things that are expounded upon but NONE of the foundational pillars of our faith will EVER change. Even the dissapointments of our church were prophesied by God in scripture. There will never be a change to what God has established through the Spirit of Prophecy. There are many unanswered questions but all of the evidence is there waiting for God to reveal the truth.

God told Mrs White that He was behind the great dissapointment. That HE put His hand over certain texts that would have discouraged them in their persuit of the three angels messages. It was foretold in prophecy, But God never sends us a prophet and uses them to test His people through lies, He sends them to correct and exhort and reproove, to draw other closer to Him through truth.

He does not test us by lies and He always warns us before allowing us to make wrong interpretations. Do you see any more such dissapointments recorded in prophecy?

The only thing that is left is the shaking, and the revelation of the mystery of Godliness through the 144,000 durring the loud cry. God will never put us through a dissapointment again because our message is not suspended on "time" any longer. There are signs to watch not a callendar.

I have two questions for you which you are not bound to answer.

1. Are you a recent convert to SDA?
2. Are you a teenager?

You are frightfully naive and gullible! I suggest you have a long conversation with your pastor, join the Pathfinders Club and go on camps, visit as many SDA churches as possible. It would do you good.

///

Then it would be wise to refrain from commenting on matters of which you have no idea. I thought your comments were the result of careful thought and analysis. My bad.

Naive and gullible?

I do not boast in how many churches I have visited. Or for how many churches I helped plant.

I have been a Seventh Day Adventist since God led me directly to the Sabbath and the SDA church by miracles and the Spirit of Prophecy in 1995. 18 years of intense devotion.

God gave me visions and dreams that were exactly like the visions and dreams He gave Mrs White as a sign to my heart that He is behind all of her writings. Before I read her writings I had the visions and dreams then I read her writings exactly like God showed me, would this not touch your heart as a sign? Probably not.

I was shown directly by God that Mrs White was led by Him to help establish the remnant church. I don't need any luke warm apostate to teach me anything about the Spirit of Prophecy, God has done all I need on that point. And I also will not be given counsel by any worldly pastor who thinks they know better than what is recorded in the Testimonies.

God has led me to take on such apostate pastors and people like you who are only at the SDA church to do damage to God's church; Satan dreassed in sheeps clothing coming into churches or visiting SDA websites like this one.

I think you should go visit pastors like Stephen Bohr or Doug Bachelor and tell them their devotion to the Testimonies are off base, see what that gets you. They are two of the most devoted pastors of our church would you call them naive or gullible?

Again, if you do not believe in the spirit of Prophecy then why do you congregate with SDA's? You are going to know the extent of your sin VERY soon and I do not envy you when Jesus comes.

I think it's interesting that you take me on about my faith in the testimonies on an SDA website and no one else defends the Spirit of Prophecy. We are truly in the time of the Shaking.

Here is a warning for you Mr Peterson. Directly from the pen of my prophet. You will know the full extent of the meaning of these prophetic utterances.



But you know better don't you Mr Peterson?

You sound amazingly like this man who has persecuted me for the past year named Ronald Ministrone from his website NJK Project who says Mrs White was speaking about a conditional prophecy in the Sunday law, etc. Men like you seem to think you can pick and chose what is from God and what is a flight of fancy. I am here to tell you that if you stand against the Spirit of Prophecy, other wise known as the Testimonies, you are standing against God and you have no business involving yourself in our church.

"Ministers and doctors may depart from the faith, as the Word declares they will, and as the messages that God has given His servant declare they will."—Manuscript Releases 7:192 (1906). {LDE 179.5}

Mrs White was the first handmaiden of God in the last days...Acts 2:18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy. Mrs White was His servant to herald the last days, to prepare the 144,000, who will prepare the world for the second coming.

How do you know, have you tested all her words against scriptures? For sure the church hasn’t done it and no one is doing it on the SDAs forums either. Everyone takes whatever she said as already proven and uses her writings to prove things.



That is true that the SDA Church and other denominations will never change their foundational pillars. If they did….then they would need to rebuilt a new church(house). No church can continue to stand when their foundational pillars are pulled out.

That is why the Lord led the Iraelites to live in a sukkah(tent) and not in houses(church) during the wilderness journey. They were only instructed to build a house (church =temple) when they entered the promise land. Even the temple was a tent that could be easily and quickly packed to follow that pillar of fire and smoke. Building houses (Churches) in the wilderness was just impractical and not appropriate because they could no longer follow the Lord where ever He leaded them. Each encampment the Lord was leading them to, had another test(lesson) prepared for them to learn so to teach them and monitor their growth from encampment to encampment until we grew into all His truth and ready us to enter the promise land.

Anyone that build in the wilderness a house foundation with few material learn from a few “understandings” of the truth has stopped following and growing in the Lord for we are unable to move the house foundations to the next encampment (lesson).

Only once we have a good understanding of all of His Ways, His Laws, His Mind, His Truth…. only then, we are ready to enter the promise land to receive our inheritance and have the proper material to build a house on a firm foundation tested and establish by Him.

So any Church or denominations that teaches that they have already a firm foundation and have built a house on it, have long stopped and are unable to follow the Lord wherever He leads, and are not walking in His Will and Ways.


Can you show me the scriptures for that?



That is not true James. Read Deut 13 very carefully. The Lord is taking credit that He sent that prophet (can be a true or a false one) for the purpose to prove(test) you or me. He does send false prophets or even a true prophet that receive a true vision from the Lord, but often the prophet is not given the interpretation of it and he(or she) will interpret it wrong. For the Lord said that He speaks to prophets … “in a vision” or “in a dream” that is given “in dark speeches”(chiydah, “a puzzle, hence, a trick”)”(Num 12:8). Anyone that interprets the vision without receiving the interpretation is given a private interpretation. More frequently the visions sent doesn't come with the interpretation, thus the prophets don't understand it and often will die without understanding it.
1C 13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.1C 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

Also read Ez 14:1-12 that says that if anyone comes to inquire to the Lord with a heart idol(teachings of men) in their heart that He, the Lord Himself, will answer Him and set His face against him and make “him a sign and a proverb” and cut him off. The prophet is commanded to not answer this person if the prophet detects that individual has set a heart idol. If the prophet answered despite him knowing the person has a heart idol, then the Lord says that the prophet will bear the punishment of the individual. But if unknowingly of the heart idol, the prophet answer that individual, then the Lord will put in the mouth of that prophet His answer.

So Ez 14 let us know that the Lord will answer another individual according to their heart idols. Whatever the Lord will answer, the Lord knows that individual will twist it to suit their heart idol and will further become a stumblingblock for them. The Lord said He will answer them in a way that will make “him a sign and a proverb” for all to see. I do believe the Lord will answer them with some truth, but the text doesn’t specify it. Whether it is truth or false, the end result is the same. The person will twist it all around to suit their heart idol.

The same principle (or law) is shown when the people ask for “flesh”(man's word = man's theories = man's interpretaton = heart idols) to eat instead of pure manna(word of G-d) in the wilderness. The Lord gave them what they ask for…“flesh” and He will give them lots of it until it gets them sick.

This is the ways of the Lord as written in the Law and the prophets for us to be able to recognize Him. What you are saying and promoting is the worship of “the queen of Heaven” saying the Lord wouldn't do that. Get grounded into the truth James. Read, study, and meditate “every word that proceeded from the mouth of the Lord”. Don’t put any aside, don’t cherry pick. Recognize what idols you have in your heart, and put them at the door before opening scriptures. Whatever we can at least recognize or have a potential to be one; then they won’t have as much power on us in distorting the pure words of the Lord.

This is a warning to all of us when we open scriptures and inquire the Lord for the Truth. If we have not put our heart idols at the door before inquiring the Lord, the Lord will feed us more flesh.


False prophets or true prophets given vision that were mis-interpretated afterwards by the prophet; or even if the signs of the prophet came true and the people were caught in the infatuation of the vision or sign given to the prophet who later on spoke falsehood or mis-interpretated the vision; or we or they (the prophet being true or false) having heart idols and have twisted His original pure word----- all of tese boils down to the same as being a lie that WE believed ourselves because we fail to test it as the Lord told us to.

No matter how long or how deep we were “made a sign and a proverb” and how many times we have stumbled on our heart idols… by falling we do get corrected an tiny inch at a time. It does exhort us to know the Lord cared enough to correct us in the only way that was possible to reproved us. Heart idols totally blinds us, so by falling and smashing our noses, can we get some hope to eventually see that we were blinded by that heart idol.

Falsehood does eventually correct us, and exhort us and reprove us and does strongly teach us to test all things according to what the Lord told us to do in Deut 13 and elsewhere. Those that come to obey the Lord and does test all the words of a prophet ….always come out in learning more and deeper the meaning of the word of the Lord and comes more familiar with the Lord’s Ways and Character despite if the prophet sent is true or false.

If someone do not test all things like the Bereans was praised for doing, then they are not obeying the Lord no matter if that prophet sent is a true prophet or not. We are called to test for ourselves anyone’s saying, preachings, church doctrines, beliefs, etc… against the Law, the prophets, the psalms, and other scriptures so we can come more familiar with Him. That’s the whole purpose of it all.

EGW and James has correctly said that it was our Christian DUTY to do so. Also Paul was not the least offended when the Bereans was testing all of his words. He upheld their actions with high regards because Paul knew that that is what the Lord requires of us. Anyone that doesn’t or preaches against it or stone anyone that test someone’s word …. is walking a path of disobedience to the Lord’s command.

Oh Elle, I wont argue with you.

Why do you bring your your contempt of the servant of the Lord to our congregation of believers?

Is it your duty to spread your lack of faith in our midst?

Why would you want to be a part of our church if you do not believe? Are you so desperate for attention that you must continue to darken the doorway of our congregations? Why don't you form your own church and leave us alone? You obviously think God has given you a new message that contradicts our prophet so why do you need us?

What would motivate someone to come to a church to spread confusion? You better think about this now before it's too late. But I am going to ask you not to respond to anything I post about the Testimonies please, you and everyone else here spreading your contradictions against the true testimony can just leave me be. Or can you not abide by this demand?

Hear this; everyone here trying to dissuade others from faith of the testimonies are playing with death. If you do not have any beliefe in the testimonies then you do not belong here or in a SDA church and you will suffer the worst in the second resurrection just as the beast will. Shame on you

By the way Elle, if you had really read what I posted you would see that God proved the words of Mrs White to me as His own, and how dare you contradict what God has shown me as if it is your duty to do so. Leave our church alone.

There is a very strange perverseness of someone coming to a church with the express purpose of converting the members of that church to their own. Like the betrayal of a groomsman trying to seduce the bride of Christ. If your message is so strong then go to your own congregations or assemblies or ingatherings and spread your beliefs.

As I meditate asking God what it is that He wants to be done about people like you spreading lies in our church, He tells me to warn others what your purpose is, to lay a marker on the sight of the heressy then warn all those who come near. Like a landmine field, to mark the path of Satan's lies.

I will never be persuaded that the Testimonies are not from God.

Mrs White was sent as a messenger from God, shame on anyone who says different.

I have only quoted you scriptures and showed you where you are not in agreement with scripture and EGW.


You seem to not understand what the Lord has reveal in His law and ways He taught us to walk that this is not a time to establish churches and even less establish pillar for a church....not until we enter the promise land.

Till then, we each have a responsibility to follow the Lord wherever He leads and learn His lessons He has prepared for us to learn His ways & truth and carry the cross the Lord gives us to carry so to bear the sins of our brothers. Basically you are stuck with me James Love ya!

Apparently Elle you like to dissagree with Jesus Himself...

Matthew 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock (testimony) I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

If the CHURCH can bind whatsoeaver it chooses on EARTH before getting to heaven, then obviously it should go without saying the church must first be HERE on earth before getting to heaven. But you have your own testimony don't you?

There is a warning to the end time Leodecia church that if we are luke warm He will spew us out of His mouth, so it must testify that even the unsanctified who claim the name of the Lord must have at one time been a part of the true church.

You think like so many other people that you are led by God to correct the movement He established. You are an island to yourself with your own unique interpretation of scripture.

Acts 11:26 ...And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

What people like you Elle are feeding the CHURCH is poison.

Revelation 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;

Revelation 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

The Seventh Day Adventist Church is the only church which has the testimony of Jesus which is the Spirit of Prophecy, and keeps the commandments of God while observing the seven days of creation. We are the remnant and you are trying to tear down what God has established among the people of God.

What other church came through the great dissapointment and received the testimony of the Sanctuary? We are the only church that teaches the atonement/ sanctuary message. We are the only people who received everything promissed in scripture in the Spirit of Prophecy. Yet people like you always find a way to be heard in our congregation. Motivated by the deceiver to enchourage apostacy, which makes you a daughter of apostacy.

The Testimony of Jesus Christ is one thing and one thing ONLY: the Book of Revelation given to John the Apostle. Any other is a false testimony and an imposter. The Bible says so. There are many denominations that keep the Ten Commandments, and have the Testimony of Jesus Christ, that is, the Book of Revelation.

///

ADMIN HAT ON!!!!!

As this thread has gone way off topic, I am closing this for Admin Team review.

ADMIN HAT OFF!!!!!