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 & Chat Rooms
(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
Donations accepted: Here
ShoutChat Box
Newest Members
Knowreason, Jeff Wickham, michaeljav, Nrothe, Theophilus
1300 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums118
Topics8,849
Posts190,239
Members1,300
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 54
Rick H 48
APL 22
Daryl 20
April
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
Member Spotlight
Green Cochoa
Green Cochoa
The Orient
Posts: 6,815
Joined: April 2008
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
11 registered members (D R, Daryl, dedication, Wendell Slattery, Theophilus, ProdigalOne, Karen Y, 4 invisible), 750 guests, and 11 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 7 of 18 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 17 18
Re: Ellen White & Amalgamation of Man and Beast [Re: APL] #135108
07/13/11 05:41 PM
07/13/11 05:41 PM
APL  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2020

5500+ Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,317
Western, USA
NJK said:
Quote:
Furthermore, I don’t see that genetics and the psyche/psychology necessarily mix.


Then all I can say is that you do not understand the connection between physiology, brain function, and psyche.

Many experiments have been done looking at combinations of genetic variations, specifically looking at single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP). Studies done in Israel looking a combinations of SNPs, researchers were able to predict with something like 75-80% how an individual would response to certain psychological experiments. Not 100%! And that is important, for freewill can override genetics. A lecture I heard gives another example of how genetics affects behavior is seen in a family in Europe, the Balkan countries, where they looked at 250 males of an extended family. 80% of the males were in prison for murder. These males have a genetic defect that affects I believe it was the amigdala. When they got into confrontational situations, the normal biochemical mechanisms that quiet anger are not there, and their anger escalates, to the point of murder. But again, not every single male with this defect is a murderer. The point is, there is a connection between the physiology and the psyche. Habits and behaviors we choose to indulge in, can affect the underlying physiology and thus ultimately our characters, in both inherited and cultivated ways. EGW says this about physiology and mind: "There is an intimate relation between the mind and the body; they react upon each other." {RH, February 11, 1902 par. 5} The body is first laid down by genetics. To divorce the two is impossible.

And this EGW quote is clear to me: "Christ has given us no assurance that to attain perfection of character is an easy matter. A noble, all-around character is not inherited. It does not come to us by accident. A noble character is earned by individual effort through the merits and grace of Christ. God gives the talents, the powers of the mind; we form the character. It is formed by hard, stern battles with self. Conflict after conflict must be waged against hereditary tendencies. We shall have to criticize ourselves closely and allow not one unfavorable trait to remain uncorrected." --COL 331 (1900). {2MCP 546.1}

So - where did these inherited tendencies come from in the first place? How are they generated? How are they expressed? How are they transferred? To me the answer is sin, but then how does sin cause these effects. It is not due to the lack of access to the TOL.

Last edited by APL; 07/13/11 05:42 PM.

Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
Re: Ellen White & Amalgamation of Man and Beast [Re: APL] #135109
07/13/11 07:27 PM
07/13/11 07:27 PM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
Originally Posted By: APL
Then all I can say is that you do not understand the connection between physiology, brain function, and psyche.


That’s likely... as I have not done much study in this science.

Originally Posted By: APL
Many experiments have been done looking at combinations of genetic variations, specifically looking at single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP). Studies done in Israel looking a combinations of SNPs, researchers were able to predict with something like 75-80% how an individual would response to certain psychological experiments. Not 100%! And that is important, for freewill can override genetics. A lecture I heard gives another example of how genetics affects behavior is seen in a family in Europe, the Balkan countries, where they looked at 250 males of an extended family. 80% of the males were in prison for murder. These males have a genetic defect that affects I believe it was the amigdala. When they got into confrontational situations, the normal biochemical mechanisms that quiet anger are not there, and their anger escalates, to the point of murder. But again, not every single male with this defect is a murderer. The point is, there is a connection between the physiology and the psyche. Habits and behaviors we choose to indulge in, can affect the underlying physiology and thus ultimately our characters, in both inherited and cultivated ways. EGW says this about physiology and mind: "There is an intimate relation between the mind and the body; they react upon each other." {RH, February 11, 1902 par. 5} The body is first laid down by genetics. To divorce the two is impossible.


Interesting example and SOP quote however my question, if that example is to be applicable to what EGW said: is the Amygdala the psyche itself or is it just one of the mechanism that the psyche using in actualizing itself. As an example, from what I just skimly read on the Amygdala, I see it as being the brake cable in a bicycle brake assembly and the psyche actually not even being the brake handle, but somewhat as intangible, yet still present as the rider’s hand. I.e., those people in that experiment, if not psychotic, probably wanted to stop this anger escalation but just couldn’t no matter how hard they tried, as it would be seen/heard in their probable expressed regret after. So if the brake cable is not there, no matter how much the rider presses the brake handle, there will be no breaking action. (The Amygdala can even be compared to the brake handle itself with the brake cable being the nervous system that transfers its “braking” action to the rest of the body, still it is the action of the variously distinct human hand that triggers it.)

A good sermon I heard on the concept of the mind (=psyche aka. Soul) is by david Asscherick entitled “The Idol Brain”

Originally Posted By: APL
And this EGW quote is clear to me: "Christ has given us no assurance that to attain perfection of character is an easy matter. A noble, all-around character is not inherited. It does not come to us by accident. A noble character is earned by individual effort through the merits and grace of Christ. God gives the talents, the powers of the mind; we form the character. It is formed by hard, stern battles with self. Conflict after conflict must be waged against hereditary tendencies. We shall have to criticize ourselves closely and allow not one unfavorable trait to remain uncorrected." --COL 331 (1900). {2MCP 546.1}

So - where did these inherited tendencies come from in the first place? How are they generated? How are they expressed? How are they transferred? To me the answer is sin, but then how does sin cause these effects.


Perhaps then, the indulgence into sin by an parent ancestor resulting in the body variously responding to that constant behavior in various physiological affectations comes to inscribe itself in one’s genes, as apparently does alcoholism. If ‘one can be what they externally intake as food’, then perhaps the internal bodily reactions to sin can indeed be transferred. Whereas, as EGW’s statement says, good character apparently keeps the body neutral (i.e., as it should be) and so there really is nothing extra to hereditarily transfer from one’s good character. However the influence of another person’s good character can lead to an emulation which comes to write/inscribe itself on the observing person’s “blank”/neutral psyche slate.

Originally Posted By: APL
It is not due to the lack of access to the TOL.


As I just said above, perhaps indeed to psyche induced, physiologically produced, gene altering processes. However I do not see that this has to go back to an original TOKGE fruit poisoning. Bodily “addictive sinning” (sex addict) which may be a different thing from more “cerebral sinning” (lying to get out of a jam) may have only begun to be instilled some time after Adam and Eve, when others then born began to engage in such “addictive practices”. I do not see a “genetic” nor Theological need for Adam and Eve to have gotten a supposed all-inclusive sin shot through the banned fruit, nor even in their initial act of sinning. Other acts of sins contributed to this possible recoded and passed on “sinful” genes/traits, and that would be why, by Christ’s time, there had come to be a great accumulation over those 4000 years of such “sinful traces” in one’s inherited genetic makeup.

So your genetic view may be valid except for the supposed “all inclusive sin junk shot” in the banned fruit. And if I misunderstood you and you do not believe in an ““all inclusive sin junk shot” in the banned fruit” but rather just a shot of a single sin, which would then meant that the other inherited sinful tendencies, which are indeed different, would have to have been formed after, and even entirely outside of Adam and Eve. That in itself, I see would make your banned fruit poison view moot as it would be stating that such “genetic” traits could have formed independent of the eating of the fruit and whatever single sin poison’ would have been included in there. Unless of course you believe that initial “sin poison” could mutate.

My view is that sin can have physiological affectations from merely thoughts, and the real issue with the Tree of Life and Sinner was merely keeping them healthy, and not making them spiritually sinless and pure. In regards to the redeemed, I see that the wholesale change of a brand new body will take care of any of these inherited sinful tendencies at any level where they may be tangibly present. And, as already stated, for the more/quasi intangible mind/psyche God will be doing a thorough sin excising process to purify it.

Last edited by NJK Project; 07/13/11 07:46 PM.

“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: Ellen White & Amalgamation of Man and Beast [Re: NJK Project] #135110
07/13/11 10:46 PM
07/13/11 10:46 PM
APL  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2020

5500+ Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,317
Western, USA
Originally Posted By: NJK
is the Amygdala the psyche itself or is it just one of the mechanism that the psyche using in actualizing itself.
Part - all parts make the whole. You can not separate out any part of the nervous system and say, ah, here is the psyche.
Originally Posted By: NJK
Perhaps then, the indulgence into sin by an parent ancestor resulting in the body variously responding to that constant behavior in various physiological affectations comes to inscribe itself in one’s genes, as apparently does alcoholism.
I mentioned epigenetics above. Google this: epigenetics, NOVA, "tale of two mice". This is a good example of epigenetics, and how epigenetic changes can be passed on to the next generation. This example takes 2 identical twin sister mice, and tweak the diet, with BPA. One remains normal with brown fur, the other becomes morbidly obese with golden fur. Go back to a normal diet for both, but the children of the obese mouse are obese. And this persists for - you guessed it - the 3rd or 4th generation.
Originally Posted By: NJK
I do not see a “genetic” nor Theological need for Adam and Eve to have gotten a supposed all-inclusive sin shot through the banned fruit, nor even in their initial act of sinning.
Not all "sin" was experienced in the garden. EGW makes a fascinating statement, that there has not been just one fall, but a sequence of fall, each worse that the prior. Here are two:
Originally Posted By: EGW
Would that man had stopped falling with Adam. But there has been a succession of falls. Men will not take warning from Adam's experience. They will indulge appetite and passion in direct violation of the law of God, and at the same time continue to mourn Adam's transgression, which brought sin into the world. {RH, March 4, 1875 par. 8}

From Adam's day to ours there has been a succession of falls, each greater than the last, in every species of crime. God did not create a race of beings so devoid of health, beauty, and moral power as now exists in the world. Disease of every kind has been fearfully increasing upon the race. This has not been by God's especial providence, but directly contrary to His will. It has come by man's disregard of the very means which God has ordained to shield him from the terrible evils existing. Obedience to God's law in every respect would save men from intemperance, licentiousness, and disease of every type. No one can violate natural law without suffering the penalty. {RH, March 4, 1875 par. 9}
This tells me that sin is the cause of disease and death, not just a lack of access to the TOL. Yes, the TOL was necessary, but you make the jump to say that the TOL would maintain perfect health. Again EGW
Originally Posted By: EGW
The fruit of the tree of life in the Garden of Eden possessed supernatural virtue. To eat of it was to live forever. Its fruit was the antidote of death. {MM 233.5}

For earth's sin and misery the gospel is the only antidote. {MH 141.2}
So yes, the TOL could maintain life, but it would be a sinner's life and it would be misery. To say that everything in the body would function perfectly seems to me a jump too far. In medicine, we often can keep people alive for long periods of time. But often that life is a miserable experience. Removing the TOL was probably a blessing...
Originally Posted By: NJK
So your genetic view may be valid except for the supposed “all inclusive sin junk shot” in the banned fruit.
I don't know what was in the fruit. I don't think is was nothing. I think the fruit was integral to the sin issue, taking scripture and EGW together. Example from Early Writings, speaking about worlds other than earth:
Originally Posted By: EGW
"None in this place have tasted of the forbidden tree; but if they should eat, they would fall." {EW 39.3}
And scripture, Hebrews 1:3, 2 Corinthians 5:21, Romans 5:12, Hebrews 2:17, and many more. And what happened in the tree was only the start. As I showed, EGW talks about a succession of falls. If sin were just the believing the lie about God, then is the succession just believing more lies? If the genetic hypothesis is true, what we see is multiple "infestations" of genetic transposable elements. And the "attacks" are not over! New TEs are being discovered. The "war" is still on. So again, I don't know what was in the fruit. God and Satan may have had a deal where if Adam ate the fruit, then Satan would have free reign. EGW does talk about the "seeds" that cause death and tares by "amalgamation", her words, when Adam at the fruit.
Originally Posted By: EGW
Christ never planted the seeds of death in the system. Satan planted these seeds when he tempted Adam to eat of the tree of knowledge, which meant disobedience to God. Not one noxious plant was placed in the Lord's great garden, but after Adam and Eve sinned, poisonous herbs sprang up. In the parable of the sower the question was asked the master, "Didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? From whence then hath it tares?" The master answered, "An enemy hath done this." [Matthew 13:27, 28.] All tares are sown by the evil one. Every noxious herb is of his sowing, and by his ingenious methods of amalgamation he has corrupted the earth with tares. {16MR 247.2}
And this one, again, taking the definition of "seed" in Genesis 3:15 to mean, genetics, which I think I've shown is a possible definition, EGW says this:
Originally Posted By: EGW
Man is God's property, and the ruin that has been made of the living habitation, the suffering caused by the seeds of death sown in the human system, are an offense to God.--Medical Ministry, page 229. {Te 87.5}
There is nothing good that I know of with the genetic transposable elements, TEs. There are many scientific papers that point to them causing disease, that some have hypothesized that ALL disease is caused by TEs. In fact there is a strong correlation with some TE and psychiatric diseases.

But we must not make any final judgment about people. Jesus healed the demoniac. Did Jesus heal the demoniac against his will? No. But the demoniac was so taken over, that he could only utter the words of Satan. We know that there are many addictive substances, and these substances cause genetic switches to be thrown that make it very difficult to quit. This is called chemical "dependency". This is a real physical need that is acquired. Some drug addictions such as barbiturates, can cause death with sudden withdrawal. EGW said this about the demoniac:
Originally Posted By: EGW
Deliverance for Those in Need Today.--There are multitudes today as truly under the power of evil spirits as was the demoniac of Capernaum. All who willfully depart from God's commandments are placing themselves under the control of Satan. Many a man tampers with evil, thinking that he can break away at pleasure; but he is lured on and on, until he finds himself controlled by a will stronger than his own. He cannot escape its mysterious power. Secret sin or master passion may hold him a captive as helpless as was the demoniac at Capernaum. {Te 123.2}

Yet his condition is not hopeless. God does not control our minds without our consent; but every man is free to choose what power he will have to rule over him. None have fallen so low, none are so vile, but they may find deliverance in Christ. The demoniac, in place of prayer, could utter only the words of Satan; yet the heart's unspoken appeal was heard. No cry from a soul in need, though it fail of utterance in words, will be unheeded. Those who consent to enter into covenant with God are not left to the power of Satan or to the infirmity of their own nature. {Te 123.3}

"Shall the prey be taken from the mighty, or the lawful captive delivered? . . . Thus saith the Lord, Even the captives of the mighty shall be taken away, and the prey of the terrible shall be delivered: for I will contend with him that contendeth with thee, and I will save thy children." Isaiah 49:24, 25. {Te 123.4}
One last point, all this discussion is speaking about a post fall brain. And I'm going to inject my engineering background here and think about the pre-fall brain, and this is oppinion, I could be wrong. I do not think that God created junk. I do not think God created being that can self-destruct by just thinking wrong. I think the system has been altered. Satan planted the seeds into the system. Now it is vulnerable. Pre-fall, it was not. Sin is messing with the way God designed the system to run. God's work is perfect, His "law", perfect. Deuteronomy 32:4; Psalms 19:7. Nahum 1:9 tells us affliction will not rise a second time. Why? Will there ever be a time again when people will question God? What about new creatures which are created after the sin problem of now is resolved? I think that sin will not rise again because it will have been shown and well documented that God can be trusted, that His work is perfect, and if you mess with the way His creatures are to operate, it will destroy them. The documentation of this experiment of sin will be there for all in the future to see and review. That's my opinion...


Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
Re: Ellen White & Amalgamation of Man and Beast [Re: APL] #135111
07/14/11 01:02 AM
07/14/11 01:02 AM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
Quote:
NJK: is the Amygdala the psyche itself or is it just one of the mechanism that the psyche using in actualizing itself.

APL=Part - all parts make the whole. You can not separate out any part of the nervous system and say, ah, here is the psyche.


I still have the question is the mind/psyche the nervous system itself. As far as I understand, the nervous system is merely a body-wide signals transmitter via neurons. I.e., the bodies electrical distribution network. However is it the generator that produce the electrical signals that flow through the system. Seems to me that there is a distinct entity (i.e, the mind/psyche) that, through thought produce a signal that is then transmitted through those electrical impulses.

---

I’ll indeed concede that some things can be genetically passed on.

Originally Posted By: APL
Not all "sin" was experienced in the garden. EGW makes a fascinating statement, that there has not been just one fall, but a sequence of fall, each worse that the prior. Here are two:


Note the reasons why, and actualizations of, these further “falls” from EGW statements

Originally Posted By: SOP RH, March 4, 1875 par. 8&9
Would that man had stopped falling with Adam. But there has been a succession of falls. Men will not take warning from Adam's experience. They will indulge appetite and passion in direct violation of the law of God, and at the same time continue to mourn Adam's transgression, which brought sin into the world. {RH, March 4, 1875 par. 8}

From Adam's day to ours there has been a succession of falls, each greater than the last, in every species of crime. God did not create a race of beings so devoid of health, beauty, and moral power as now exists in the world. Disease of every kind has been fearfully increasing upon the race. This has not been by God's especial providence, but directly contrary to His will. It has come by man's disregard of the very means which God has ordained to shield him from the terrible evils existing. Obedience to God's law in every respect would save men from intemperance, licentiousness, and disease of every type. No one can violate natural law without suffering the penalty. {RH, March 4, 1875 par. 9}


It seems clear to me that the reasons for these further falls is the increased violation of God’s health and moral laws. I think further falls have been seen since the days of EGW with e.g, sedentary lifestyles producing obesity related diseases, something not seen in her days. Cancer, Aids, STD’s are all further “falls” in my view and not because of something concocted by Satan himself and injected into man, but simply by the disobedience/violation of God’s moral and natural laws through bolder and more careless behavior.

Originally Posted By: APL
This tells me that sin is the cause of disease and death, not just a lack of access to the TOL. Yes, the TOL was necessary, but you make the jump to say that the TOL would maintain perfect health. Again EGW

Originally Posted By: EGW
The fruit of the tree of life in the Garden of Eden possessed supernatural virtue. To eat of it was to live forever. Its fruit was the antidote of death. {MM 233.5}

For earth's sin and misery the gospel is the only antidote. {MH 141.2}


So yes, the TOL could maintain life, but it would be a sinner's life and it would be misery. To say that everything in the body would function perfectly seems to me a jump too far. In medicine, we often can keep people alive for long periods of time. But often that life is a miserable experience. Removing the TOL was probably a blessing...


Perhaps if man, though occasionally sinning, did not engage in acts that violate God’s moral or natural laws, as seen in the way many heathen live today e.g., practising “safe, but promiscuous, sexual relation” all the while being exercising vegans, then they could indeed live that life eternally with the Fruit of Life and free from diseases that is generated by “careless” and unhealthful living. That was perhaps the crux of Satan’s argument. Man did not have to obey all God laws, per se, but merely, if they so wanted to, live “carefully” and healthily, but this still being a sinful law. Even a life that only violates the first 3.5 commandments, as they would be having a day of total rest/relaxation per week, just not either on Saturday or to the glory of God. So I still see the GC issue to be: “why did God make it that someone who did not obey all of His laws as He wanted it to be done, die.”

So under this (relatively) good, fit/healthy, careful, albeit God despising sinner, I see that the TOL would have maintain perfect health, even if only dealing with the somewhat intangible adverse effects produced by violating the first 3.5 commandment, if there actually are any. It could very well be that the only advantage in those commandments is, life the fifth, the quite helpful guidance and protection that God, our parent could provide to those who actually love him. As seen in the health message, SDA’s were the first to benefit from it, and the world had to struggle on its own, mainly through pain and pleasure and trial and error, (as indeed seen in the continuing conflicting studies on the supposed benefits of alcohol), before they saw that it was beneficial. Meanwhile SDA’s who followed this message have been living more optimal lives.

Also keep in mind, as it is quite significant that with the TOL still present, the Earth would be in a perfect state and thus be most conducive to optimal life and health.

Quote:
NJK: So your genetic view may be valid except for the supposed “all inclusive sin junk shot” in the banned fruit.

APL: I don't know what was in the fruit. I don't think is was nothing. I think the fruit was integral to the sin issue, taking scripture and EGW together. Example from Early Writings, speaking about worlds other than earth:

Originally Posted By: EGW
"None in this place have tasted of the forbidden tree; but if they should eat, they would fall." {EW 39.3}
And scripture, Hebrews 1:3, 2 Corinthians 5:21, Romans 5:12, Hebrews 2:17, and many more.


I tried, but do not Theologically/exegetically see your “genetics view”, at least entirely, in those passages. To me, having read all of your arguments, they could still be only involving a spiritual aspect of sin. While “hereditary sinful tendencies” may be also involved, to me it is not ‘tangible sin in its entirety’ as you seem to believe.

Originally Posted By: APL
And what happened in the tree was only the start. As I showed, EGW talks about a succession of falls. If sin were just the believing the lie about God, then is the succession just believing more lies? If the genetic hypothesis is true, what we see is multiple "infestations" of genetic transposable elements. And the "attacks" are not over! New TEs are being discovered. The "war" is still on. So again, I don't know what was in the fruit. God and Satan may have had a deal where if Adam ate the fruit, then Satan would have free reign. EGW does talk about the "seeds" that cause death and tares by "amalgamation", her words, when Adam at the fruit.


I think you can agree that Adam and Eve did not become vile sinners the instant they ate of the Fruit, perhaps, not even for the rest of their lives, actually becoming the fathers of the relatively faithful lineage of the “Sons of God”. Indeed Eve did not even lose her robe of light when she ate of the Fruit. So their Fall, which when compared with their previous sinlessness, would have been a drastic fall in itself. Indeed just like falling/committing a sin for the very first time. There similarly can be quite distinct successive falls from that initial fall, even with the same sin. So I still see that Adam and Eve fall was merely on the Spiritual level. Then as their descendants continued to commit greater sins, indeed with Cain giving in to jealousy and anger killing Abel, successive ‘falls” came as new “sin frontiers” were pursued and boundaries extended by the antediluvians and successive generation. Again from EGW day to our day, even from within my own lifetime, I can say I have seen a further fall of man into sin.

Originally Posted By: APL
Originally Posted By: EGW
Christ never planted the seeds of death in the system. Satan planted these seeds when he tempted Adam to eat of the tree of knowledge, which meant disobedience to God. Not one noxious plant was placed in the Lord's great garden, but after Adam and Eve sinned, poisonous herbs sprang up. In the parable of the sower the question was asked the master, "Didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? From whence then hath it tares?" The master answered, "An enemy hath done this." [Matthew 13:27, 28.] All tares are sown by the evil one. Every noxious herb is of his sowing, and by his ingenious methods of amalgamation he has corrupted the earth with tares. {16MR 247.2}


And this one, again, taking the definition of "seed" in Genesis 3:15 to mean, genetics, which I think I've shown is a possible definition, EGW says this:

Originally Posted By: EGW
Man is God's property, and the ruin that has been made of the living habitation, the suffering caused by the seeds of death sown in the human system, are an offense to God.--Medical Ministry, page 229. {Te 87.5}


There is nothing good that I know of with the genetic transposable elements, TEs. There are many scientific papers that point to them causing disease, that some have hypothesized that ALL disease is caused by TEs. In fact there is a strong correlation with some TE and psychiatric diseases.


I rather/still see that Adam and Eve fall, like lucifers, who is intelligent enough to know not to live recklessly, only needed to be Spiritual, yet still be a steep Fall. Then loss of optimal health, even if not (yet) “disease”, even if for them merely aging, came to them, and gradually developed when the TOL was removed. And in successive generations, indeed also through the noxious elements that Satan injected into nature, other types/levels of diseases came to be factored in this “Fall” equation.

But we must not make any final judgment about people. Jesus healed the demoniac. Did Jesus heal the demoniac against his will? No. But the demoniac was so taken over, that he could only utter the words of Satan. We know that there are many addictive substances, and these substances cause genetic switches to be thrown that make it very difficult to quit. This is called chemical "dependency". This is a real physical need that is acquired. Some drug addictions such as barbiturates, can cause death with sudden withdrawal. EGW said this about the demoniac:

---

Particularly with mental diseases, God can indeed be the only source of true/full healing vs. bandage chemical balancing/coping.


Originally Posted By: APL
One last point, all this discussion is speaking about a post fall brain. And I'm going to inject my engineering background here and think about the pre-fall brain, and this is oppinion, I could be wrong. I do not think that God created junk. I do not think God created being that can self-destruct by just thinking wrong. I think the system has been altered. Satan planted the seeds into the system. Now it is vulnerable. Pre-fall, it was not. Sin is messing with the way God designed the system to run. God's work is perfect, His "law", perfect. Deuteronomy 32:4; Psalms 19:7. Nahum 1:9 tells us affliction will not rise a second time. Why? Will there ever be a time again when people will question God? What about new creatures which are created after the sin problem of now is resolved? I think that sin will not rise again because it will have been shown and well documented that God can be trusted, that His work is perfect, and if you mess with the way His creatures are to operate, it will destroy them. The documentation of this experiment of sin will be there for all in the future to see and review. That's my opinion...


Couple of points here in regards to this opinion. First of all I do not think that man self-destructs merely by thinking wrong. That is why I believe, as Gen 3:22-24 says, that a ‘sinful(-minded) person’ can live eternally. The destruction occurs when those sinful thoughts are acted upon. So e.g., a sinner may just chose to lust after someone else in his mind but never act upon it. Thus they would prevent the risks of diseases that come when lust is physically acted upon.

I have expressed my exegetical view on Nahum 1:9 in this Post #131487 and responding ones: #131492; #131531; #131548; #131576; #131592; #131623; #131659; #131670; #131690; #131708; #131738; #131748; #131785. On top of the pre-emptive reason you have stated, I think, given the freedom we will still have, sin will not allowed to be concretized, even if merely mentally, because any sin/sinner manifestation will be summarily judged and eradicated, to the approval of all others.

I also have another view, based on EGW’s “Golden Card” revelation, that, at least beings who have never sinned have a total thought “privacy”, meaning that God does not, though capable to, read their thoughts. See here. Perhaps redeemed man will also have this trusting privilege. However sinful thoughts can and would be seen upon merely one’s particular facial “countenance.”


“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: Ellen White & Amalgamation of Man and Beast [Re: NJK Project] #135113
07/14/11 02:58 AM
07/14/11 02:58 AM
APL  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2020

5500+ Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,317
Western, USA
A couple more thoughts. HIV - this is a viral infection, a retrovirus. It is a type of transposable genetic element. Does it cause immediate death? No. But untreated, the sufferer will die. This death is caused by a choice. But only when the choice is fully acted upon. This is an imperfect example, but one none the less.

Jesus said, Luke 5:23 AKJV "Whether is easier, to say, Your sins be forgiven you; or to say, Rise up and walk?" Forgiveness of sins in this case was the same a physical healing. They were the same.

Jesus - was he affected by sin? Yes he was. How? It was in His heredity, because he never "participated" in the sinful (full of sin) human nature.
Originally Posted By: EGW
He took the nature of man, with all its possibilities. We have nothing to endure that He has not endured. . . . Adam had the advantage over Christ, in that when he was assailed by the tempter, none of the effects of sin were upon him. He stood in the strength of perfect manhood, possessing the full vigor of mind and body. He was surrounded with the glories of Eden, and was in daily communion with heavenly beings. It was not thus with Jesus when He entered the wilderness to cope with Satan. For four thousand years the race had been decreasing in physical strength, in mental power, in moral worth; and Christ took upon Him the infirmities of degenerate humanity. Only thus could He rescue man from the lowest depths of degradation.--Ms. 113, 1902, pp. 1, 2 (See DA 117).
If this was only due to the loss of the TOL, then God is to blame for this condition. God is NOT to blame. The human race was degenerating, in BOTH physical and mental/spiritual power. The only way I know that this is passed one to the next generation is genetic with Jesus.
Originally Posted By: EGW
It would have been an almost infinite humiliation for the Son of God to take man's nature, even when Adam stood in his innocence in Eden. But Jesus accepted humanity when the race had been weakened by four thousand years of sin. Like every child of Adam He accepted the results of the working of the great law of heredity. What these results were is shown in the history of His earthly ancestors. He came with such a heredity to share our sorrows and temptations, and to give us the example of a sinless life. {DA 48.5}
The only way the Christ could be MADE SIN, is to take on the same heredity. He never participated in sin. But as Isaiah 53 says, He took or infirmities and carried our sorrows. And as EGW said, accepted the "great law of heredity".


Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
Re: Ellen White & Amalgamation of Man and Beast [Re: APL] #135116
07/14/11 07:49 AM
07/14/11 07:49 AM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
A couple of response points to your post:

Originally Posted By: APL
A couple more thoughts. HIV - this is a viral infection, a retrovirus. It is a type of transposable genetic element. Does it cause immediate death? No. But untreated, the sufferer will die. This death is caused by a choice. But only when the choice is fully acted upon. This is an imperfect example, but one none the less.


How is the contracting of HIV a (personal) choice when it is contracted through a hospital error during a blood transfusion or an accidental infection? And how is the death aspect of it a choice, as you posit, does someone with HIV have the opposing choice not to die from this virus, especially when they contracted by no unhealthful/immoral living of their own?

Originally Posted By: APL
Jesus said, Luke 5:23 AKJV "Whether is easier, to say, Your sins be forgiven you; or to say, Rise up and walk?" Forgiveness of sins in this case was the same a physical healing. They were the same.


Jesus understood that full restoration, especially from a life that has been affected both spiritually and physically by (4000 years of) sin, involves both the forgiveness of sin as well as, even after, physical healing. As His answer stated He wanted to show and emphasize that the Son of Man has the authority to forgive sins (Luke 5:24). To me the (monthly) TOL fruit could and may have prevented most, if not all of such physical degradation in Man, to the point were the adverse effects of even a unhealthy lifestyle may not have been allowed to take root. The Fruits supernatural element may also have contained a sort of spontaneous formation of a healing element to meet new bodily/health problems.

Originally Posted By: APL
If this was only due to the loss of the TOL, then God is to blame for this condition. God is NOT to blame. The human race was degenerating, in BOTH physical and mental/spiritual power. The only way I know that this is passed one to the next generation is genetic with Jesus.


I think you are mixing your contexts here by making a post-TOL removal context argument for a no-TOL removal one. My Theological/GC position from what I have gathered in the Bible and SOP is that, since sinful man could have lived eternally, then God is indeed to “blame” for this outcome death for all and any person who does not live according to all of His laws. As I said before, especially the first 3.5. Indeed I see that Satan blames God for this seemingly arbitrary choice and this ongoing GC is to show why this had to be so as all of these commandments are being played out in man to see if they are not arbitrary. The last one to be vindicated/validated is the fourth, the Sabbath. The first 3 are demonstrated by the fact that God does not have to sponsor the life of someone who neither recognizes, loves, respects, nor wants to honor God superiority in terms of power, knowledge and intelligence.

--

In a post TOL removal context, Jesus can indeed be affected both physically and hereditarily by unfettered and unchecked degradation from sinful living.

I guess where we only differ on this issue is on the points of sinful man being capable of living eternally with the TOL and that a “tangibly contaminating junk shot” was present in the banned fruit. To me the first contradicts the Bible and SOP and the Second takes sin away from its root/foundational (free) choice aspect and actually rather excusingly claims, like a crack baby (who actually can be cured by, especially when older, will power): “I was made this sinful way”. Indeed that would mean that Adam and Eve were forcefully “injected” with some forms of sin that they did not even want to commit. The key “choice” element for each and every type of sin is removed by this Biblical hypothesis. To me, even today, 6000 years after many falls, man still has the choice as to which sins they will be “captured” by. Indeed just as it was with Jesus. He made have had “sinful flesh,” however He, by constant good choices, was never taken captive by this degraded “flesh” even though it inherently made Him ‘susceptible (i.e., able/capable) to sin.’


“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: Ellen White & Amalgamation of Man and Beast [Re: NJK Project] #135127
07/14/11 11:00 PM
07/14/11 11:00 PM
Rosangela  Offline
5500+ Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,153
Brazil
Quote:
The fact that people in Africa, as well as other southern climates have a history of predominantly living out in the open/nature, versus others who had to build climate shelters and thus naturally lived in them year round, among other factors, led to this skin adapting change over time, with not much reasons for a reversal either way after that in succeeding, much shorter, sheltered and comfortably living generations.

This viewpoint is more reasonable, in my opinion:

Quote:
When we look around us today and see all of the different physical characteristics in people and relate this to Adam, who was the first man, we can see that in Adam the potential combination of genes was enormous. ...

Considering this fact, it is easier to understand how Adam produced all the different varieties we see in people today. Also very important is the evidence that after a number of generations, there appears to be strong evidence that certain genes become dominant and the variability of characteristics is limited.22 This does not mean that other genes are not present. However it does mean some genes, once they reach a point, become dominant and continue to be dominant in future generations. This only occurs with in breeding or selective breeding.

An example was my FDS (Field Dog Stud Book) registered Irish Setter "Bryan's Red Sun" (we just called him "Sam"). He was the product of selected breeding over many generations. As a dog breeder, one basic rule I quickly learned was that to produce an Irish Setter, I had to breed a male and female Irish Setter. This is where the term "pure breed" comes from. In other words, in Sam's historical blood line for several hundred years only dogs of the same family were bred together. No other breed of dog was allowed to "cross breed" into his blood line. The key to producing a particular breed is in isolation from other breeds. The genes which produced the red-colored hair and general physical appearance of the Irish Setter have become dominate by selective breeding, and consistently produce the same characteristics over and over again in every generation.

Through the example of Sam, we see that isolation of a group of dogs from other groups of dogs produces what could be called "race." Note, however, that even within the "race" or "breed" called Irish Setter there is still much potential for variation.

... In this paper we have seen that the decedents of Noah's three sons were generally dispersed over all the earth. Also, the physical characteristics of any of his sons were not exclusive to his progeny. Each could and did produce different colored offspring.

The most important factor in reaching an explanation for the origin of race is the understanding that as the migration from the Middle East proceeded, contact with other groups became less frequent, and finally each group became isolated from all others, and the groups became smaller. Because of this isolation men and women married within their own group. Thus in breeding took place within an isolated group and between kin.

An example of how isolation caused particular characteristics in a group of people would be the American Indian. The American Indian originated from oriental peoples who came across the Bering Strait which connected eastern Asia and Alaska. As they migrated south and east, they became isolated from the peoples of Asia. American Indians are considered to be Mongoloid people, but differ from Asian Mongoloids of China and Japan. One must assume that genetics caused the American Indian to be somewhat different from other Mongoloids of Asia. By moving into North America they became isolated from other Asian peoples. Their group was at first small and they married among their kin from within his group. The dominant genes of the group surfaced within a few generations and began to produce the general characteristics which are common to the American Indian today.

Some groups moved further south into Mexico and South America, and they, too, became isolated. This isolation caused somewhat differing physical appearances in each group. Thor Heyerdahl, the anthropologist, studied the people of North America and the Pacific islands for years. He has shown that the Polynesian people came from North America and migrated (in boats) to the Pacific Islands. The isolation of these people produced the Polynesian peoples.

Without isolation it is unlikely that "race" would have ever occurred. It is a vital part of understanding how genetics caused the different physical characteristics of isolated groups of people which we call races.

http://www.bible-truth.org/race.htm

Re: Ellen White & Amalgamation of Man and Beast [Re: kland] #135133
07/15/11 07:48 AM
07/15/11 07:48 AM
Green Cochoa  Offline
Group: Admin Team
5500+ Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,815
The Orient
Originally Posted By: kland
Originally Posted By: Green Cochoa

1) The "race" of mankind arguably most subjected to slavery throughout all time is the blacks. (Ask most any "African American" their opinion on this and I'm sure they would agree.)

Seems subjective and biased to me. Ask any American Indian if they've been taken advantage of and I'm sure they would agree.
Ask any American Indian if they've been taken advantage of and I'm sure they would agree.
Ask any Mexican if they've been taken advantage of and I'm sure they would agree.
Ask any woman if they've been taken advantage of and I'm sure they would agree.
Ask any white male if they've been taken advantage of and I'm sure they would agree.

I don't think asking a group is a way to determine if they are "arguably most subjected to slavery throughout all time."
Quote:

2) Canaan and his descendents were cursed by Noah with servanthood, though he was innocent of his father's crime.
Says nothing about being black nor resembling cain. And are you saying he cursed Canaan because he was black?! What about looking at the spirit of Ham and seeing how it had been trained in his son and prophesying what would happen?
Quote:

3) Canaan may have been so named on account of his appearing much like Cain. (It is likely that being obscure Hebrew words, modern scholars have no idea of the exact meanings of these names.)
That is what I'm calling into question. Repeating it doesn't support it.
Quote:

4) Unless both blacks and whites were somehow represented in the ark, there has been an amazing divergence in the biology of mankind in a few short millennia. Where else can we source both?
What about orientals, mexicans, indians, etc., etc.? What makes you think Noah and family were only one or the other? What makes you think there isn't a wide divergence in the genome since the ark of man and beast? What do you think of the idea that scientists traced all mankind to seven (or a few) Eves?
Quote:

5) God marked Cain. Mrs. White speaks of the "race of Cain." Clearly, the descendents of Cain differed from those of Seth, not only in spiritual things, but also in appearance. The Bible speaks of the "sons of God" (Seth's lineage) looking upon the "daughters of men" (Cain's race) and seeing that they were "fair."
She also speaks of the race before the flood regarding all man, a race of sinners, a race of rebels, a race of humanity, a race of beings, not a race of righteous men (Lot), a race of slaves (Israelites), race of Adam, race of Jews. None of that means "clearly" they differed in appearance. It only speaks of Cain having a mark. She compares daughters of men to this day and says
Quote:
"The sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose." {ST, November 27, 1884 par. 12}
A similar state of things exists now in relation to marriage. Marriages are formed between the godly and the ungodly because inclination governs in the selection of husband or wife. The parties do not ask counsel of God, nor have his glory in view. Christianity ought to have a controlling, sanctifying influence upon the marriage relation; but husband and wife are not united by Christian principle; uncontrolled passion lies at the foundation of many of the marriages that are contracted at the present time. {ST, November 27, 1884 par. 13}
Think the ungodly of today look better?
Quote:

6) It would be just like God to symbolize the sin of Cain with an appropriate color. Sin is dark.
Are you saying Black people represent sin and are somehow looked down upon by God? And this because of choices of his father and mother. Are you saying God made him black at that time or just because he was, he picked on him?

Quote:

I just looked up the meaning of Canaan. BlueLetterBible has the following definition for the root/origin of the word.
Quote:
  1. to be humble, be humbled, be subdued, be brought down, be low, be under, be brought into subjection
    1. (Niphal)
      1. to humble oneself
      2. to be humbled, be subdued
    2. (Hiphil)
      1. to humble
      2. to subdue

Yep, he was humbled by Noah. Or the result of his father or lack of proper training.

kland,

Re: #1
There is more significance to the slavery issue than merely having been treated unfairly. If you were to pass out a survey to a broad variety of people, of multiple ethnicities, chances are that the race most associated with slavery would be the blacks. When have you ever, for example, heard of American Indians, of any tribe: Hopi, Choctaw, Iroquois, Mohawk, Cherokee, Sioux, Apache, Chippewa, Algonquin, Navajo, Arapaho, Shawnee, Pueblo, etc. being subjected to slavery? Conquered, yes. Forced to occupy small reservations, yes. Enslaved? If one counts slavery to alcohol, or "fire water," perhaps. But actual forced slavery? Uncommon. It did happen. But it as it happens, the Indians were actually slaveholders, just like the whites.

Originally Posted By: Wikipedia
Benjamin Hawkins was the federal agent assigned to the southeastern tribes in the in the 1790s and advised the tribes to take up slaveholding. The five civilized tribes tried to gain power by owning slaves, as they assimilated some other European-American ways. Among the slave-owning families of the Cherokee, 78% claimed some white ancestry. The nature of the interactions among the peoples depended upon the historical character of the Native American groups, the enslaved people, and the European slaveholders. Native Americans often assisted runaway slaves. They also sold Africans to whites, trading them like so many blankets or horses.


This is the general trend of things. Given a choice between white or black, Asian or black, Indian or black, or any race against black--I can predict which one would be considered most likely to have slaves in their ancestral lineage--and the answer is always the same. And I believe any honest survey would find that to be the public perception.

Re: #2
Why would Noah curse Ham's son instead of cursing Ham himself? What about the business of children not being punished for the sins of their fathers and vice versa?

I believe that the Holy Spirit spoke through Noah in a sort of "birthright cursing" in this case. God knew the future, and preserved Noah's words to our generation to help us see the accuracy of His foreknowledge.

Re: #4
I don't believe that all of our current races were borne on the ark. In that sense, you and I agree. However, I do believe that there was sufficient variety represented on the ark to pass on the diversity which we now have.

If you look at at people who live for generations in the hot sun, you will not see that their color changes because of it. At least, I have not seen that. Look at the Middle East, for example. How many of the so-called "Arabs" are black? Do they not live in some of the hotter and more desert-covered terrains on the planet? Why should they not be much nearer to ebony in their appearance? Genetics are not quickly changed by a little sunshine. Wrinkles may come. Dark tans may come. But permanently black or wrinkled skin in one's progeny does not come.

So, I would return the question to you--where do you think the black color would have "evolved?"

Re: #5
Yes. The word "race" has multiple senses, and Mrs. White used it in more than one of them. So we agree on this. But it is important to note that any/every time the word "race" is used, it indicates some distinction between people groups. That distinction may vary from simple matters of pigmentation to more complex and/or abstract matters of spirituality or condition.

Re: #6
In a sense, yes. I'm not saying black people themselves represent sin. I do not believe this at all. Nor would it be quite fair to think of them as representing "sinners" when that encompasses every human who ever lived here except for Christ Himself. We are all blackened by sin. But the color black--I do believe it is a fitting symbol of sin, of ignorance, of error, and of slavery and bondage. And it almost seems just like God to provide us tangible object lessons through such simple matters as that of color.

Here are a few of Mrs. White's thoughts relative to the "color" of sin.
Originally Posted By: Ellen White
Thus the words of Christ are verified: "If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!" Matthew 6:23. For a time, persons who have committed this sin may appear to be children of God; but when circumstances arise to develop character and show what manner of spirit they are of, it will be found that they are on the enemy's ground, standing under his black banner. {CCh 81.1}

He went a little distance from them--not so far but that they could both see and hear Him--and fell prostrate upon the ground. He felt that by sin He was being separated from His Father. The gulf was so broad, so black, so deep, that His spirit shuddered before it. This agony He must not exert His divine power to escape. As man He must suffer the consequences of man's sin. As man He must endure the wrath of God against transgression. {DA 686.3}

here will be some that will take their position forever under the black banner of the powers of darkness; there are some that will take their position under the blood-stained banner of Prince Immanuel. Our words, our deportment, how we present the truth, may balance minds for or against the truth; and we want in every discourse, whether it is doctrinal or not, we want that Jesus Christ should be presented distinctly, as John declared, "Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world." {Ev 299.3}

He is separated from God by a gulf of sin that is broad and black and deep, and he mourns in brokenness of heart. Such mourning "shall be comforted." God reveals to us our guilt that we may flee to Christ, and through Him be set free from the bondage of sin, and rejoice in the liberty of the sons of God. In true contrition we may come to the foot of the cross, and there leave our burdens. . . . {SD 302.2}

You cannot consent to profess the truth and not live it; you have ever admired a life consistent with profession. I was shown a book in which was written your name with many others. Against your name was a black blot. You were looking upon this and saying: "It can never be effaced." Jesus held His wounded hand above it and said: "My blood alone can efface it. If thou wilt from henceforth choose the path of humble obedience, and rely solely upon the merits of My blood to cover thy past transgressions, I will blot out thy transgressions, and cover thy sins. But if you choose the path of transgressors you must reap the transgressor's reward. The wages of sin is death." {1T 543.2}

Sin is black. Pardon that is offered for sin is red or crimson (blood). Purity and righteousness are white. These are the major colors, spiritually speaking. One's skin color is not a proper indicator of one's spiritual color. Hopefully that is clear.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.


Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong. -- Thomas Jefferson

Error is never harmless. It never sanctifies, but always brings confusion and dissension. -- Ellen White

The Bible, and the Bible alone, is to be our creed, the sole bond of union; all who bow to this Holy Word will be in harmony. ...Let us meet all opposition as did our Master, saying, "It is written." -- Ellen White
Re: Ellen White & Amalgamation of Man and Beast [Re: Green Cochoa] #135142
07/15/11 01:31 PM
07/15/11 01:31 PM
APL  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2020

5500+ Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,317
Western, USA
Originally Posted By: NJK
How is the contracting of HIV a (personal) choice when it is contracted through a hospital error during a blood transfusion or an accidental infection?
Does a baby that contracts HIV in utero have a personal choice? They are born with it.

Last edited by APL; 07/15/11 01:31 PM.

Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
Re: Ellen White & Amalgamation of Man and Beast [Re: APL] #135143
07/15/11 01:44 PM
07/15/11 01:44 PM
APL  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2020

5500+ Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,317
Western, USA
In follow up to Cochoa on slavery - it can be argued that there are most slaves today than at any time in history. And these from all colors and races. Human trafficking is big business.

In follow up on skin color - some assumes that the darker skin "evolved". But it is probable that the lighter colors "devolved". And looking genetically, most humans have the same genes. The only difference is the amount of expression of those genes.


Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
Page 7 of 18 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 17 18

Moderator  dedication 

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
Should Churches Close Because Of Pandemic?
by D R. 04/05/20 06:54 PM
Why Bible Believers Should Oppose Vaccines
by kland. 04/05/20 02:16 PM
Coronavirus - potential impacts
by kland. 04/05/20 12:05 PM
When Does The Little Time Of Trouble Commence?
by ProdigalOne. 04/04/20 01:52 AM
Sunday Law Enacted In Panama!
by ProdigalOne. 04/04/20 01:47 AM
It Is Time To Repair The Breach!
by Green Cochoa. 04/03/20 11:25 PM
Seven Trumpets reconsidered
by Karen Y. 04/03/20 12:56 PM
The Constitution Is Being Repudiated!
by ProdigalOne. 03/31/20 01:36 AM
Vaccine Credibility
by kland. 03/30/20 11:49 AM
Meeting People Online: Current Tools
by kland. 03/27/20 11:24 AM
The Simple Cure for Coronavirus: COVID-19
by Rick H. 03/25/20 03:20 PM
Money in the Bank
by Rick H. 03/15/20 05:30 AM
The Lost Sanctuary Bible Study Guide
by dedication. 03/14/20 09:59 PM
Fires, fires and more fires
by Rick H. 03/14/20 07:32 AM
Most Recent Posts From Selected Private Forums of MSDAOL
Church Closure Puts Latter Rain on Hold
by kland. 04/05/20 05:45 PM
Ten Kings - One Hour
by kland. 04/05/20 05:19 PM
::S:: Nihar Justins dreams
by Wendell Slattery. 04/04/20 10:21 PM
What is the daily in Daniel 8:11?
by dedication. 03/30/20 01:29 AM
An Experience With a False Prophet
by Rick H. 03/28/20 06:55 PM
What is the Time of Jacob's Trouble
by Rick H. 03/23/20 12:57 PM
Pioneers' Beliefs about the Godhead
by APL. 03/20/20 12:16 PM
Churches Closing
by APL. 03/19/20 04:02 PM
Walter Veith Discusses Religious Freedom Movement
by ProdigalOne. 03/13/20 12:15 PM
Understanding the 1,260-year Prophecy
by kland. 03/11/20 12:36 PM
Pope Francis Is in Control
by Wendell Slattery. 03/07/20 10:00 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