Forums118
Topics9,199
Posts195,608
Members1,323
|
Most Online5,850 Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
Re: Do you agree?
[Re: asygo]
#86181
03/08/07 12:09 PM
03/08/07 12:09 PM
|
OP
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
It's easy to recognize a narrative, and in a narrative false statements may be made by the characters. But, as far as I can see, the narrative of Solomon's story is in chapters 1 and 2, not in the whole book of Ecclesiastes. Besides, the main question for me is, Who is going to determine what represents the mind and will of the Spirit and what doesn't? Human beings? Many of them have already told me that Ecclesiastes 9:5,6,10 doesn't represent the position of the Bible about the state of the dead, but is just an expression of Solomon's bitterness. There seems to me to be some things, especially in the first few chapters, that should not be taken at face value because they contradict other parts of the Bible. James apparently contradicts Paul but, although it may be difficult, isn't there a way to harmonize them?
|
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
Re: Do you agree?
[Re: Rosangela]
#86195
03/08/07 07:38 PM
03/08/07 07:38 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Who is going to determine what represents the mind and will of the Spirit and what doesn't? Human beings? Of course! And there's only one human being who can do this: you!
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Do you agree?
[Re: Rosangela]
#86221
03/09/07 02:50 AM
03/09/07 02:50 AM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,583
California, USA
|
|
It's easy to recognize a narrative, and in a narrative false statements may be made by the characters. But, as far as I can see, the narrative of Solomon's story is in chapters 1 and 2, not in the whole book of Ecclesiastes. But when you read the rest of Ecclesiastes, isn't that still a narrative, in the sense that you and Solomon are interacting? Sarah tells Abraham something; Solomon tells you something. Besides, the main question for me is, Who is going to determine what represents the mind and will of the Spirit and what doesn't? Human beings? When Sarah was talking, Abraham was the one to decide if what she was saying is congruent with God's voice. The same with Eve and the serpent. The same thing with us and Solomon. Remember, when told to kill his son, Abraham could tell that the voice was God's. Tough trick. Many of them have already told me that Ecclesiastes 9:5,6,10 doesn't represent the position of the Bible about the state of the dead, but is just an expression of Solomon's bitterness. I obviously don't agree, but it's a valid argument if you just take Ecclesiastes by itself. More later.
By God's grace, Arnold
There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. RH 12/20/1892
|
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Do you agree?
[Re: asygo]
#86224
03/09/07 11:06 AM
03/09/07 11:06 AM
|
OP
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
But when you read the rest of Ecclesiastes, isn't that still a narrative, in the sense that you and Solomon are interacting? Sarah tells Abraham something; Solomon tells you something. In that case, Paul tells me something, Peter tells me something, John tells me something, and I decide what applies to my life and what doesn't.
|
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Do you agree?
[Re: Rosangela]
#86226
03/09/07 02:16 PM
03/09/07 02:16 PM
|
|
We need to look at Ecclesiastes as being included in the following text: 2 Tim. 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
In other words, Ecclesiastes is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
|
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Do you agree?
[Re: Rosangela]
#86238
03/09/07 05:04 PM
03/09/07 05:04 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,583
California, USA
|
|
In that case, Paul tells me something, Peter tells me something, John tells me something, and I decide what applies to my life and what doesn't. Sort of, but not exactly. First, you decide if what God says applies to your life. If you decide to submit to God, then you decide if what Paul, Peter, and John say are equivalent to what God says. Of course, all this is done under that constant wooing of the Holy Spirit. Take Peter, for example. We have him on record saying many things. Do they all apply to you? The Holy Spirit will help you decide which ones do and which ones don't.
By God's grace, Arnold
There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. RH 12/20/1892
|
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Do you agree?
[Re: Daryl]
#86239
03/09/07 05:05 PM
03/09/07 05:05 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,583
California, USA
|
|
In other words, Ecclesiastes is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: I agree. But it can be profitable without being taken literally, at face value. In fact, it can be profitable without being correct.
By God's grace, Arnold
There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. RH 12/20/1892
|
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
Re: Do you agree?
[Re: Daryl]
#86245
03/09/07 09:03 PM
03/09/07 09:03 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,583
California, USA
|
|
For example, it is profitable to study Abraham marrying Hagar, even though that was wrong. Even studying Eve's interaction with Satan at the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is profitable. Studying what Satan said to Eve is profitable.
God has recorded these in His word because they are "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness," even though we are not to take them as precepts or examples of righteousness.
I can see the same thing apply in some of Ecclesiastes. There are several possible explanations of why Solomon wrote what he wrote, but I don't think we can necessarily accept them all exactly as they read.
By God's grace, Arnold
There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. RH 12/20/1892
|
Reply
Quote
|
|
|
|
|