Post Number: 1
|Posted on Friday, September 22, 2017 - 10:34 am: || |
Hi, I’m Hope Helen Huerta and have just been invited to the forum. I read the rules and believe it acceptable to post a segment of a book I’m seeking to get published. I do want to relate publishing here confirms my authorship. I am contending the traditional Historicist’s interpretation of the Book of Revelation, without diminishing the sine qua non that the Papacy fulfills one of the beast-kings in Revelation 17. While the Revelation does reveal the continuous unfold of history the Historicist’s interpretation must be restructured concerning its folding to properly reconcile it with history, which is the aim of my manuscript and my website that has published a preview (www.twohousechronicles.com). Now for the segment:
Historicists that interpret the opening of the books in Daniel 7 as an investigative judgment, such as Woodrow Wilson Whidden, hold to the perception that “justification,” God’s pardon is revocable; such a notion views God as changing his mind in the rejection of Saul as Israel’s king and other sundry scriptures.
“Then came the word of the LORD unto Samuel, saying, It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments. And it grieved Samuel; and he cried unto the LORD all night.” 1 Samuel 15:10-11
Even so, the context maintains the compound, sovereign perception that God is not like a man that changes his mind, which compounds God’s omnipotence and omniscience.
“And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent.” 1 Samuel 15:29
The only question is, what sense must be moderated to reconcile one declaration with the other by Samuel, since it is irrational that both are true in the same sense. The Arminian doctrine interprets verse 11 as literally as possible and theologizes verse 29. The Compatibilist perception of predestination holds verse 29 as literal and verse 11 as theologically discernable. Professor of systematic and historical theology at the Adventist International Institute, Woodrow W. Whidden conveys the Wesleyan/Arminian doctrine of Ellet J. Waggoner, another Historicist, on justification.
“For Waggoner it seems that Jesus is mediating sustaining grace to keep the saints from falling into sin, but is no longer mediating justifying grace for any sort of unavoidable deficiencies. Paul Penno, Jr., expresses it this way: ‘The final blotting out of sins is justification by faith or forgiveness retained by the believer. This is the sanctuary message of the final atonement by Christ in the most holy.’ Thus the period between the close of probation, when Jesus ceases His mediation, and that of the Second Coming is the time for the initial, irrevocable gift of justification. And this permanent gift is one key explanation for their endurance during the ‘time of trouble,’ that is, the interval of crisis between the close of probation and the Second Advent… Glorification is the beginning of the eternal retention of justification.” [Woodrow W. Whidden, E.J. Waggoner: From the Physician of Good News to the Agent of Division, Review & Herald Publishing (January 1, 2008), pg. 77]
The context in Whidden’s book is the end of probation, prior to Christ’s return. Only at this time is justification a settled matter through his lens. Before then God is compelled to forensically vindicate the elect, starting in 1844 in their theology of Daniel 8:14. This is in significant conflict with God’s omniscience that the works of the elect are ordained and foreseen.
“For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” Ephesians 2:10
“And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” Acts 13:48
“Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.” 1 Peter 1:2
The Arminian perception diminishes God’s omnipotence and omniscience on the altar of free will; any impedance of the free will makes God the author of sin in their theology. But as the first chapters concluded, Romans 7 substantiates that man’s will was impeded at his fall to the law of sin and death, his carnal mindedness.
“For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do… For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.” Romans 7:18-19, 22-25
The New Testament maintains the Holy Spirit is able to free man from his carnal mindedness, to find, “how to perform that which is good.” It is fellowship with the Holy Spirit that restores man to the original state of free will (able to perceiver over his carnality), which was possible only prior his fall; only this fellowship, by a free gift, grants him the true ability to discern right from wrong. And if it is free (Eph 2:8-10) there can be no conditions of works, which is how Arminianism views justification, as witnessed in the citation from Whidden, above. Justification has long been held as an unconditional free gift bestowed by Christ’s propitiation at the first advent that cannot be revoked.
“For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.” Roman 3:23-28
The proper perception of election can only be perceived through the Compatibilist’s lens and is the reason why the Adventist’s theological doctrine of the “cleansing of the sanctuary” in Daniel 8:14 cannot sustain an “investigative judgment.” The theological discernment of opening of the books in Daniel 7 cannot diminish Paul’s testimony that God is able to, “make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonor.” Romans 9:21. Texts that state God, “will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth,” (1Ti 2:3) must be theologically discerned as the fragmented or divided sense as opposed to the compound sense, insomuch as one must be moderated to reconcile both, since it is irrational that both are true in the same sense; again, this was dealt with in the first chapters. In truth, the scriptures hold that election is irrevocable, which destroys the Adventist’s doctrine of the investigative judgment and support the measuring of the temple in Revelation 11 as the antitype, which is chronologically correspondent with the seven seals and seven trumpets.
Post Number: 3056
|Posted on Saturday, September 23, 2017 - 7:11 am: || |
Welcome to the forum!
Post Number: 2
|Posted on Saturday, September 23, 2017 - 8:51 am: || |
Post Number: 15535
|Posted on Wednesday, September 27, 2017 - 10:10 am: || |
Welcome to the forum, Hope! I agree; the scriptural doctrine of election completely annuls the investigative judgment and the whole idea that we are "on probation". Either God is sovereign and knows all things, including His own, from eternity, or created beings like us have the "last word".
I know that no human is able to have the "last word". We simply are limited to time and space, and we are not eternal.
We'd love to get to know more about your story!
Post Number: 3
|Posted on Thursday, October 05, 2017 - 9:01 am: || |
Sorry for not responding right away but I’ve been extremely occupied. Before I was born my family studied its way into Adventism and at the time I was very young they studied their way out of it. From that time the dialogue about what they believe as opposed to what the scriptures actually convey has abounded in our family.