| Author | Message | ||
| Lori |
Valerie, I have been fortunate to be studying scripture under the guidance of a minister who diligently studied the ancient Greek language and ancient Greek history. He studied these subjects far beyond what one receives in Seminary. Another thing that is missing in the Greek/Hebrew Lexicons is what tense the word is (active, passive, present, past)and all these things change the accurate meaning of the word. The blueletterbible website has this on a few words but it does very little to properly explain the differences. Presently, I am studying 2 Peter 1, in verses 5-7 it contains references to idioms that Peter used related to Greek drama. That is what made me remember the one in Romans 5:20. I thought it might be helpful to Kelly to know that one. I am trying to write extensive notes on this subject-as soon as I get them in the computer, I'll post them so that others can benefit from them as well. Lori | ||
| Valm |
Violet, You are not being cranky. There is a big concern with any congregation doing this. The multitude of requirements before baptism is a statement of salvation by works not by faith in Jesus. In addition in inhibits growth and forces closet like behaviors when problems do occur. For example, I wonder how many abortions have occured in the SDA church because the families of the young unwed mother could not come to their congregation for support and also realized that their daughter might be shunned or disfellowshipped for her sin? Where does the recovering alcoholic who has fell off the wagon go in a church system that forbids drinking to be an active member. I could go on. I believe that such a requirement list as a RED flag to a TOXIC FAITH. And yes it does smack with elitism in my mind also. Valerie | ||
| Violet |
Valerie, its funny that you brought up the topic of abortion. When I was growing up in a Adventist school my best friend had a abortion without telling her parents, she could not of shamed them with that. Now she lives with the guilt of killing a baby. This is so TOXIC. I AGREE. | ||
| Lori |
Violet, The minister that I study under has a tape ministry. They have a website www.rbthieme.com Lori | ||
| Lori |
OOPS!!! Gave you the wrong web address! The correct one is http://www.rbthieme.org | ||
| Max |
Violet, You're just being cranky. No, of course you're not. OFTAism is a gnostic cult. According to Webster's 10th gnosticism is "the thought and practice especially of various cults of late pre-Christian and early Christian centuries distinguished by the conviction that matter is evil and that emancipation comes through gnosis." Gnosis is "esoteric [occult or hidden or secret] knowledge of spiritual truth held by ancient Gnostics to be essential to salvation." Are you getting the picture? OFTAs are pharisaical Jewish Christians from the first century AD. Bet you didn't know Ellen and James had access to a time machine. Yep, came from OUR future. Went back to 30 AD and picked up a whole lot of the pharisaical Jews-turned-Christian that James ruled against in the Jerusalem Council and transported them to upstate New York in the early 1840s to await the Second Coming. Being time-aliens they had to adapt very quickly. They had to learn to dress and talk like the natives, etc., so they wouldn't be discovered. But when Jesus didn't come in 1844, they were of course, terribly disappointed. Not to worry. Being very creative they dreamed up a reason why. Reading all of the history they could get their hands on, they learned that the sanctuary in Jerusalem had been destroyed in 70 AD by Roman armies. And it had never been rebuilt! But, they reasoned, since God would never have allowed his sanctuary to be destroyed, He must have taken it to heaven! And, since our salvation was still future -- based on our works -- Jesus must still be in it! And not only that, but since his death on the cross didn't really accomplish anything, he must still have been outside the Most Holy Place! Until 1844, that is! And then he tore the curtain separating the two compartments and stepped from the Holy Place into the Most Holy Place. And what was he doing in there? Saving us? Not quite. He was showing us HOW to get saved. Like he's a lifeguard. Like he sees you drowning out there in the surf. So he swims out to you. But rather than using the standard lifeguard hold and towing you to shore -- HE GIVES YOU SWIMMING LESSONS! He's your EXAMPLE, you see. That stepping from the HP into the MHP was Hirum Edson's idea. It hit him in a corn field. Ellen and James thought it was supercalifragelistic. The rest is history. Oh, and the swimming lessons? Here are a few examples: 1. Keep the seventh-day holy. 2. Realize that Saturday-worship is the seal of God. [And never you mind the Holy Spirit. On that subject, "silence is golden" (EGW).] And recognize that going to church on Sunday is the mark of the beast and the remnant -- which you are and they aren't -- don't do that. 2. Pay tithe to Neal Wilson or Bob Folkenberg or whoever's "the first minister" at any given moment. 3. Delete all jewelry, even your wedding band (U.S. only). 4. Let those baaad Methodists and Catholics defend you and your country in wartime, since the U.S. is the beast of Revelation 13 and isn't worth defending anyway. 5. Stop eating meat. It's okay to wear leather belts, jackets, shoes, etc. You can WEAR the animal, don't you see, just don't EAT it! 6. And other deft moves too numerous to mention. And those are my thoughts this morning, Violet. Have a supercalifragilistic weekend! MC | ||
| Violet |
Lori thanks for the link. Max you are a hoot! Where have you guys been all my life? It is so funny how just to think a year ago I would never of been open to any of this information, now I cannot put it down. The Lord is so wise in when He allows something to enter into your life! My hardest part is wanting to run to all of my friends and tellng them. I have to be careful and use good judgement as to not put them off. | ||
| Cindy |
Max, Hi! :-)) The above was great! Lots of humor, too...:-)) Like you said somewhere today...PITY is the feeling you have for EGW... I now have that feeling too! Poor woman was bogged down in legalism and a "messiah complex"...or at least a honored and yet potentially persecuted "prophet complex"! :-)) But unfortunately her legend continues to grow; it seems unstoppable at times, but OUR GOD IS SOVEREIGN!! And HIS WILL will prevail! I'm so glad for the new posters here. I'm sure they represent many out there in cyberspace or otherwise who continue to question the whole prophetic, end-time, triumphalistic, remnant schema and man-centered religion! (woman-centered also... by relying on EGW's infallible interpretaion of Scripture!) Grace always, Cindy | ||
| Richardhardison |
For those interested in Greek and not able to study at a Seminary or Bible College there are helps out there you can use. One is the Hebrew-Greek Keyword Study bible which has Tense-voice-mood aids for the NT. Another is Online Bible, which is available free on the Christian Classic Ethereal Library at www.ccel.org. There are also a lot of other add-ons available for it, also free. The library also has a goodly number of works free only for the downloading. Some are quite large. I have both and have them to be quite useful. The keyword Study Bible is about $40 in KJV and is available in NASB amd NIV, both quite a bit more than KJV (I'm cheap, I bought KJV). A note on Online Bible. Larry Pierce, the author of Online, is a staunch Calvinist and if you load an add-on that is from a non-Calvinist source (i.e. Charles Finney's Systematic theology) you get nasty note about unbiblical content. I kept version 8.10 for that reason (the "free" copy, I understand the CD version which they used to sell has the message as well). Parsons Technology also sells Greek Tutor. I got my copy for about $50. Richard L. Hardison | ||
| Chyna |
dear violet, about wanting to run off and tell your friends, pray (pray!) and trust in God that His words will be yours when you do speak to them. even something that comes off as terrible might be God's way of using you. look at my situation, betrayal, deception, and a broken heart, yet through it I have faith that God is continually removing Andy's spiritual blindness. i finally explained to my singular one other Adventist friend that i thought that Adventism is a cult and psychologically and emotionally, not to mention spiritually damaging. she won't talk to me anymore either. but it's just like the rest of Christianity, there is no "soft sell" it's not 'once you become a Christian life will be so easy for you' it's the opposite 'once you become a Christian, living in this world will become impossible, but! you will have unspeakable joy :)' love, Chyna Chyna | ||
| Chyna |
or once you leave Adventism, living in the world of Adventists will become impossible, but! you will have unspeakable joy. | ||
| Max |
Chyna, OFTA = Our Friends The Adventists. It is you who are the stunning one! For you never jumped off the side of El Capitan in Yosimite. Some of us were born in "the freefall." Others took the plunge. But you are like Job's third messenger (NIV Job 1:17): ^^Another mesenger came and said, "The [OFTAs] formed three raiding parties and swept down on your camels and carried them off. They put the servants to the sword, and I [Chyna] am the only one who has escaped to tell you!"^^ Agape, MC | ||
| Lori |
I have a question about Revelation 12:7-9, is this a past or future event: "And there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon and the dragon and his angels fought back. But he was not stron enough, and they lost their place in heaven. The great serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him". The Adventist church teaches that this IS a past event. I had concluded through a brief study that this was a future event that would take place in the mid-tribulation. The first prior 12:6 says "the woman fled into the desert.......where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days (this is almost 3 and 1/2 years) following in Rev. 13:5, it ways that the beast was......to exercise his power for 42 months (this is 3 and 1/2 years). The reason I am asking is that Chyna had placed this event as a past event that happened after Christ took his place on the right hand of God. Hence, saying that Satan no longer has access into the heavenly realms. Ephesians 2:6 " And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus...." (We are seated with Christ in the heavenly realms) Ephesians 6:12 "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the powers of this dark world and against the SPIRITUAL FORCES OF EVIL IN THE HEAVENLY REALMS". (There are still spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms) My question: Doesn't this imply that (just like with Job) Satan is still saying "Hey, look at this one, he's only good because you won't let anything bad happen to him"? I'm curious to know where each of you have Biblically placed this event (past or future)? Lori | ||
| Denisegilmore |
Hello Lori, I have been studying this on and off. Sometimes I get so bogged down with it all that I just stop for awhile. But, once again, sometime next week I'll try to have some answer from my perspective on what the Scriptures show me. Doesn't mean I'll be right however. I'll still endeavor to find an answer. Right now, it goes one way, then just the opposite on this question. Course we all know how scatter-brained I can be sometimes. :)) I need more study. God Bless you richly in your quest to know Truth on this, your sister in Christ Jesus, DtB | ||
| Lori |
Denise, I know exactly what you mean--Revelation is one book that I have somewhat avoided a deep study of. With all the other "issues" in leaving Adventism it has been one that I have just not wanted to undertake. However, I have studied parts and pieces that relate to other topics. I did do a rather in depth study of the book of Daniel, it was refreshing to find that all the "symbolic confusion that Adventist place in those verses" really wasn't that hard to understand once you let scripture interpret scripture. I enjoyed it! But I haven't felt led to do a study of Revelation, so I don't want to abandon the topics that God has placed before me in order to pursue that. Just thought someone might have a little more knowledge about it than I and could tell me if my understanding was accurate and, if not, give me some other Biblical placement of this event. Thanks! Lori | ||
| Kelly |
I have a question about 1 Cor. 14:34, "Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says". Why does Paul refer the Corinthians to the Law if we are no longer bound by the law? This law is not in the 10 commandments and I haven't been able to find it in the additional commands that were given to Israel so where does it come from and why does Paul refer these people to the law when in other places he clearly says we are not under the law? This is one of the texts that causes me to wonder about the validity of the 10 commandment Law for today. Can anyone explain this? Kelly | ||
| Colleentinker |
Hi, Kelly! The word Law in verse 34 is the same as in verse 21 where it says, "In the Law it is writtenÖ" and proceeds to quote Isaiah 28:11,12. Paul frequently quoted passages from the Old Testament and called it the Law. Another place he did that is Romans 3:10-19 where he quotes from a wide variety of OT passages. Where this particular quote in v. 34 comes from, I don't know. My study Bible doesn't give a source as it usually does when the OT is quoted in the NT. As Adventists we were trained to hear Law=10 Commandments. Technically, the whole Pentateuch is the law, and the rest of the OT was wisdom writings and The Prophets. But Paul often refers to OT passages as the Law. I see 1 Corinthians 14 as primarily a treatise on how people were to behave in worship services. Apparently they were allowing their spiritual gifts to get out-of-hand, especially speaking in tongues, and disorder and chaos reigned in worship meetings. Here Paul is telling them how to behave and reminding them that worship services are to be orderly and beneficial to everyone. The passage about women's behavior I read in the context of 1 Corinthians 11, where Paul says women should have a covering, or a sign of authority, on their heads. Essentially I see Paul saying in that passage that if women want to be taken seriously when they are praying or prophesying, (verses 2-16), they must dress and behave in a manner that is socially acceptable for women. In that eastern culture, women were covered from head to toe. Women who uncovered their heads were "loose" or immoral. Prostitutes uncovered their heads. Paul was reminding these women that their freedom in Christ did not allow them to behave in ways perceived by the culture to be immoral or unfeminine. If they flaunted their supposed freedom, Paul seems to be saying, no one, especially men, will take their prophecies or prayers seriously. In other words, men should be men and women should be women. They are equal in value to God, but they have different roles, and they need to respect social conventions in order not to offend others, thereby discrediting what they say. One of the small group discussion leaders in our Monday night women's Bible study gave an interesting bit of insight into the possible meaning of Paul's admonition in 1 Cor. 14:34. She grew up in a Sikh family. The women, she said, sat on one side of the church, the men on the other. The women wore long veils over their heads, and they discreetly hid behind the hanging veils to carry on their own noisy conversations during church services. Because they kept their faces hidden, it was not immediately obvious who was making all the noise. The noise level would become extremely high, she said, and it would be hard for anyone to hear what was going on. We know that women and men did not sit together in synagogues, and it's probable that the women did not sit with men in those first Gentile churches either because of social conventions. Paul may well have had something like the phenomenon my friend explained in mind when he wrote 1 Cor. 14:34. Paul most emphatically does not place us under the law. Read Galatians and Romans if there's any doubt. I hope this helps! Colleen | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Kelly, Here's the way I remember this explained several years ago. Whether it's right, I don't know but it certainly makes sense to me. Women in those days were pretty far down on the list of possesions and men ruled. They bore the children, kept the home going etc., but had no real right or recognition. Even because of the custom of being possesions etc., women still needed to go to Church and be fed. In Church, they were seated on their side and the men, husbands, fathers, brothers, sons, etc. on the other side. When the teacher said something that the women didn't understand, the women would stand up and holler, "Hey Hunny/Barnabas/John/Paul, what did he say, what does he mean?!" They hollered at their relative as it wasn't proper to speak in public to someone not a relative. So, Paul, in accordance with the customs of the day said, "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. Let your women keep silent in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in church" 1 Cor 14:33-35 So with reading this from the good ol' King James, you can see that it would cause a lot of confusion for the women to be hollerin' at her Hunny across the aisle. Any input on this from any of you scholars would be welcome. Certainly makes loads more sense than any other way I heard;-)) Maryann....IBC | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Colleen and Kelly, That was a great take on it too, Colleen;-)) A lot of buzzing under the veils, that's sure a possibility! | ||
| Lori |
Kelly, I have just one additional scripture to offer you. Colleen and Maryann gave you some great answers, which do make a lot of sense when you consider their culture. There's one thing that as students of God's word we must do---we must learn the historical setting in which these letters were written, we must know the condition (strengths/weaknesses) of the churches that Paul wrote to and this must be position that we interpret these letters from. --Situation always trumps Application-- O.K., here's my scripture--Genesis 3:16, "To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you." From the beginning of sin in the garden of Eden, woman were given the mandate that man would rule over them. This was set up long before the 10 commandments were given to Israel. |
