| Author |
Message |
Bob
Registered user
Username: Bob
Post Number: 122
Registered: 7-2000
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 9:56 pm: |     |
Diana, he is sarcastically playing on words in order to insult your position on EGW. Much of the imagery in Revelation links back to imagery also found in the prophecies of the Old Testament. He is suggesting that the apostle John is guilty of "stealing" the words and ideas of Isaiah, Ezekiel, Joel, etc.
Bob |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 1584
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 10:02 pm: | |
Diana, maybe some of the other forum members can help me out here--but I don't know what this man means unless he means that MUCH of the symbolism of Revelation first appears in the Old Testament. In fact, Richard Fredericks of Damascus Community Church (formerly SDA, now Christian) has written a dissertation about interpreting Revelation by looking back to the Old Testament for understanding symbolic references.
As you said, Diana, God inspired the whole Bible. Of course He uses similar symbolism; He is God, after all! The seed of Abraham, for example, first shows up in Genesis when God promises him descendants, and it's still being defined in Romans as Paul explains it includes all who believe in Jesus and God's promises. There is also sanctuary language in the Books of Moses, Hebrews, and Revelation. Jerusalem also occurs throughout the OT and again in Revelation.
If your aquaintance is referring to Revelation's symbolic language and claiming it's plagiarized, then he is not taking the inspiration of the Bible seriously. His reasoning is typically Adventist--they don't believe the Bible's inerrant, and many excuse Ellen by saying the gospel writers and Paul quote the OT inaccurately, etc.
It really annoys me when they defend Ellen by accusing the writers of the Bible of inaccuracies and non-integrity. The only reason they can say such things is because they don't believe that the words of the Bible are truly inspired. They believe that God gave them "thoughts" about various subjects and then allowed them to interpret those thoughts the best they could in the context of their own culture and language. They assume that all Bible writers are prone to mistakes which we are free to interpret or ignore based on our culture and understanding.
I assume this sort of similarity to OT language is what your acquaintance must mean. Perhaps I'm missing something, though...
Colleen |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 1585
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 12, 2005 - 10:05 pm: | |
Oops--sorry, Bob--I didn't see your post! You confirmed my take on the matter.
Colleen |
Jeremy
Registered user
Username: Jeremy
Post Number: 436
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, March 13, 2005 - 3:35 pm: | |
It is absolutely ridiculous when they try to defend Ellen by saying that the Bible writers "plagiarized" by quoting the OT.
We don't even accuse Ellen of "plagiarizing" when she takes things from the Bible!
They don't seem to understand that it is the copying (plagiarizing) of un-inspired writers that we have a problem with. And without credit or permission!
Jeremy
(Message edited by jeremy on March 13, 2005) |
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady
Post Number: 1191
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, March 13, 2005 - 4:57 pm: | |
This man is some one who wrote to me through the web site. I really do not know him at all, except he says he is SDA, but there are some of the doctrines with which he does not agree. He did not outline them. He said the only EGW things he reads are the conflict series.
When an SDA writes to me I ask why seeing as I am no longer one. I forget why this one said he wrote to me, but he wanted to correspond with me.
I do have to say he did not start out well at all. He made some offensive, to me, remarks about Mexicans and I let him know they were offensive. He apologized.
I told him about FAF. He said he has been here and read things from the forum. But he has not returned.
I did ask him what he meant by Revelation being plagiarized. Jeremy, I thought the same thing you wrote when I read his email. I just did not articulate it to him. I think and pray about things before I answer them. I do that because I used to have a very sharp, sarcastic tongue and could get myself into all kinds of trouble with it. God took that from me. This man has not answered me yet. I will pray as I answer him, if he continues to write to me. If he does not, "C'est la vie".
All I want to do is be the Christian God wants me to be.
Diana |
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa
Post Number: 795
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 8:11 am: | |
How can scripture explain scripture if it's not referenced elsewhere?? The interesting thing about Revelation in particular is how many of the symbols are explained in the OT...we don't need imagination, dreams or visions to interpret them, just the OT.
I also don't recall hearing how much money John made off the book of revelation myself, but I'm sure EGW has him beat.... (humor, really....). |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 1594
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 12:36 pm: | |
Melissa, I truly am laughing out loud!
Great points--great humor--great insight...!
Colleen |
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady
Post Number: 1199
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Monday, March 14, 2005 - 5:35 pm: | |
Melissa,
I burst out laughing when I read your statement.
And as Colleen said, Great points--great humor--great insight.
Diana |
Lisa_boyldavis
Registered user
Username: Lisa_boyldavis
Post Number: 11
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 3:26 pm: | |
I'm coming to this discussion a few days later, but I want to say that the way doctrine is argued in the Adventist church, and by ones who have attempted to get into a rowel with me, is by using smooth Lawyer tactics... twists and turns and discombobulated logic. Take the issue of EGW in a dream communicating with her dead husband, conversing with him, asking him to stick around, and taking his advise after the dream were over.... an Adventist who is acting as a mother bear trying to protect the very thing that keeps him or her safe, makes him/her superior, provides him/her with "the truth" will simply say that having a dream is not the same as communicating with the dead, and ignore the fact that she took the advice from the communication between her and her dead husband, etc.... However, using that same logic, if that Adventist heard that your Sunday Pastor had dreamt he was taking to his dead wife, and that she gave him advise, and that he was taking that as a message from God, that Adventist could see quite clearly the problems presented... In other words, discern the intent.... is this SDA man wanting truth, or wanting to put you in your place, or win you back... Just a thought.
Lisa
|
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady
Post Number: 1212
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 6:55 pm: | |
Lisa,
The way I see it is that this is a dating web site. He wrote to me, knowing I was not SDA because I say so in my profile. I told him why I decided not to rejoin the SDA church, which is I found out that EGW plagiarized, ect. I always ask the SDA men why they write to me knowing I am not SDA any more. He is the only one who has answered me, but he is very offensive and I will write to him and tell him why I am not writing, if he answers my last email. I have a "feeling" he may be trying to win me back to adventism, but it is only a feeling. I really think he does not want the truth and I am truthful when it comes to my salvation. If he answers me, I will see what he says and let you folks know.
In all of this, I pray and ask God to put words in my mouth. He is so awesome.
Diana |
|
