| Author |
Message |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 3802
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 2:08 pm: |     |
Honestly, Rafael, I'm a bit confused about what you're wanting to know.
Colleen |
Rafael_r
Registered user
Username: Rafael_r
Post Number: 43
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 5:04 pm: | |
Just answer my questions |
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady
Post Number: 2469
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 6:23 pm: | |
Rafael, I am not Colleen, but the following question hits very, very close to home.
"What do you think of a christian mother that discipline her non-christian childrens when they says lies or are desobedients to her, do you think that she is legalist?"
My Dad's first wife died and left him with two young children. He was single for 5 years. He met my Mom and married her. From the very beginning of the marriage she treated her step children so badly. She did not hit them, but she would tell them things and one time she took their only picture of their Mother and burned it right in front of them. She then gave them the ashes and said, there is your mother. They had not been misbehaving. My Mom just did not love them. She would not feed them at times. An Aunt who lived with my Mom and Dad would sneak them food at those times. She treated them so bad my brother tried to commit suicide at age 9. Our Dad did not defend them either.
My Mom had been raised Catholic, converted to Adventism after she married my Dad, who was Adventist. So, I truly believe my Mom was not a Christian for the way she treated her step children and also for the way she treated her own children as they came along. That goes beyond being legalistic. It was plain cruel.
Diana
|
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 476
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 9:30 am: | |
Rafael, if you have a point you are trying to make with your questions, just state your point.
For example, I have a hard time understanding how this question relates to the discussion at hand--
What do you think of a christian mother that discipline her non-christian childrens when they says lies or are desobedients to her, do you think that she is legalist?
As far as some of your other questions--
What is the problem with "mainstream Christians"?
I didn't see any statement that there was a particular problem with mainstream Christianity, simply a statement that SDAs were fitting in better. SDAism continues to tweak the descriptions of their beliefs to sound more and more similar to mainstream Protestant thought. At the same time there is a strong movement in mainstream Christianity to be less divisive over doctrinal matters (a trend that has both positive and negative elements). Between the SDA tweaks and the trends towards inclusiveness it is not surprising that SDAism is fitting in better. But "fitting in" does not resolve the anti-gospel elements of SDA teaching.
Do you think that historic Christianity is wrong?
That is too broad of a question to answer. Have there been errors within historic Christian teachings--certainly. Have there been truths--certainly as well.
Would you read the next statement and tell me yuor opinion?
That was an awfully long statement that contained a number of elements. What would you like an opinion about, whether there is any value in reading the historic works and commentaries of other Christians? Whether these works have an authority? Whether there is any conflict between sola Scriptura and advice to read what others have written in regards to Scripture?
Perhaps if you could narrow these questions down a little bit it would be easier for others to answer you satisfactorily. I don't think anyone is trying to avoid your questions, but we just aren't sure where to start. |
Rafael_r
Registered user
Username: Rafael_r
Post Number: 44
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 2:15 pm: | |
Diana, I agree with you, it is painful to hear the way that you mother treated her step children, I infer from her behavior she was just a religious person not a christian. When I said a christian mother I meant a born again mother, a woman with the Holy Spirit. I¥m not talking about that group of people that take the name of Christ but not his caracter, and do not show in their life the fruot of the Spirit.
To Ric_b
Collen said:
Yet there is no power in honoring a day or clinging to the law. What Adventists are doing is exactly what other deceived Christians are doing who do not know Jesus and allow His Spirit to transform them. The focus on the law removes people's focus from Jesusóand Adventists are "fitting in" with "mainstream Christians" better now than at any time in their history.
She called thet christians that not think like she do ®deceived Christians®, that they do not know Jesus and do not allow the spirit trnsform them. She think that mainstream christianity is wrong, so I want to know why.
If any one talk about of the ten commandaments for you is legalism, you says we not need a writen code we have the Spirit, I wonder if the way in wich the Spirit lead the people of God is contrary to the ten commandaments.
Ok Ric_b, or Colleen or any one hear read the next satement and tell me what you think:
28 Do not move an ancient boundary stone
set up by your forefathers.
Proverbs 22:28 (New International Version)
®...Of course, you are not such wiseacres as to think or say that you can expound Scripture without assistance from the works of divines and learned men who have laboured before you in the field of exposition. If you are of that opinion, pray remain so, for you are not worth the trouble of conversion, and like a little coterie who think with you, would resent the attempt as an insult to your infallibility. It seems odd, that certain men who talk so much of what the Holy Spirit reveals to themselves, should think so little of what he has revealed to others. My chat this afternoon is not for these great originals, but for you who are content to learn of holy men, taught of God, and mighty in the Scriptures. It has been the fashion of late years to speak against the use of commentaries. If there were any fear that the expositions of Matthew Henry, Gill, Scott, and others, would be exalted into Christian Targums, we would join the chorus of objectors, but the existence or approach of such a danger we do not suspect. The temptations of our times lie rather in empty pretensions to novelty of sentiment, than in a slavish following of accepted guides. A respectable acquaintance with the opinions of the giants of the past, might have saved many an erratic thinker from wild interpretations and outrageous inferences. Usually, we have found the despisers of commentaries to be men who have no sort of acquaintance with them; in their case, it is the opposite of familiarity which has bred contempt. It is true there are a number of expositions of the whole Bible which are hardly worth shelf room; they aim at too much and fail altogether; the authors have spread a little learning over a vast surface, and have badly attempted for the entire Scriptures what they might have accomplished for one book with tolerable success; but who will deny the preeminent value of such expositions as those of Calvin, Ness, Henry, Trapp, Poole, and Bengel, which are as deep as they are broad? and yet further, who can pretend to biblical learning who has not made himself familiar with the great writers who spent a life in explaining some one sacred book?...® |
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 478
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 2:46 pm: | |
Paul's words for those who rely on the law is far harsher than anything that has been said on this forum. According to Paul, "You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace." (Gal 5:4)
The law has a purpose. It closes every mouth for we can not argue that we are righteous. (Rom 3:19) and it leads us to the only source of our salvation, Jesus Christ (Gal 3:24). However the law is weak and limited in what it can do (Rom 8:3). Paul continues in Romans 8 to point us to the Spirit instead of the law. Quite similar actually to Galatians chapter 5.
Would the Spirit ever lead us to do something that is contrary to the law? Interesting question. Did the Spirit lead Abraham to offer his son as a sacrifice? Does Abraham's willingness to do this in his heart mean the same as having actual done it? Would that have been contrary to God's law? |
Patriar
Registered user
Username: Patriar
Post Number: 267
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 6:07 pm: | |
Schasc:
Remember that her 'prophecies' are specifically relating to her belief that Christ was returning in her lifetime (or soon after). She would never have answered "yes" to a question about whether the world would last until 2006. In light of that fact, we can't say that she was falsely prophecying (sp) about current events of 2006; she was actually falsely prophecying about current events of 1850-1914 (approx).
Patria |
Patriar
Registered user
Username: Patriar
Post Number: 268
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 6:44 pm: | |
Schasc:
I'm not sure, now that I'm thinking about it, if my statement above is 100% accurate. Anyone is welcome to correct me!
Patria |
Jeremiah
Registered user
Username: Jeremiah
Post Number: 84
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 7:11 pm: | |
Rafael,
From my perspective, even the commentaries you mention are "moving ancient boundary stones". True Christianity couldn't have started in the 1500's. 
I like commentary by St John Chrysostom pretty well... it's at least 1100 years earlier than what you mentioned. Not that age is any gaurantee of purity... but we're talking about ANCIENT boundary stones, aren't we?
Jeremiah |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 1570
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 8:04 pm: | |
Rafael,
I will say one thing for sure. I always like it when you post Charles Spurgeon quotes. It is hard to find anything that I disagree with him on, except maybe his interpretation of Sunday Sabbatarianism.
Stan |
Rafael_r
Registered user
Username: Rafael_r
Post Number: 45
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 5:52 am: | |
Jeremiah, I do not think that True Christianity have started in the 1500's. I'm only familiar with reformed faith in this moments, I¥m open to historic christianity since that I¥m not the only christian and can not talk ignoring what my spiritual forefathers had said and practiced. I follow the next rule in the interpretation of interpretation of Scripture.
What Rule is to be observed in the interpretation of Scripture.
...How are they to distinguish truth from falsehood in the sacred Scriptures? They must be very careful to pursue that course which, in the beginning of this Commonitory, we said that holy and learned men had commended to us, that is to say, they must interpret the sacred Canon according to the traditions of the Universal Church and in keeping with the rules of catholic doctrine, in which catholic and Universal Church, moreover, they must follow universality, antiquity, consent. And if at any time a part opposes itself to the whole, novelty to antiquity, the dissent of one or a few who are in error to the consent of all or at all events of the great majority of Catholics, then they must prefer the soundness of the whole to the corruption of a part; in which same whole they must prefer the religion of antiquity to the profaneness of novelty; and in antiquity itself in like manner, to the temerity of one or of a very few they must prefer, first of all, the general decrees, if such there be, of a Universal Council, or if there be no such, then, what is next best, they must follow the consentient belief of many and great masters. Which rule having been faithfully, soberly, and scrupulously observed, we shall with little difficulty detect the noxious errors of heretics as they arise.
The Commonitory of Vincent of Lerins
|
Rafael_r
Registered user
Username: Rafael_r
Post Number: 46
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 8:59 am: | |
Ricb, I¥m not talking about justification or salvation. Paul also said:
Misleadings in Doctrine and Living
1Paul, (A)an apostle of (B)Christ Jesus (C)according to the commandment of (D)God our Savior, and of (E)Christ Jesus, who is our (F)hope,
2To (G)Timothy, (H)my true child in the faith: (I)Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and (J)Christ Jesus our Lord.
3As I urged you upon my departure for (K)Macedonia, remain on at (L)Ephesus so that you may instruct certain men not to (M)teach strange doctrines,
4nor to pay attention to (N)myths and endless (O)genealogies, which give rise to mere (P)speculation rather than (Q)furthering the administration of God which is by faith.
5But the goal of our (R)instruction is love (S)from a pure heart and a (T)good conscience and a sincere (U)faith.
6For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to (V)fruitless discussion,
7(W)wanting to be (X)teachers of the Law, even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions.
8But we know that (Y)the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully,
9realizing the fact that (Z)law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and (AA)rebellious, for the (AB)ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and (AC)profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers
10and (AD)immoral men and (AE)homosexuals and (AF)kidnappers and (AG)liars and (AH)perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to (AI)sound teaching,
11according to (AJ)the glorious gospel of (AK)the blessed God, with which I have been (AL)entrusted.
12I thank (AM)Christ Jesus our Lord, who has (AN)strengthened me, because He considered me faithful, (AO)putting me into service,
13even though I was formerly a blasphemer and a (AP)persecutor and a violent aggressor Yet I was (AQ)shown mercy because (AR)I acted ignorantly in unbelief;
14and the (AS)grace of our Lord was more than abundant, with the (AT)faith and love which are found in Christ Jesus.
15(AU)It is a trustworthy statement, deserving full acceptance, that (AV)Christ Jesus came into the world to (AW)save sinners, among whom (AX)I am foremost of all.
16Yet for this reason I (AY)found mercy, so that in me as the foremost, Jesus Christ might (AZ)demonstrate His perfect patience as an example for those who would believe in Him for eternal life.
17Now to the (BA)King eternal, (BB)immortal, (BC)invisible, the (BD)only God, (BE)be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.
18This (BF)command I entrust to you, Timothy, (BG)my son, in accordance with the (BH)prophecies previously made concerning you, that by them you (BI)fight the good fight,
19keeping (BJ)faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and suffered shipwreck in regard to (BK)their faith.
20Among these are (BL)Hymenaeus and (BM)Alexander, whom I have (BN)handed over to Satan, so that they will be (BO)taught not to blaspheme.
1 Timothy 1 (New American Standard Bible)
and
5The reason I left you in Crete was that you might straighten out what was left unfinished and appoint[a] elders in every town, as I directed you. 6An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. 7Since an overseer[b] is entrusted with God's work, he must be blamelessónot overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. 8Rather he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. 9He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.
10For there are many rebellious people, mere talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision group. 11They must be silenced, because they are ruining whole households by teaching things they ought not to teachóand that for the sake of dishonest gain. 12Even one of their own prophets has said, "Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons." 13This testimony is true. Therefore, rebuke them sharply, so that they will be sound in the faith...
Titus 1:5-13
|
Jeremiah
Registered user
Username: Jeremiah
Post Number: 85
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 9:31 am: | |
Rafael,
If you follow the rule of universality, antiquity, and consent, I think you'll arrive at the historic faith. There's alot to study, but in the end I think you'll find that the Christian Church is still here and teaches the same thing which was taught in the beginning.
Jeremiah |
|
