Archive through November 15, 2006 Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Former Adventist Fellowship Forum » ARCHIVED DISCUSSIONS 5 » A Spirit of deceit? » Archive through November 15, 2006 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz

Post Number: 2279
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - 2:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Hi Jacob,

The traditional teaching that even Robert Morey teaches in the book you have clearly teaches that the wicked will be resurrected to suffer torment in both body and soul eternally. In other words, when sinners are cast into the lake of fire, they don't live a spirit existence after their bodies are incinderated. This is where the difficulty for traditionalists stands. Charles Spurgeon postulated special resurrection asbestos suits so the damned would feel the heat and torment for all eternity--no wonder he had second thoughts before he died about this doctrine.

The smoke of their torment rising forever and ever is pictured both in Genesis 19 where the smoke from Sodom was seen rising, and also with Isaiah 34 where the same terminology is used about smoke rising forever. This had to do with the total annihilation of Edom.

If the prophecy in Malachi 4 is correct, then the wicked are figuratively reduced to ashes by the unquenchable fire. John the Baptist picked up on this theme in Matthew 3.

The word for hell that is Gehenna is used only in the synoptic gospels by Jesus, and this word was for the Valley of Hinnom where a garbage dump continually burned forever. There was certainly a partial fulfillment of this in AD 70 when there was observed a lot of burned bodies in Gehenna, thus reflecting back on Isaiah 66:24 where the worms are feeding on DEAD bodies.

Stan
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz

Post Number: 2280
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - 2:45 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Here is what John Stott said of the Matthew 25:46 passage:

"Another matter for debate is the meaning and use of the word ìeternalî, which keeps popping up in the context of both the future destiny of both the saved and the lost. [52] As regards its use at the end of the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats where ìeternal punishmentî is contrasted with ìeternal lifeî (Matthew 25:46), Stott comments:

"What Jesus said is that both the life and the punishment would be eternal, but he did not in that passage define the nature of either. Because he elsewhere spoke of eternal life as a conscious enjoyment of God (John 17:3), it does not follow that eternal punishment must be a conscious experience of pain at the hand of God. On the contrary, although declaring both to be eternal, Jesus is contrasting the two destinies: the more unlike they are, the better.

The issue at stake is whether the word ìeternalî refers to the length of the punishment, or merely to the irreversible nature of the punishment, whatever that punishment might include. There is nothing here that might necessarily preclude the second option."
------------------------------------------------
Stan
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b

Post Number: 635
Registered: 7-2004


Posted on Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - 2:57 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

However, Rev 20 does not talk about smoke being forever, but rather the punishment being day and night, forever and ever. I have read Fudge and frankly I think he fudges (pardon the pun) on this one.

If the worms do not die, doesn't that indicate that they continue feeding on something besides ashes? If the fire is unquenchable, doesn't that indicate that the wicked aren't burnt up eventually quenching the fire?

Everything about me likes the doctrine of annilihation much better than the traditional doctrine of eternal punishment. But I found that I had to jump through too many hoops in Scriptural understanding in order to cling to conditionalism. For those of you who are familiar with the concept of Occam's Razor, I find that the traditional view requires less assumptions and is arrived at through a far less complex approach to Scripture.

I don't deny that conditionalism can be taught from Scripture. But so can the traditional view, and with less complexity.
Dennis
Registered user
Username: Dennis

Post Number: 871
Registered: 4-2000


Posted on Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - 4:43 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ric,

The traditional view also coheres well with other biblical teachings.

Dennis Fischer
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa

Post Number: 1511
Registered: 7-2003
Posted on Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - 8:10 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Why is it assumed if someone believes the 'traditional' teaching that they 'like' it?

I get no pleasure to think that people will suffer eternally, but I can't see that eternal means one thing when speaking to eternal life and another of eternal punishment. They have to be refering to the same length of time to be consistent to me. But I'd be thrilled to be wrong. I get no 'joy' in leaning towards the traditional view. But it really doesn't change how I live my life.
Agapetos
Registered user
Username: Agapetos

Post Number: 548
Registered: 10-2002


Posted on Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - 8:10 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

This double topic (annihilation & intermediate state) is like the mythical phoenix bird at the forum, isn't it! Sometimes it resurfaces with the same things said before, and other times -- like this time -- it seems to have some new things (thank you to Stan!). :-)

(Haha, so I suppose the Phoenix bird itself would not support "annihilation" since it keeps coming back...) :-)

However, amid the flood of this interesting discussion, I noted this post by River:


quote:

Colleen,

If what you say is true and I know it is, there is a vast difference between going up against bad doctrine and going up against an entity.
In order for there to be the deceived there must be a deceiver.

Now of course we are dealing with people in the Adventist ìchurchî and of course I am referring to the wide spectrum, in that spectrum we could try to ìboilî it down to a few basic types.
Looking past the people involved we would be looking at a hierarchy, at the root, the deceiver, now in this case, controller over a domain if we dare look at the thing in the Macro.

Now if we look at it in the micro we find different individuals, the human entity.
I will see if I can bring it down to a few basic types of individuals.

1. We find the individual who has given over completely to this deceiving entity, more likely to hold onto positions of power, whether financial or otherwise, a spirit of pride, should we contend with him, he is busy digging his grave and marking his grave stone and will not hear you. If you dare interrupt him in his digging and carving he will turn on you with bared bloody fangs.

2. We find the person who perhaps through circumstance of life or other reasons, lets let Isaiah describe him (Isa 44:18 NIV) They know nothing, they understand nothing; their eyes are plastered over so they cannot see, and their minds closed so they cannot understand. (Isa 44:19 NIV) No one stops to think, no one has the knowledge or understanding to say, "Half of it I used for fuel; I even baked bread over its coals, I roasted meat and I ate. Shall I make a detestable thing from what is left? Shall I bow down to a block of wood?" (Isa 44:20 NIV) He feeds on ashes, a deluded heart misleads him; he cannot save himself, or say, "Is not this thing in my right hand a lie?"

Shall we contend for his soul?

3. We have the person who, as in all ìChurchesî attends idly who has no real commitment; it is just ìsomething to do, ìafter all the kids like it!î

Shall we contend for his soul?

4. We have the person who says ìWhat new babble shall I hear today?

Do we dare Babel with the babbler and chance rendering our own ministry too non effect?

"If the Lords lot falleth for you to travel yon rough road, so strewn with the wounded souls of mení
Wilt thou cower at the task?
If the Lord saith unto thee, 'Awake, arise, let us goí
Wilt thou sleep on and take thy rest?
If asked to bear the lords Cross a little way
Wilt thou balk at the load?
If the Lord calleth thee to work in his vineyard
Wilt thou continue to sit idly by the way
and say 'Nay, nay Lord, call upon this man for he is more fit than I'?"

River


I found this profound and deep, and I think it truly brings up an important question: Recognizing the root of Adventism --the spirit of deceit-- what shall we do about it? And more importantly, what does the Lord privately call us to do? Especially in sight of the understanding of the spiritual nature of the Adventist root.

Many of us (including myself) have been content to talk to the person, to hash & re-hash theologies, points, articles of faith old & new, etc. But it would seem there is something very important to River's expression, "contend for his soul", and originally as Paul said, "We wrestle against powers & principalities".

What I think this is leading up to is, in a nutshell, the ministry of intercessory prayer.

We tend to look at matters only doctrinally, and if we think of the possibility of someone "changing" or losing the "veil", a good portion of us tend to gravitate towards talking about "election". While I believe none of us intends it to become so, nonetheless I think sometimes we don't progress but instead fall back to passiveness (usually in the form of doctrinal discussion).

One effect I think this understanding should have on us is the way that we view & approach people who are being blinded or are seeing through the veil, having been deceived by the inherited root of Adventism.

There's a lot here, more than I know. But I think it is progress for us to examine these things prayerfully and go where He leads.

In His love,
Ramone
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady

Post Number: 3031
Registered: 3-2004


Posted on Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - 8:25 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ramone,
I like things stated simply for my senior mind. It sounds like spiritual warfare you are talking about above. With spiritual warfare, I know I can do nothing but pray. So I pray for all those caught up in adventisms trap. I pray for those who were raised SDA, but are unchurched not because they have given up on God or what ever reason(that is my family). I am not perfect at it, but I keep on praying. That is just me, personally, how I do things.
Like I said, I like to keep it simple.
Diana
Agapetos
Registered user
Username: Agapetos

Post Number: 551
Registered: 10-2002


Posted on Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - 8:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

:-) You're awesome, Diana. :-)

Yes, I think it is spiritual warfare, but I also feel there is something else. I'm not exactly sure what, though.

Ha! Everyone, I ask your pardon for not having my thoughts completely formulated when I begin typing! Like now, for example... :-)

I'm not exactly sure, Diana. Yes, praying for them, but also... I'm not sure. A change of attitude? Or a change of the way we speak about them? A change of our theology about what "binds" them in view of the spirit of deceit? And these things, perhaps, changing the "way" that we pray for them?

River, help!!!! Haha.

You all are great.

Blessings & love in Christ,
Ramone
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady

Post Number: 3033
Registered: 3-2004


Posted on Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - 9:04 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ramone,
I learned something in my 12 step program that has worked for me in the past. It is the the Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous. This is about prayer. It goes like this: If there is some one or some thing that is bothering you, pray about it for two weeks, every day, asking God to give them everything you want for yourself. God will change YOUR attitude and not the person, at least not in two weeks. This is how I do it. I am really angry at some one and And I will start praying for them. I tell God that I know this works, but I am so angry I do not want that person to have everything I want. I want them to be miserable and I am VERY truthful about how I think of that person. The way I see it is that God knows what I think, so I better be truthful with Him, so He can change me. So, I pray like this for two weeks and God does change my attitude. So maybe, I need at attitude change. I will pray about that. I, also, am not sure what to do about our brothers and sisters still in the grip of adventism. knowing prayer is the best thing I can do, I pray. I will ask God if I, and others, need an attitude change and if so where and what. I know he will answer.
He is always awesome.
Diana
Agapetos
Registered user
Username: Agapetos

Post Number: 553
Registered: 10-2002


Posted on Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - 9:23 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Thanks for sharing that, Diana.

I have several friends who've been through 12-step, and I deeply respect them all. I kind of wish every Christian could have the experience so as to learn how to forgive others and thus really get to know God's agape love in perhaps one of the most practical ways on earth.

With our family in Adventism, I hope that I try to never forget what it was like being Adventist. Oh, there are the negative things, the fears, the confusion -- that I happily let go of. But what I mean is what life looked like from "under the veil". I realize many things I say (and we all say) would be difficult to "hear" for the "me" of 10 years ago. So when I speak to others, I pray that I will talk to them as if I was talking to myself 10 years ago.

One of the practical benefits of this is learning to trust God and leave "them" in His hands. Because after all, He led me to Himself and out of the mess! 10 years ago I wouldn't have ever imagined it, and I certainly did not know I was gradually being drawn out of Adventism. So when I apply my own experience---the way God led me "out"---to Adventists today, I realize that whatever doctrinal things they say & believe right now as they're talking to me---I don't have to get too fretted by it. I was changed, and God might be (might? is!) working on them now in the same way that He worked on me!

So instead maybe it becomes a matter of doing like Jesus did -- He said that He only did what He saw the Father doing. Perhaps our "way" is to do the same? To pray & seek His face, and then listen to the person we're talking to long enough to begin to discern how God is moving in their life. Look for what God is doing, and then join Him in that.

Thanks again for sharing, Diana!
In Christ,
Ramone
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker

Post Number: 4955
Registered: 12-2003


Posted on Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - 10:43 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Praying for Adventists is key. Besides prayer, we have also the example of Jesus and the apostles who did more than listen to the Jews and the unbelieving Gentiles and find how God was moving in their lives. Jesus directly exposed the heresies and fallacies of the traditional Jewish teachings, and Paul couldn't have been more straightfoward than he was when he condemned the compromised living among the Cornthians and the deception by the Judaizers among the Galatians.

God asks us to tell the truth as He moves us. He doesn't ask us to be pushy or trouble-making. But He gives us opportunities to speak, and He asks us to speak truthfully, to know who our true enemy isóthe deceiver himselfóand to stay dressed in His armor as we stand our ground.

We cannot speak to every Adventist the same wayóbut when we ask God to speak through us and give us His words, to fill us with the knowledge of His will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding (Col 1:9), we will speak truth with authority that is from Godónot from ourselves, and not derived from any man's opinion.

I don't think that the fact that something might be difficult to hear is a good reason not to speak. Jesus and Paul certainly spoke directly to people many times with words that were so difficult to hear that people tried to kill them. Yes, we must speak with understanding and wisdom and great discernment and compassionóbut we can't avoid clearly speaking truth because people might be offended.

Arguing is not helpful; usually our urges to be adversarial come from our own frustration rather than from God. But sometimes what God really leads us to say as we defend and respresent Jesus is far more direct and "offensive" than is arguing about theology. Identifying and defending Jesus and His truth is often offensiveóand it's difficult to do because it tends to make people angry much more than does theological argument.

So yes, we must prayóand we must be dressed in the belt of truth, the breastplate of righteousness, the shoes of the gospel of peace, the helmet of salvation, the shield of faithóand we must be prepared to wield the sword of the Spirit which is the word of God at a moment's notice. And as we prepare ourselves for the battle (which is God's battle, not ours), we are to pray in the Spirit on all occasions.

We must pray, and we must declare truth. We are Christ's witnesses!

Colleen
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b

Post Number: 636
Registered: 7-2004


Posted on Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - 11:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Colleen, I agree that we can not avoid discussing the doctrinal errors of the church with SDAs. For any of us who are convinced that the church teaches another gospel than the one taught by Paul and Jesus, we are obligated to speak up. We can't sit by without doing what we can. That doesn't mean always being confrontational.

However, I'm not sure that conditionalism/eternal punishment would be high on my list of the errors that I would want to start discussing. I know many people who have left the church and held on to this belief for at least some period of time. Conditionalism does not appear to directly interfere with an understanding of the true Gospel. I think that the big 3 issues are Biblical inspiration (if we can't trust and agree on Scripture alone as the accurate source of doctrine there really can't be any other fruitful discussion), justification/atonement, and our spirit being more than just breath.

I don't believe anyone can understand the Sabbath, without a firm understanding of justification and atonement. Until we know the rest provided in Christ, any discussions about fulfillment of the shadow can not be grasped.
River
Registered user
Username: River

Post Number: 113
Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 - 6:09 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

We all travel yon rough road, so strewn with the wounded souls of mení a step at a time. Just as there are individuals I mentioned above, we are individuals just as they are individuals, like the old height marks carved on the door post, we each have different height marks in our own Christian maturity.
Diana keeps it simple, Dale (Referring to his letter) in the post above gets down to the ìnitty grittyî by his writing I can tell he didnít get there sitting on his ìLaurelsî so God uses Dale where he is at. Those questions were to myself, the poem was to me also. Did God speak to your heart when you read it? Then take heed. When our work is done, what will be left of our personal ministry, just hay and stubble? God is a consuming fire and make no mistake, hay and stubble will be burned away. The Lord said to Peter, Peter do you love me? Feed my sheep. Well, do we?
I just know that I have been doing some deep soul searching lately, or is the Lord doing the searching?
Am I to sit idly eating green grass while some of ìHis sheep has to make do with ashes?î Will I be able to hear their painful bleating as they sink their teeth in grit?
We must be lead by the spirit at all times, at times contending in prayer, at times with words, at times remain silent, probably most times both, but contend we must?
(Rom 11:29 KJV) For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
Whatever my gift, it doesnít appear to me that God will change his mind.
I submit to you Romans 12:4 thru 8.
My personal desire is to see through his eyes. I am convinced of this, one ministry or calling is not above or beneath anotherís.
The spirit of God will not lead through a spirit pride and I have to remind myself of that continually.
River
River
Registered user
Username: River

Post Number: 114
Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 - 8:36 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ramone writes: Recognizing the root of Adventism --the spirit of deceit-- what shall we do about it? And more importantly, what does the Lord privately call us to do? Especially in sight of the understanding of the spiritual nature of the Adventist root.

Many of us (including myself) have been content to talk to the person, to hash & re-hash theologies, points, articles of faith old & new, etc. But it would seem there is something very important to River's expression, "contend for his soul", and originally as Paul said, "We wrestle against powers & principalities".

What I think this is leading up to is, in a nutshell, the ministry of intercessory prayer.

We tend to look at matters only doctrinally, and if we think of the possibility of someone "changing" or losing the "veil", a good portion of us tend to gravitate towards talking about "election". While I believe none of us intends it to become so, nonetheless I think sometimes we don't progress but instead fall back to passiveness (usually in the form of doctrinal discussion).
Ramone,
You answered your own question: What I think this is leading up to is, in a nutshell, the ministry of intercessory prayer.
Now you have the missing ingredient, intercessory prayer is not like normal prayer, I have experienced it only one time in my 35 years of being a Christian but I did experience it and I am telling you itís not the way we pray normally, some of you may experience it often, I can tell when I hear someone is involved in intercessory prayer just by hearing them at prayer, I know one person who enters into it easily through use of it and believe me, every devil in hell takes cover, I have been in the next room and it even made me want to take cover.
Ramone, donít kid yourself into thinking you can go up against this spirit of deceit and ìContend for the souls of menî without it, arguing with these spiritual entities will not cut it, they will just sap your strength and leave you drained.
Now some of you are probably going to think ìAh, he is just an ignorant old Pentecostal redneck preacher, probably doesnít have much educationî I got a little ìbook Larninî but ìbook Larninî donít cut it either when it comes to this.
I dare to say 90 % of Christians never go into intercessory prayer, they pray until their knees hurt and call it intercessory prayer, Iím not criticizing, they just do not know. The one time I was in intercessory prayer for a person, I didnít even know I had knees much less whether they hurt or not. Iíll lay you ten to one Jesus was not aware of the blood mixed with sweat popping out on his face, I really donít know what all he prayed about there but I have to come to the conclusion he was doing spiritual battle to get his flesh ready for what was coming was one of the things he was doing, but it is a perfect example of intercessory prayer. He hurt when poked the same as you and me. No doubt this was a common practice with Jesus, yet the Bible doesnít record this. One could possibly gather this from the fact that the three with him went to sleep, were they used to hearing Jesus pray?
I honestly do not know whether I am up to this or not but I do know what it is and what it is not.
Ramone I tell you this in all honesty, yes, it will lead up to that if you or I or anyone else pursue it, I just do not know any other way to ìContend for the souls of menî.
This entering into ìintercessory prayerî is not a light thing, my flesh just does not want to do it, itís too hard, oh, I got no problems with prayer, even standing on my knees till they hurt which is at my age about two minutes. Intercessory prayer is not the length of prayer but the intensity of the soul and being totally (bound up?) in God. I will try to explain this, (Mat 26:37 KJV) And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy.
Intercessory pray is heaviness of soul. Exceeding heaviness and sorrow. Jesus said (Mat 26:38 KJV) Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me.
That is the kind of love and concern you must have, if you donít have it then you must ask it of the Father.
Hey, if you good folk call me kooky or think me kooky I wonít love you any less.
River
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady

Post Number: 3035
Registered: 3-2004


Posted on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 - 9:10 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

River, I am sure you have seen the thread for the prayer circle. We want our SDA brothers and sisters free from this deceit. Now, I have heard of intercessory prayer, from an SDA point of view, and that is to pray for others. I have not heard it explained as you just did. I think that is the way we should pray for our loved ones and friends who are included in the list for the prayer circle. I will pray about it for myself. I want my blood family to know Christ and all my SDA family to know him also.
Thanks for explaining what intercessory prayer is.
God, you are awesome.
Diana
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz

Post Number: 2282
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 - 10:22 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I second Rick's comments in his last post above.

Yes, the doctrine of conditionalism and eternal torment are very interesting to debate, but I maintain that our focus in witnessing to current SDAs should be the gospel.

The only unique doctrine to SDAs is the heresy of the Investigative Judgment. This doctrine strikes at the most basic root of the problem of Adventism, and that is that man is the captain of his soul, and determines his fate in salvation.

The Bible clearly teaches that God does the saving and has determined our destiny before the foundation of the world, and He knows who are His. The Lord Jesus actively seeks out and saves those whom He purchased on Calvary.

The Investigative Judgment just destroys any hope of assurance, and the attempts of the revisionists to sanitize the doctrine make it worse by suggesting that the IJ is to somehow vindicate God--which again strikes at the sovereignty of God.

This doctrine was established by a false vision of Ellen White as a way to excuse the Millerite error. This doctrine denies the doctrine of the particular atonement of Christ for our sins, and makes the atonement incomplete, as then we are the ones finally contributing to our salvation.

The doctrine of the IJ and sanctuary is so easy to refute Biblically, on the basis of Hebrews 9 and 10 alone.

If we can get our SDA friends to see the faulty foundation that this doctrine is based on, then all the other particular doctrines will fall as well--The Sabbath as the seal of God, Ellen White as a true prophet of God. And as Rick said, the authority and inerrancy of scripture is of prime importance.

SDA's claim to be the inheritors of the Reformation of Martin Luther, but the doctrine of the IJ strikes at the very heart of the doctrine of justification by faith alone. This is what the Devil wants to do--destroy our assurance, and therefore make us ineffective ambassadors for Christ.

This is the reason I left Adventism, as its only claim to uniqueness of doctrine vs. other Christians is this false doctrine which strikes at the very root of the gospel, and propagates the spirit of deception.

Stan

Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady

Post Number: 3038
Registered: 3-2004


Posted on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 - 10:40 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Stan,
What I have seen on CARM is a vigorous defense of the IJ. I think that stems from the thinking that the Bible writers copied from others, so like EGW, the Bible has errors. All I can do is pray for them.
Diana
River
Registered user
Username: River

Post Number: 115
Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 - 10:47 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Diana
When honestly you go into your place of prayer with true love of a persons or persons on your heart to wait before the Father, allowing him to place the burden of heaviness into your soul, your heart will be broken, I said it was not an easy thing, your very spirit will begin to travail for that person or persons, it is at that time that the strongholds will begin to be pulled down and you will see the result of that. We lead an easy life, Jesus did not. I suspect that he left the village and went into the garden because he knew he must not be interrupted and if you do it you must not be interrupted either.
Jesus knew when he went in there that he was going to turn himself over completely to prayer and too his Father. He entered his prayer garden with purpose and was prepared to stay for the duration. Can we do any less? You see when God places this ìExceeding heaviness of soulî in us it is no longer our human love but the love of the Father will begin to cry out for the person.
Tisha
Registered user
Username: Tisha

Post Number: 214
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 - 11:29 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Diana, I think another reason for the vigorous defense of the IJ is because (whether they know it or not) it is the doctrine that holds it all together for the SDA's. Without it, EGW falls, and so will the SDA denomination when enough people see the truth. That is a very scary thing for SDAs to face.

River, thanks for giving insight into intercessory prayer. That has been something I just do not understand, but am getting more comfortable with as I learn more.

It really is an act of sacrifice on our part, which is not to be taken lightly. It is ME with my agenda getting out of the way, which in turn allows me to see how just powerful and gracious God is! I really do believe intercessory prayer is as much (or more) for me and my growth than for those I pray for. God doesn't need my feeble attempts, but I need to see God working to fully grasp His Love.

I hope this makes sense, because I don't know if it is coming across as humbly as I mean it. I just know that God doesn't NEED me to accomplish His will, so there must be more to intercessory prayer than ME MAKING GOD do something!

-tisha
Walkonwater
Registered user
Username: Walkonwater

Post Number: 133
Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 - 12:00 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I beleive with all my heart that the WORD of God, the Bible, was given under the inspiration of the Spirit of God and it is the only book in the world that can make that claim.

However, even Jesus talked about those who search the Scripture thinking they will find salvation there when Salvation was standing right in front of them.

The Bible is God's inspired word, but innerrent? no. Let me give a short list of some of the problems. I give this list not to cause anyone to lose confidence in the Bible. Instead I give the list to demonstarate that many who beleive in inerrency cliam something for the Bible that is untrue.

Just as many Adventists have claimed something for Ellen White that is untrue, so too many do the very same thing with the Bible. Thus unbelivers can simply point to a few errors in the Bible and gut a Christian of his basis of authority, the Bible.

Here are just a few of the problems.

2 Kings 8:26 says "Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign..." 2 Chronicles 22:2 says "Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign..."

2 Samuel 6:23 says "Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death" 2 Samuel 21:8 says "But the king took...the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul"

2 Samuel 8:3-4 says "David smote also Hadadezer...and took from him...seven hundred horsemen..." 1 Chronicles 18:3-4 says "David smote Hadarezer...and took from him...seven thousand horsemen..."

1 Kings 4:26 says "And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots..." 2 Chronicles 9:25 says "And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots..."

2 Kings 25:8 says "And in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month...Nebuzaradan...came...unto Jerusalem" Jeremiah 52:12 says "...in the fifth month, in the tenth day of the month...came Nebuzaradan...into Jerusalem"

1 Samuel 31:4-6 says "...Saul took a sword and fell upon it. And when his armourbearer saw that Saul was dead and...died with him. So Saul died..." 2 Samuel 21:12 says "...the Philistines had slain Saul in Gilboa."

Gen 2:17 says "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day thou eastest thereof thou shalt surely die [note: it doesn't say 'spiritual' death]
Gen 5:5 says "And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died."

Matt 1:16 says, "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus..." Luke 3:23 says "And Jesus...the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli"

James 1:13 says "..for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man." Gen 22:1 says "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham..."

Gen 6:20 says "Of fowls after their kind and of cattle [etc.]...two of every sort shall come unto thee..." Gen 7:2,3 says "Of every clean beast thou shall take to thee by sevens...Of fowls also of the air by sevens..."

Luke23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost." John 19:30 "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."

Gen 32:30 states "...for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." John 1:18 states, "No man hath seen God at any time..."

These are just a few of the discrepancies non Christians point out in the Bible. I can list many more.

By saying the Bible is inerrent, it gives non Christians a basis for throwing out the Bible as the inspired word of God just as you have thrown out Ellen White because you have found "errors" in what she said.

All I am saying here is, "What's sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander." We cannot apply one standard to the writings of Ellen White and another to the Bible. If errors cause one to throw out Ellen then errors should cause one to throw out the Bible.

WalkOnWater
Tenblo0@hotmail.com

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration