The books of Hebrews and Revelation prove the unchangeableness of God's Holy Law. (2)

[Leuko Petra]

...Daniel 7:10 is not exclusively for the judgment of the people of God so it cannot be used to support the IJ

Daniel 7, like all of Daniel is written Chiastically, and sealed. Daniel 7:10 has a chaistic twin, found in Daniel 7:22, "Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High..." or renders "given in favor of the saints". It also has its parallels in Daniel 8; Matthew 25 and Revelation, etc.

 

[Leuko Petra]

...Thus you deny God's omniscience, he needs to investigate and seek out what he should know.

Again a misunderstanding of what was presented previously, it is not for God's knowledge [He knows all]... others are involved.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPTtslMKZVg

 

[Leuko Petra]

...will obey...

Obey what?

 

[Leuko Petra]

...Christ's own prophecy....

Which one?

One with the "Son of Man" in it? That is from Daniel and Ezekiel... Coming with all the Holy Angels, that is from Psalms, Isaiah, etc.

Christ spoke of His second coming from the OT, Scriptures. Even as Peter said, We have a more sure word of prophecy... which one's Peter?... from the OT... Paul spoke about the Lawless one, or the man of sin, and be destroyed by the brightness of the Lord's coming, and spake of it from OT...

...Gabriel in the OT, in Daniel 12:3 spake of the Second Advent, and yet he said beforehand, "that which is noted in the scripture of truth".... like Jeremiah, Ezekiel, etc.

 

[Keachian]

Again a misunderstanding of what was presented previously, it is not for God's knowledge [He knows all]... others are involved.

I'm not watching a video, just type out who else is involved, and no Satan is not involved before you bring him up. And Job is not an example of IJ between Satan and God.

 

[Keachian]

Obey what?

The covenant which is written on their hearts.

 

[Keachian]

Daniel 7, like all of Daniel is written Chiastically, and sealed. Daniel 7:10 has a chaistic twin, found in Daniel 7:22, "Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High..." or renders "given in favor of the saints". It also has its parallels in Daniel 8; Matthew 25 and Revelation, etc.

So we don't possess the Kingdom? Even though Christ's message was behold the Kingdom is at hand, and displayed this through his ministry, it was immediate it was not far off, when we enter into Christ, we enter into the Kingdom, Christ is King and he reigns from on high.

 

[Leuko Petra]

The covenant which is written on their hearts.

Where is this covenant to be found prophesied?

 

[Stryder06]

You haven't shown where the IJ is depicted in Scripture.
You haven't explained why Adventists accept a doctrine they can't support (disagreement with the Sanctuary Doctrine still remains probably the leading reason members leave the SDA church to join other Christian fellowships, between 80-90% according to surveys I have seen).
What you accuse others of is your own practice.

When your empty claims are replaced with tangible content, I would be happy to respond to them.

They're not empty. The IJ is found in the sanctuary model given to Israel, which is in Exodus, the visions of Daniel which are in Daniel, and the visions of John, which are in Revelation.

The problem here is that you don't want to understand it, you want to debate it. If you want to understand it, go study those areas of the bible. If you want to debate it, then you'll have to find someone else to do that with.

 

[Stryder06]

LLoJ has kindly resurrected one of my threads: http://www.christianforums.com/t7735006/

You offer the same dodging dismissal of my understanding of what I see as the key passage, Tall73 also gives detailed exegesis of the context of the passage and we all look at Lev 16 in detail which you seemed to think was what was lacking in my understanding of the Hebrews passage and how it interacts with the IJ.

Tall73 is wrong. His understanding of this teaching and the sanctuary is flawed. You only agree with him because you consider this to be an incorrect doctrine.

I have no problem however going back to the discussion with you in you thread if that's what you would like to do.

You treat her as a prophet, she acts like a prophet, by all outward appearances she looks like a 19C prophet. To claim that she doesn't fill that role in your sect is sophism, even on her part.

How did she act like a prophet? And how do you know how I treat her? God said that in the last days men and women would see visions, and dream dreams. Having a vision, or having a dream does not make you a prophet.

 

[Stryder06]

Certainly. Grace simply cancels the law.

So then do you believe that Israel didn't have grace?

 

[Keachian]

If you want to understand it, go study those areas of the bible.

Been there done that, should I try again with the Conflict of the Ages handy?

 

[Stryder06]

Been there done that, should I try again with the Conflict of the Ages handy?

Looking at your response to LP I can handly say that you haven't been there and you haven't done that.

You have your own understanding that you're reading into scripture, and because you refuse to acknowledge that you may be wrong, you reject any explanation given to you that goes contrary to what you've already decided is true.

 

[Stephen Kendall]

The highest esteem or even summation of the Law was given by Jesus through the golden two. Was not Jesus a teacher to help us find our way to our Father? It is our Faith in him with his sent Holy Spirit living within us for all eternity that allows us to walk in God's favor. I don't chase after the mystery of the Law or hide from condemnation of it, for it is by faith that we believe and follow Christ Jesus. I would think that Jesus is the Law to us, that we should obey him and follow him to our Father.

You know as confusing as everything is, especially when you throw in theologies, like Trinity, are we expected to be able to follow Jesus correctly and make it with our faith? If we belong to God, then we will understand Jesus and be able to follow him. However, what about our mistakes. What about the 33,000 denominations and their mistakes? Since they all can't be right then they all must be in error. They pit one against the other and fail to be known by their love for one another. We are expected to be known by our love. Plain and simple. Why aren't we expected to be known by our knowledge, such as God's Law? Maybe because God's Law is love or die. Also plain and simple.

 

[Keachian]

Tall73 is wrong. His understanding of this teaching and the sanctuary is flawed. You only agree with him because you consider this to be an incorrect doctrine.

We do disagree on certain parts of doctrine. And yes I do agree with him that the SDA view of sanctuary is wrong.

I have no problem however going back to the discussion with you in you thread if that's what you would like to do.

If you want to, but you really werent of much use there either. You just said I was wrong and pretty much left it at that.

How did she act like a prophet? And how do you know how I treat her?

Well a 19thC prophet at least, she is the standard and you conform your beliefs to hers.

God said that in the last days men and women would see visions, and dream dreams. Having a vision, or having a dream does not make you a prophet.

Yes, Acts 2, seriously is there no end of you trying to push things out of where the Apostles saw their fulfillment? Of course everything has it's exception, especially when it comes to EGW for you

 

[VictorC]

Daniel 7, like all of Daniel is written Chiastically, and sealed. Daniel 7:10 has a chaistic twin, found in Daniel 7:22, "Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High..." or renders "given in favor of the saints". It also has its parallels in Daniel 8; Matthew 25 and Revelation, etc.

It has been many months (at least) that you were shown that the judgment scenario depicted in Daniel 7 is on the beast governments, with the saints being the recipients of the kingdoms they lost. This doesn't fit the definition of the Investigative Judgment. This is similar to the content in all of your posts, where you've filled them with vast amounts of material that doesn't meet the criteria the IJ is constrained to:

• Convened only after 1844, 'it is...in 1844...to perform the work of investigative judgment'
• Addresses only the 'professed people of God', and is not a general judgment
• Convened in absentia of the accused, 'they will not be present in person'
• The accused are judged according to the old covenant, 'The law of God is the standard'
• Adventist soteriology is dependent on this alleged judgment, 'their names will be blotted out of the book of life'

Now, ask yourself this question: Why do you vast quantities of material that doesn't even fit this defintion?
Others see it as obfuscation posted in lieu of actual support for a doctrine you're having trouble finding in Scripture.

 

[Keachian]

Looking at your response to LP I can handly say that you haven't been there and you haven't done that.

You have your own understanding that you're reading into scripture, and because you refuse to acknowledge that you may be wrong, you reject any explanation given to you that goes contrary to what you've already decided is true.

I can say the same of you. Yes the Daniel and Revelation passages are weaker in terms of study, however I make up for it by ruling out the IJ from being in either because of my in depth knowledge of Hebrews. That still doesn't rule out that the IJ needs to have the judgment of the professed believer (something never talked about as happening in Scripture except that they leave us to prove that they were never of us) it is not done in lieu of the accused either and the only link to 1844 is a tenuous one which from my perspective if your prophet clinging to her favourite date for the 2nd coming.

 

[VictorC]

Tall73 is wrong. His understanding of this teaching and the sanctuary is flawed. You only agree with him because you consider this to be an incorrect doctrine.

Tall73 and I have participated on various topics on two different forums, and while we don't match opinions on various nonessential fine points, we do come to similar conclusions regarding the Sanctuary Doctrine that remains exclusive to the SDA church. The same is true with my experience with his wife, Sophia7. Their approach is reliance on what Scripture actually says, and Tall73 spent time wading through 1100 pages of dissertations on the Sanctuary Doctrine. He then asked the right questions, and got the wrong answers continuously from those hoping to retain his tenure as a SDA pastor. The result is that he left Adventism.

I miss his (and Sophia7) participation on the forum. Alas, a discussion forum is a good place to turn to for answers, but after addressing them a forum loses its value - so I can't blame him or his wife for leaving CF. Forums can be as addictive as gambling, and are not a replacement for real life.

Characterizing others the way you do is a form of argumentum ad hominem, a logical fallacy. It dismisses the content of his contributions for no valid reason. Tall73 brought valuable insight into Adventism that only a SDA pastor can do.

*EDIT* I just saw that Tall73 wrote a post yesterday, so I guess he's still lurking around these parts. Maybe he will offer something on this thread.

 

[Keachian]

Obey what?

This is largely a distraction that fails to interact with a statement of belief that you don't understand, or care to understand. You have probably had little to no interaction with Reformed Soteriology and so because your prophet dismissed some of the defining marks of RS you dismiss them even more cavalierly.

All are Totally depraved yet it is Yahweh's good pleasure that from before creation he Unconditionally Elected and purposed to send the Son to make Limited Atonement for a people from all nations and across all history through his Irresistable Grace and so that they might Persevere in order that his Glory might be seen, his Justice be supreme and that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, and every tongue confess that he is Lord to the glory of the Father.

 

[Stephen Kendall]

I gave the answer sought after to this tread. Did anyone hear? Maybe people here have a desire to debate and wrangle over words. Read the last chapters of First Timothy in the New Testament.

God will allow you to go your own direction, even if it is to your destruction. The big question is why? If He responds in the way of Love, since he is life itself, then to let you be free, though a slave to sin, is to love you. He sends prophets and all out to you, but you enjoy your darkness too much. Why all this doubting and hurt? Why all this anger towards God?

Fear of God is to love him and know him. Sure he is powerful and almighty, but he acts out of compassion and love for us. If we truly seek him, we seek to understand him. Since Christ had his Father always with him, then if we seek God, we seek Christ. Understanding the love of Christ for us to please his Father, we need to find God through Jesus and not back through the salvation through the Law. It is love that fulfills the Law through Jesus' love of his Dad and thus to us through his sacrifice. We are to come into this love and faith in Jesus. We are to have compassion and willingness to take the steps of Christ in our lives.