THE GREAT CONTROVERSY in Baltimore, Maryland

[Aaron112]

the question comes to mind as to why biblical illiteracy is so widespread.

As written, God sent (and at present exists?) a famine not of Scripture nor of bread or food, but a famine of the hearing of the Word of Yahweh. In Scripture His Purpose might be seen if He Permits.

The books sent to every address might have better results than trying to get people to read Scripture. God Knows. A lot of people don't believe Scripture you know ? They believe traditions of men, i.e. what they have been told Scripture says.

 

[Amo2]

As I said, I've read chapters 2 and 3. I'm not seeing what the extra text you included adds to clarify the timeline. Yes, there's a reference to claimed pagan influence before the "establishment of the papacy," although it's not clear whether this is referring to the 6th century, when she says the pope was proclaimed to be the head of the church (and I'm puzzled at what her rationale for that could be other than backdating 1260 years from her own time) or some earlier time. But then the section that includes a mention of the Real Presence comes after one on indulgences, which are said to involve enlistment in the "pontiff's wars," which could only be a reference to the Crusades, the first of which took place in the 11th century. Is there an implicit reversal in time? Is the reference to the "pontiff's wars" only an example of how indulgences were later used? Neither would seem to be the natural reading of the text.

Whether you can see and or accept it or not, what is said in several paragraphs between the two statements under examination, does have direct bearing upon the overall context of that being written. Speaking of the 11th century in one paragraph, and then the 13th century seven paragraphs later, doesn't equal the presentation of history in historical order between these two centuries. Unless the context of those in-between paragraphs suggests or simply states this to be so. To the contrary, after speaking of the eleventh century, the context is taken back to a time before the papacy itself in addressing its development throughout the centuries. Clearly establishing that the paragraphs under examination were not depicting historical developments just from the 11th to the 13th century. You are saying this is what is being stated, not the context of that being examined, itself.

The natural reading of the text is that after speaking of the 11th century, the text goes back to a time before the existence of the papacy. Breaking any link or suggestion that what is being discussed is intended to be taken as though it was just in relation to events which took place between the 11th and 13th century. There is no definite order of events throughout time, just an address concerning slow developments over the centuries, while mentioning certain events during certain centuries. You may of course make it out to be whatever you wish, even if it is not there.

 

[Amo2]

The people I interact with outside of this forum generally don't give much thought to SDA arguments one way or the other, other than where they overlap with other Protestant arguments such as the silly idea of anonymous secret Protestants living in parallel with the mainstream church for centuries and leaving no historical evidence prior to the Waldensians, and then also trying to claim that these hypothetical people would have been Nicene Christians even though they would have to reject the church that wrote the Nicene Creed.

The Waldensians themselves claim to go back to the time of the apostles I do believe. No one is claiming there were Protestants before Luther. Or no one is doing so correctly in any case. The term was applied to predominantly Roman Catholics who protested the abuses of their church, were excommunicated by the church for doing so, and then labeled as Protestants. The abuses they protested included the abuse of non Catholic Christians of the time and prior, who maintained biblical teachings or teachings contrary to the mandated beliefs of Roman Catholicism. Many of whom existed throughout all of the centuries since the apostles. As evidenced in many an historical account, and the persecutions themselves which decisively reveal that there were many who did not agree with and or comply with Roman Catholic teaching. This is not to mention the many Christians killed during the Imperial establishment of Roman Catholicism, the many dissenting Christian sects of the day suffering persecution when they would not conform their faiths.

The second chapter of the book at the following link gives an excellent definition and or account of what it is or means to be a Protestant.

https://philadelphiamessage.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/lessons-from-the-reformation-by-A-T-Jones.pdf

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Thank you again for your pertinent reply. Am I correct in understanding that the primary purpose for inundating Baltimore and Philadelphia with this particular book was membership recruitment for the SDA?

The argument in itself is suspect. It begs the question, if the Bible alone is sufficient for a rule of faith, of what use is the SDA?
Are they not a group of men and women apart from scripture and therefore subject to error?

If we are to believe the Bible and the SDA, does that not make the claim of scripture only a slogan rather than a belief?

 

[Freth]

The argument in itself is suspect. It begs the question, if the Bible alone is sufficient for a rule of faith, of what use is the SDA?
Are they not a group of men and women apart from scripture and therefore subject to error?

If we are to believe the Bible and the SDA, does that not make the claim of scripture only a slogan rather than a belief?

How does one determine error?

Scriptural discernment through the Holy Spirit.

1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.​

Through prayerful study of scripture, one can know the truth.

Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.​

​

2 Timothy 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.​

​

The church.

Matthew 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.​

Matthew 28:19-20 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.​

​

Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.​

​

James 5:14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord​

​

Hebrews 10:25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.​

Jesus addressed issues in the seven churches in Revelation 1:1-3. He said that any church that remained unrepentant would have its candlestick removed.

Revelation 2:5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.​

What assurances do I have that my denomination is not in error? I prayerfully study scripture and rely on the Holy Spirit for discernment. I wouldn't remain in a church if I thought it was in error. In fact, when I came back to Christianity, I vetted every point, and I continue to do so as a member of the church.

In closing, let's revisit the questions presented.

Q: If the Bible alone is sufficient for a rule of faith, of what use is the SDA? Are they not a group of men and women apart from scripture and therefore subject to error? If we are to believe the Bible and the SDA, does that not make the claim of scripture only a slogan rather than a belief?​

This would apply to the whole of Protestantism, not just SDA.

Protestantism: A branch of Christianity that emerged from the Reformation and emphasizes "sola scriptura," or the belief that the Bible is the only source of spiritual authority.​

​

Protestantism is a major branch of Christianity that began with the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century when Martin Luther and others challenged the authority and practices of the Roman Catholic Church. Key Protestant beliefs include the Bible as the ultimate authority (Sola Scriptura), salvation by faith and grace alone, and only two sacraments (baptism and Communion). It encompasses many diverse denominations, like Lutherans, Methodists, and Baptists, and emphasizes the importance of the individual's relationship with God.​

 

[boughtwithaprice]

How does one determine error?

Scriptural discernment through the Holy Spirit.

1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.​

Through prayerful study of scripture, one can know the truth.

Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.​

​

2 Timothy 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.​

​

The church.

Matthew 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.​

Matthew 28:19-20 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.​

​

Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.​

​

James 5:14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord​

​

Hebrews 10:25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.​

Jesus addressed issues in the seven churches in Revelation 1:1-3. He said that any church that remained unrepentant would have its candlestick removed.

Revelation 2:5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.​

What assurances do I have that my denomination is not in error? I prayerfully study scripture and rely on the Holy Spirit for discernment. I wouldn't remain in a church if I thought it was in error. In fact, when I came back to Christianity, I vetted every point, and I continue to do so as a member of the church.

In closing, let's revisit the questions presented.

Q: If the Bible alone is sufficient for a rule of faith, of what use is the SDA? Are they not a group of men and women apart from scripture and therefore subject to error? If we are to believe the Bible and the SDA, does that not make the claim of scripture only a slogan rather than a belief?​

This would apply to the whole of Protestantism, not just SDA.

Protestantism: A branch of Christianity that emerged from the Reformation and emphasizes "sola scriptura," or the belief that the Bible is the only source of spiritual authority.​

​

Protestantism is a major branch of Christianity that began with the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century when Martin Luther and others challenged the authority and practices of the Roman Catholic Church. Key Protestant beliefs include the Bible as the ultimate authority (Sola Scriptura), salvation by faith and grace alone, and only two sacraments (baptism and Communion). It encompasses many diverse denominations, like Lutherans, Methodists, and Baptists, and emphasizes the importance of the individual's relationship with God.​

You have not answered the question. The point has not been made that scripture is the sole rule of faith.
You said it yourself. “I vetted every point.”
So is scripture only scripture if it has been “vetted” by you? How do you deal with disagreements with your vetting, as there are many?
What is the standard that you use?

Does someone that disagrees with your interpretation have an evil spirit? How do you know that you do not have an evil spirit?

Many claim sola scriptura, yet there is no consistent sola scriptura faith. How can we know truth?
If you say the Holy Spirit leads you into truth, the others say the same thing. Is there Holy Spirit the same as yours?
Claiming self knowledge and self spiritual enlightenment is no different than the Mormons who claim the burning in the bosom, or the Bhudists or New age spiritists that claim enlightenment.
Are they right, or is there another standard for truth?

Are you claiming that only those that come to your way of thinking are Christians and others are still in the dark despite having the same scriptures as you? How does that work?

 

[Freth]

You have not answered the question. The point has not been made that scripture is the sole rule of faith.
You said it yourself. “I vetted every point.”
So is scripture only scripture if it has been “vetted” by you? How do you deal with disagreements with your vetting, as there are many?
What is the standard that you use?

Does someone that disagrees with your interpretation have an evil spirit? How do you know that you do not have an evil spirit?

Many claim sola scriptura, yet there is no consistent sola scriptura faith. How can we know truth?
If you say the Holy Spirit leads you into truth, the others say the same thing. Is there Holy Spirit the same as yours?
Claiming self knowledge and self spiritual enlightenment is no different than the Mormons who claim the burning in the bosom, or the Bhudists or New age spiritists that claim enlightenment.
Are they right, or is there another standard for truth?

Are you claiming that only those that come to your way of thinking are Christians and others are still in the dark despite having the same scriptures as you? How does that work?

2 Timothy 2:15-16 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

Seems straight-forward to me.