God's job

[tall73]

Yes, they were quite helpful, with the exception of one.

You said what you can't get people to accpet about Jesus' plain statements. Do you accept any of His other statements? Or rather, are there any of Jesus' statements you don't accept?

 

[payattention]

Yes, they were quite helpful, with the exception of one.

You said what you can't get people to accpet about Jesus' plain statements. Do you accept any of His other statements? Or rather, are there any of Jesus' statements you don't accept?

Everything Christ said is of vital importance to me. He is my leader.

 

[tall73]

Then I will try to limit myself to only quotations of Christ when addressing you. This is what I was trying to discern earlier because it was clear we were wasting our time addressing other scriptures to you which you do not view the same as we do.

Now I realize you think some may have some value, but you can't take them at face value. So rather than argue each one out, which I have no burden to do, from now I will simply address you with the word's of Christ.

Thanks


Out of curiosity, how do you then interpret the statement of Jesus in Matt. 16:25-28. Or rather, what are the implications you speak of.

 

[woobadooba]

Woobadooba,

I have apprecaited your posts on this thread. Please check out the law one if you didn't already.


I do think there are often principles. But there are cases where they would be hard to find out what the principle is.

For a demonstration of what I've been teaching here, see post #10 in the thread: Is The law Applicable

 

[Peguero]

The more I listen to my Christian brethren the more concerned I get about a long-standing effort to determine what kinds of activities will keep others out of heaven. Last night I had a long talk with a friend who insisted on saying that there are people who have said they want nothing to do with God and those people will go to hell because they have rejected God. I kept asking why she believed they had rejected and she kept going back to what they had said. I sense the same sentiment in discussions among other Christians who conclude that people who are doing this and such will be lost.

Why do we think that we have to engage in this type of discussion? Do we really think that we the ones deciding their destiny? I think we should come to the realization that our only responsibility is to live according to what we know and believe. When we decide to divine other people's condition before God we are trying to do work He has reserved to Himself. We are putting ourselves in His place. To put it bluntly, we are trying to be God and are therefore putting another god before Him.

I have to disagreed. If you love your brother and sister I think you will not want your brother and sister to perished in such a horrific way. We must followed the example of Christ, apostle, paul , Huss, Luther, ect. by witnessing the word of God to our fellow brothers and sis. But if we sense that a discussion that may bring disagreement, then we should stop, or focus on the only thing that is Important, CHRIST.

May God bless you and bring you joy/peace to you and your family.

 

[payattention]

I have to disagreed. If you love your brother and sister I think you will not want your brother and sister to perished in such a horrific way. We must followed the example of Christ, apostle, paul , Huss, Luther, ect. by witnessing the word of God to our fellow brothers and sis. But if we sense that a discussion that may bring disagreement, then we should stop, or focus on the only thing that is Important, CHRIST.

May God bless you and bring you joy/peace to you and your family.

On this you and I are agreed. Que Dios te bendiga.

 

[payattention]

Out of curiosity, how do you then interpret the statement of Jesus in Matt. 16:25-28. Or rather, what are the implications you speak of.

This passage clearly states that Jesus expected to return to earth and bring an end to the reign of sin before all His disciples died. He was not delusional. This expectation was based on the fact that He knew that He had accomplished His work of redeeming the human race. Unfortunately, the early church dropped the ball and Christ was disappointed. As a result of that failure the church strayed further until the Reformation was necessary but even there they failed to rectify whatever it was that was wrong. Then there was the great Awakening of the 1840's. In 1856 EGW records that an angel told her that some people who had attended a conference in that year would not die before Christ returned. It did not happen. Instead of admitting that Christ's promise in Matt. and the angel's announcement in 1856 were sabotaged because of a failure on our part we have chosen to claim that God knew He would not have returned before 2005, thus casting doubt on Jesus' state of mind.

 

[tall73]

Yes, I have no problem with that scenario. Most of the Bible writers seemed to expect His imminent return. And the transfiguration, while interesting, doesn't really seem to fit the text.

 

[payattention]

Yes, I have no problem with that scenario. Most of the Bible writers seemed to expect His imminent return. And the transfiguration, while interesting, doesn't really seem to fit the text.

What then do we do?

 

[tall73]

what then do we do? Finish the work. I thought that was the obvious conclusion.

 

[StormyOne]

what then do we do? Finish the work. I thought that was the obvious conclusion.

No not quite... it is something different...

 

[payattention]

what then do we do? Finish the work. I thought that was the obvious conclusion.

What work should we finish? Are you referring to the same work we have been doing for ages that has not worked? Finish the work does not tell us much. We must first determine what the work is. It is possible to be very active about work that is not required. You will still be busy but you won't be effective. This is where the church finds itself today. The evidence is the fact that 2,000 years after Christ expecte to return we are still here.

 

[tall73]

I am familiar with the statements of EGW on the subject of the failed return then. My point was, I thought you were referring to what do we do about the subject of the missaplication of the text. Which is not really a concern of mine.

 

[payattention]

I am familiar with the statements of EGW on the subject of the failed return then. My point was, I thought you were referring to what do we do about the subject of the missaplication of the text. Which is not really a concern of mine.

I thought you answered that question already. But now you seem to be saying you did not know what the question was. I am confused.