Hi Cliff
Cliff2 said:
This thread is about the Sabbath not an attack at every chance on EGW and SDA's.
Wonder why it happens all the time when we do not even bring her writings up at all.
Hmmm ok, you should remember that when posting on the Catholic threads discussing the Pope,
As to why I post EGW you already know, Your Sabbath teaching is not biblical, You are handling the word of God deceitfully
2co 4:2 But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.
I know that you do not intentionally do this to deceive others but because you yourself have been deceived, You are not led by the Holy Spirit in your studies of the Bible, You are led by the Spirit of Prophecy,
Review and Herald Supplement, August 14, 1883.
It is from the standpoint of the light that has come through the Spirit of Prophecy that the question will be considered, believing as we do that the Spirit of Prophecy is the only infallible interpreter of Bible principles, since it is the Christ, through this agency, giving real meaning of his own words.
Is it not true that in the SDA bibles all the verses are cross referenced to the Spirit Of Prophecy showing where in the writings Ellen White explains the "true meaning" of that particular verse?
The third angels message is why you are here, Part of that is to teach the Sabbath and part of that is to teach that Sunday is the Future mark of the beast, Also that if we reject your sabbath message that we will lose our salvation.
You are here to proselytize for your Church. A church that was founded in error by disobeying Scripture in setting a definite time for the return of Christ in 1844, Rather than admit your errors your church instead established a Prophetess to justify your errors by establishing a doctrine that teaches that atonement was not complete at the cross but is an on going work in the Heavenly Holy of Holies, Jesus himself spoke against just such a teaching as your sanctuary doctrine,
Mt 24:26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
Your church has claimed that it has prophetic support {not biblical} that in 1844 Jesus went into the secret chambers ie. The Holy of Holies of the Heavenly Temple,
That original doctrine first received in vision by Hiram Edson describes an event that cannot be confirmed by Scripture, It was confirmed by subsequent visions and extensively expanded by Ellen White, Although many of the SDA congregation believe that these things can be proved by the Bible your church leaders past and present know it can not,
At the suggestion of F. D. Nichol he sent a questionnaire to twenty-seven leading Adventist scholars and found that they too had no adequate biblical defense for it. Some expressed the thought that Daniel 8:14 had nothing to do with its context and that the inaccurate word cleansed, which had lead the pioneers to connect Daniel 8:14 with the cleansing of the sanctuary in Leviticus 16, was simply a fortunate accident.
A committee appointed by the General Conference met for five years but could not resolve the issues. A minority admitted that the Adventist position could not be proved from the Bible. The majority wanted to solve the problem by ignoring context and language altogether
{To me cliff ignoring biblical context and language appears to be something most SDA's hold in common
}
At the meeting of the forum Elder Cottrell declared that despite exhaustive efforts he could not prove the SDA view from the Bible. (In the 1950s, Don F. Neufeld of the Adventist Review had reached the same conclusion.) Cottrell does not want to abandon the traditional teaching. In fact, he desperately wishes to retain it. But he believes it solely on the say-so of Ellen White. (It is doubtful that anyone is really satisfied with such a "solution."How can we preach a message to the world if we cannot prove it from the Bible?)
Excerpts from a letter written by Robert Brinsmead
Adventist historian and theologian, LeRoy E. Froom states the doctrine of the Investigative Judgment, which is not found in the Bible, is the Seventh-day Adventist churchs only reason for existence:
Indeed, if there is no actual Sanctuary in heaven, and no pastoring Great High Priest serving therein; and if there is no Judgment Hour message to herald from God to mankind at this time, then we have no justifiable place in the religious world, no distinctive denominational mission and message, no excuse for functioning as a separate church entity today. Movement of Destiny, p. 542.
Froom also states that any deviation from this doctrine of the Investigative Judgment strikes at Adventisms very integrity:
Consequently any weakening or denial or submerging of the Sanctuary truth is not only a serious but a crucial matter. Any deviation or dereliction therefrom strikes at the heart of Adventism, and challenges its very integrity. Movement of Destiny, p. 542.
It is upon the above doctrine of the sanctuary that all of your arguments are based, And your own church leaders acknowledge it can not be supported by scripture, Your Sabbath teaching is a sub doctrine of that original doctrine,
You are not biblical you never have been biblical and you never will be biblical,
yours in Christ
deu 58
