. What do you want to discuss...…..
Investigative Judgment or Sola Scriptura???????????
That would be a real pleasure -- I look forward to it happening.
I am giving you an entire thread for that on Daniel 7 and I have given you that opening in Matthew 18 and in Romans 2 and in Romans 11 so far...
Feel free to start - at any time.
There will be NO investigation of the Christians as to if they will still keep eternal life or not, as we are eternally secured into Christ by God, correct?You sure do like to 'run' at the mouth without substance (remember, you are to give account for every word). Mayhap you need to get some Holy Spirit imodium for that 'issue'.
If you could please stick to actual documented facts please. It would be less clutter on the forum, and more closely related to the actual OP and material presented in response. You do have a response for what was presented right?
That sort of pejorative villifying condemnation summary - is not Bible proof of anything at all.
You merely proved my point - when you were confronted with the Bible details of Matthew 18 - you hold them at a distance... flat out ignore them... pretend Ellen White wrote Matthew 18 so you can ignore it?? what sort of nonsense is that??
I am offering the Bible details in Matthew 18 -- and you respond with insults and accusations??
So far we have "you" falsely accusing and we have "you" quoting Ellen White. that's it... that is your entire "sola scriptura" position.
Must be "less than satisfying" for you. Or did you imagine that "we simply would not notice"??
Indeed I keep pointing out the Matthew 18 details you are in such a rush to ignore.
My experience with those into the Sda is that they are blinded by what Ellen White wrote and stated concerning the scriptures. for they see her as the infallible guide to what scriptures really teach, and are just like talking to a JW or a Mormon on theology!This is exacly what YOU accused me of...……."Circling back to the same thing".
FOCUS!
You have hammered Daniel 7 now about 20 or so times. Do you really think that repetition will make what you believable to others?
I have already responded to Daniel 7, Matthew 18, Romans 2 and Romans 11 for you.
You have I assume read those comments.
Now from your own SDA apologetic website--- The Investigative Judgment Has Three Main Problems.......we read that one of the reason why I.J. is so controversial is because of its...……….
Inscrutability—
"Supporting evidence for the I.J. is often hard to understand, convoluted, contradictory, very technical, highly debatable, inaccessible, or nonexistent. In other words, it is hardly the model of a secure and reasonable biblical doctrine.
a)For it to work, the I.J. requires that, on the basis of the scantest evidence, human beings confirm that on a given day, in a given month, in a given year, an action occurred, in an extra-universal realm, amidst divine beings; indeed, an action for which there is no possible detectable evidence, counter-action, or sign on Earth.
This is, again, unique, as a supposedly biblical schema. Indeed, the only evidence offered for this event is the reading of the supportive texts that, themselves, generate the hypothesis. This renders the argument, by definition, circular.
Which is exactly what you are doing!
But, most of all:
b) For it to work, the investigative judgment requires a theology, not of man, nor of angels, but, of extraterrestrials ("unfallen worlds"); i.e., a xenotheology. These xenomorphs, purportedly, are the recipients of God's advance judicial review, because human beings—otherwise the Bible's primary focus—certainly are not.
So, on p. 75 of the SDA Study Guide, alternately speaking, perhaps, of angels, the author argues, as a reason for the I.J., "Heavenly beings need to be sure that the saints are safe to save." But he offers no Biblical evidence or support for his point. He just says it.
Do I really have to say any more than that to you??????
Yes, for they see her as an infallible prophetess to the scriptures, even though most of what she taught and held to contradicts the word of God...Again and again. Matthew 18 does not in any way validate Investigative Judgment.
From your activity else where on the internet forums, I see that you are just as argumentative and confrontational here as you are there.
You seem to be able to only argue against people instead of Scriptures, be rude and obnoxious.
The bottom line truth is what you want to reject your theology as coming from Ellen G. White instead of the Word of God.
I gave you an entire thread for that... you are ignoring that as well.
"that just happened" -- A moment ago #1
Sda and Roman Catholics appear on various internet boards not to really have discussions, but to keep on propagating their false doctrines and dogmas...If you JUST,,,,JUST made an entire thread for me...…..
HOW IN THE WORLD COULD I HAVE IGNORED IT IF YOU JUST DID IT???????
Now, does this mean that you are finished with THIS thread?
Focus my friend
Sda and Roman Catholics appear on various internet boards not to really have discussions, but to keep on propagating their false doctrines and dogmas...
Aside from all the unnecessary bluster, not worth responding to, please provide the evidence that the Seventh-day Adventist teaches "salvation" by "works", or as you stated "WORKS to be saved".I guess my biggest problem with SDA is the teaching of WORKS to be saved.
What? Where do you get that from in what was stated? That is the furthest thing from the truth. Do you always misrepresent the other position which differs from your own like this?Jesus was not teaching that God’s power can be manipulated by man’s will, or that men can obligate God to do anything.
MUCH, MUCH too long of a post with way too many questions to respond to for me....
What on earth are you talking about? Seriously. Are you on 'medication'? Is English your primary language?To assume that this passage gives believers some sort of blank check for anything it asks God for does not fit the context of the passage, and would be contradictory to the rest of Scripture.
Yes, for they see her as an infallible prophetess ...
If you think 'spectrum' (or even 'a-today' for that matter) website is an Seventh-day Adventist apologetic website, you have not been paying attention to its Jesuit leaning doctrines and symbols over the years. That website is one of the most 'liberal' not-in-harmony with the SoP/ToJ or scripture websites. One might as well read out of the San Francisco Chronicle.Now from your own SDA apologetic website
If you think 'spectrum' (or even 'a-today' for that matter) website is an Seventh-day Adventist apologetic website, you have not been paying attention to its Jesuit leaning doctrines and symbols over the years. That website is one of the most 'liberal' not-in-harmony with the SoP/ToJ or scripture websites. One might as well read out of the San Francisco Chronicle.
Go here for real apologetics, from a real Seventh-day Adventist perspective which is in harmony with the scripture (KJB) & SoP/ToJ -
awhn
or here - Messengers of Light Ministry
King James Bible (the one I have in my hands, the perfectly preserved (Psalms 12:6-7) word of God in English)What is KJB?
King James Bible (the one I have in my hands, the prefectly preserved (Psalms 12:6-7) word of God in English)
Strawman. I said nothing about 1611. I said I have the preserved word of God in English in my hands, which is the King James Bible....1611 ...
Strawman. I said nothing about 1611. I said I have the preserved word of God in English in my hands, which is the King James Bible.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?