Sabbath School subject discussion thread

[moicherie]

Ok...then kindly tell me how you know God in Christ with out the bible please? You can pray and talk to a god all day, but until you get to know Him through His word first, you have'nt a clue.


AT

My mother helped me to know God, before I could even read a bible. Abram had no problem without a bible are you saying he did not have a clue? That may be the means you need to operate but don't assume the same for all others.

 

[Adventtruth]

My mother helped me to know God, before I could even read a bible. Abram had no problem without a bible are you saying he did not have a clue? That may be the means you need to operate but don't assume the same for all others.

That is why we call it a post modern christian world.

Yes your mother helped you to understand God as a child...even the bible tells parents they have this duty, seeing children lack the skills for comprehensive reading.

And Abraham had a relationship with God unlike you and I...you live in another dispensation unlike Abrahams day when perhaps God spoke directly to Abraham and others audibly, so you can use that excuse.

So how does one today understand and know Gods will without the bible?

AT

 

[Byfaithalone1]

My mother helped me to know God, before I could even read a bible.

Would it be fair to say that sin exists even in the absence of the ability to read a Bible or the law contained in it?

BFA

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

And Abraham had a relationship with God unlike you and I...you live in another dispensation unlike Abrahams day when perhaps God spoke directly to Abraham and others audibly, so you can use that excuse.

So how does one today understand and know Gods will without the bible?

AT

Yet even the founders of the Christian church did not have the Bible, a couple of centuries later they came to an agreement on what was relevant. Being thought relevant, being thought accurate was the foundation for Biblical acceptance, yet here we see people trying to criticize people reasoning in favor of accepting what people's reasoning put together. It is a strange turn of events, perhaps that strangeness is more reflective of why post modernism exists.

The other assumption is that the Old Testament stories were all literally true. So that you can say God audibly spoke to Abraham and thus they were so much different then the rest of us, or the rest of the world even back then. Romans chapter 3 makes it clear that God speaks to people through their conscience. The great equilaizer. However if one ignores their conscience, ignores their reasoning abilities and relies only upon written words they have little to go on...which is why it is really just tradition that drives them, they have given over thinking to others.

 

[Adventtruth]

Yet even the founders of the Christian church did not have the Bible, a couple of centuries later they came to an agreement on what was relevant. Being thought relevant, being thought accurate was the foundation for Biblical acceptance, yet here we see people trying to criticize people reasoning in favor of accepting what people's reasoning put together. It is a strange turn of events, perhaps that strangeness is more reflective of why post modernism exists.

The accounts of the New Testament is of that of eyewitnesses or those who recorded first hand testimonies of those who where . The New Testament was written from about 50 AD unto a little beyond 90 AD. We don't have the original manuscripts but there are over 5000 copies that contain fragment or all of the New Testament. The earliest fragments date to about 120 AD. Your assertion of the founding of the bible is more that what you say. And there is nothing wrong with reasoning. But when we as christians stand upon the athority of scripture as truth, and claim a biblical world view based upon the written word and light from God, but reason our responces to life from the resources of our carnal mind in what is right and wrong and what is truth or not, rather than trusting in Gods word and will, I question that responce.

The other assumption is that the Old Testament stories were all literally true. So that you can say God audibly spoke to Abraham and thus they were so much different then the rest of us, or the rest of the world even back then. Romans chapter 3 makes it clear that God speaks to people through their conscience. The great equilaizer. However if one ignores their conscience, ignores their reasoning abilities and relies only upon written words they have little to go on...which is why it is really just tradition that drives them, they have given over thinking to others.

And just what stories don't you think where true? Many of the stories where written as historical narratives and have no indication of being allagories.


The bible also says that God called Samuel but I betcha you don't believe it either. Oh and btw...its Romans chapter 1 or 2 that you are refering to. The conscience of believers aught to be driven by Holy Spirit and the written word of God...if not, then one can not claim a biblical world view.

(Pro 14:12) There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death.

1 And the child Samuel ministered unto the LORD before Eli. And the word of the LORD was precious in those days; there was no open vision. 2 And it came to pass at that time, when Eli was laid down in his place, and his eyes began to wax dim, that he could not see; 3 And ere the lamp of God went out in the temple of the LORD, where the ark of God was, and Samuel was laid down to sleep; 4 That the LORD called Samuel: and he answered, Here am I. 5 And he ran unto Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou calledst me. And he said, I called not; lie down again. And he went and lay down. 6 And the LORD called yet again, Samuel. And Samuel arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou didst call me. And he answered, I called not, my son; lie down again. 7 Now Samuel did not yet know the LORD, neither was the word of the LORD yet revealed unto him. 8 And the LORD called Samuel again the third time. And he arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou didst call me. And Eli perceived that the LORD had called the child. 9 Therefore Eli said unto Samuel, Go, lie down: and it shall be, if he call thee, that thou shalt say, Speak, LORD; for thy servant heareth. So Samuel went and lay down in his place. 10 And the LORD came, and stood, and called as at other times, Samuel, Samuel. Then Samuel answered, Speak; for thy servant heareth.
The Holy Bible : King James Version. 1995 (electronic ed. of the 1769 edition of the 1611 Authorized Version.) (1 Sa 3:1-10). Bellingham WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

AT

 

[moicherie]

That is why we call it a post modern christian world.

Yes your mother helped you to understand God as a child...even the bible tells parents they have this duty, seeing children lack the skills for comprehensive reading.

And Abraham had a relationship with God unlike you and I...you live in another dispensation unlike Abrahams day when perhaps God spoke directly to Abraham and others audibly, so you can use that excuse.

So how does one today understand and know Gods will without the bible?

AT

My relationship with God includes the audible method, this is something other Christian people have testified to. Maybe God has tried it with you but you were not listening?

 

[moicherie]

Would it be fair to say that sin exists even in the absence of the ability to read a Bible or the law contained in it?

BFA

Joseph thought sleeping with Potiphar's wife was a sin.....he had no bible or written law. How do societies that we consider 'heathen' in the past and present know that killing is wrong? God is not limited in His methods to communicate with humanity (even tho it seems some of His followers seemed to think He stopped having that ability once E G White died)

 

[Byfaithalone1]

Joseph thought sleeping with Potiphar's wife was a sin.....he had no bible or written law.

I completely agree.

How do societies that we consider 'heathen' in the past and present know that killing is wrong?

Good question.

God is not limited in His methods to communicate with humanity

I completely agree.

It is for this reason that I often scratch my head when posting in discussion forums. You see, I am frequently told that the only definition of sin is "transgression of the law." I am frequently told that, if Christ fulfilled the law, then it is OK to commit adultery. I am frequently told that the ten commandments must have jurisdiction over Gentiles; otherwise it would be OK for Gentiles to commit murder. And yet you and I can agree that people knew that murder and adultery were wrong even in an environment in which the ten commandments did not exist.

It would seem that sin exists even in the absence of law. This is why the Bible defines sin as "all wrongdoing" and teaches that "any man who knows to do right and does it not--to him it is sin." According to John 14 and John 16, the Holy Spirit convicts us with respect to sin and righteousness and judgment.

OK. I've taken a brief detour. Please resume regular programming . . . .

BFA

 

[Adventtruth]

My relationship with God includes the audible method, this is something other Christian people have testified to. Maybe God has tried it with you but you were not listening?

So are you saying that God speaks to you out loud and you hear Him? That is what I mean by audible.

AT

 

[moicherie]

So are you saying that God speaks to you out loud and you hear Him? That is what I mean by audible.

AT

Yep, that's what all good Fathers do, speak to their kids so they can hear.
You should try listening more, you might hear Him yourself or maybe that tactic does not work for you?

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

And just what stories don't you think where true? Many of the stories where written as historical narratives and have no indication of being allagories.

The bible also says that God called Samuel but I betcha you don't believe it either. Oh and btw...its Romans chapter 1 or 2 that you are refering to. The conscience of believers aught to be driven by Holy Spirit and the written word of God...if not, then one can not claim a biblical world view.

AT

Here you simply assume your tradition saying "written as historical narratives" I don't restrict the Old Testament writings that way. Now you can assume that God really wanted to destroy Israel and start a new nation from Moses and Moses just talked Him out of it, or that God was testing Moses by God lying and you can believe in talking snakes and God destroying the whole world with a flood, not just punishing man but killing most all animal life on the planet or you can believe that God got upset at the Tower of Babel because man was working too well together (traditional Christianity rewrites the story to say they were trying to build a tower to escape a potential flood). I don't believe those are literal historical narratives. But then I don't believe something has to have happened to provide a learning situation, I don't believe that unknown ancient writers had to have a kind of extra special connection to God, because if they did they provided little evidence as witnessed by their cruelty and subjugation of women and children and other nations. They would not have produced laws that stone people for gathering wood on the Sabbath.

The evidence is not really on your side in this debate, only your assumptions. Of course we want our intelligence and reasoning to be God directed. But unfortunately many think that it is only guided by the Holy Spirit if their tradition is accepted.

 

[mva1985]

Here you simply assume your tradition saying "written as historical narratives" I don't restrict the Old Testament writings that way. Now you can assume that God really wanted to destroy Israel and start a new nation from Moses and Moses just talked Him out of it, or that God was testing Moses by God lying and you can believe in talking snakes and God destroying the whole world with a flood, not just punishing man but killing most all animal life on the planet or you can believe that God got upset at the Tower of Babel because man was working too well together (traditional Christianity rewrites the story to say they were trying to build a tower to escape a potential flood). I don't believe those are literal historical narratives. But then I don't believe something has to have happened to provide a learning situation, I don't believe that unknown ancient writers had to have a kind of extra special connection to God, because if they did they provided little evidence as witnessed by their cruelty and subjugation of women and children and other nations. They would not have produced laws that stone people for gathering wood on the Sabbath.

The evidence is not really on your side in this debate, only your assumptions. Of course we want our intelligence and reasoning to be God directed. But unfortunately many think that it is only guided by the Holy Spirit if their tradition is accepted.

Wow.... simply amazing!

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Wow.... simply amazing!

Yes it is, if we had not been indoctrinated into assuming that a story had to be historical how different we would have understood God. Not had to feel that God was out there killing people when they did something wrong or that God was pleased when one nation killed and enslaved another. How much different if we had listened to the later prophets who said that it was not about sacrifices but about love and mercy and justice.

It is no wonder so many try to cling to their old religion even when it makes so little sense. They were indoctrinated to not think about what they read but to parrot what they had been taught. And the better one parroted the more holy he or she was assumed to be. It is amazing indeed.

 

[mva1985]

Yes it is, if we had not been indoctrinated into assuming that a story had to be historical how different we would have understood God. Not had to feel that God was out there killing people when they did something wrong or that God was pleased when one nation killed and enslaved another. How much different if we had listened to the later prophets who said that it was not about sacrifices but about love and mercy and justice.

It is no wonder so many try to cling to their old religion even when it makes so little sense. They were indoctrinated to not think about what they read but to parrot what they had been taught. And the better one parroted the more holy he or she was assumed to be. It is amazing indeed.

Who said that God was pleased?

And you know that is not what I meant from my "Wow" statement.

Interesting how Moses continued to love God and have a relationship with Him even with all that "killing" going on.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Who said that God was pleased?

And you know that is not what I meant from my "Wow" statement.

Interesting how Moses continued to love God and have a relationship with Him even with all that "killing" going on.

Yes it is interesting but then David who said he was a man after God's own heart made his aids promise to destroy his enemies some of which had been his allies. So what you really have is people with imperfect, biased and often plainly wrong ideas about God. The problem then becomes those who read those stories and hold these people as special people who were closer to God then we can be even after we have the record of Jesus Christ, God in human form.

And who said God was pleased, well that was the general idea of the writers of the Old Testament, at least the early period. Then with stories like Jonah, the idea of God pleased with the destruction of foreign nations is shown to be foolishness. Just as Job made the idea that people understood God and evil and why bad things happen was dismantled.

So you may have meant wow in the traditionalist view, as in wow I can't believe you don't believe God killed all living things on the earth except those in the Ark, I still say it should be wow, can you believe these people still have such views about God?

 

[Adventtruth]

Here you simply assume your tradition saying "written as historical narratives" I don't restrict the Old Testament writings that way.

I don't know if you had writting courses or studied different types of literature in college, but I can assure you I did. One does not have to have tradition as a crutch to understand what types of literature one is reading. Now if you believe its historical fiction, thats your undersanding and you have that right. I find nothing contained in the whole of the text that suggest it as such. Some where down the line, someone or something got a hold of you and you have been in the tank for unbelief ever sense.

Now you can assume that God really wanted to destroy Israel and start a new nation from Moses and Moses just talked Him out of it, or that God was testing Moses by God lying and you can believe in talking snakes and God destroying the whole world with a flood, not just punishing man but killing most all animal life on the planet or you can believe that God got upset at the Tower of Babel because man was working too well together (traditional Christianity rewrites the story to say they were trying to build a tower to escape a potential flood). I don't believe those are literal historical narratives. But then I don't believe something has to have happened to provide a learning situation, I don't believe that unknown ancient writers had to have a kind of extra special connection to God, because if they did they provided little evidence as witnessed by their cruelty and subjugation of women and children and other nations. They would not have produced laws that stone people for gathering wood on the Sabbath.

The evidence is not really on your side in this debate, only your assumptions. Of course we want our intelligence and reasoning to be God directed. But unfortunately many think that it is only guided by the Holy Spirit if their tradition is accepted.

You have an very unfavorable biblical world view from what I can gather from your postings, and enough negatives and unbelief on your side for one to question if you really believe God in Christ through the gospel alone.

God has a right to do what ever He wants to do...after all He is God, or have you forgot, or did you really know that?

If God wanted to let all of humanity die in their sin, who are you to question that! Or are you to busy trying to shape your god into what you want Him to be...lets see.... what kind of picture is this.... You attend a SDA church, you don't believe in the bible, you don't believe in the garden of Eden, you don't believe God talked audibly with people, you don't believe Christ died as our vacarious substitute, What else don't you believe? I assume we can scratch Hebrews chapter 11 off of your list.


AT

 

[mva1985]

I say "WOW" because you as an SDA don't accept the Bible as the written Word.

Unbelievable!!

P.S. I was referring to RC - just for clarification.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

I don't know if you had writting courses or studied different types of literature in college, but I can assure you I did. One does not have to have tradition as a crutch to understand what types of literature one is reading. Now if you believe its historical fiction, thats your undersanding and you have that right. I find nothing contained in the whole of the text that suggest it as such. Some where down the line, someone or something got a hold of you and you have been in the tank for unbelief ever sense.


You have an very unfavorable biblical world view from what I can gather from your postings, and enough negatives and unbelief on your side for one to question if you really believe God in Christ through the gospel alone.

God has a right to do what ever He wants to do...after all He is God, or have you forgot, or did you really know that?

If God wanted to let all of humanity die in their sin, who are you to question that! Or are you to busy trying to shape your god into what you want Him to be...lets see.... what kind of picture is this.... You attend a SDA church, you don't believe in the bible, you don't believe in the garden of Eden, you don't believe God talked audibly with people, you don't believe Christ died as our vacarious substitute, What else don't you believe? I assume we can scratch Hebrews chapter 11 off of your list.


AT

Wow as MVA would say. A dramatic demonstration of just how it must be their tradition or you can't believe in God. Then you continued assumptions based upon things I never said, but I am used to that from you.

It is a shame how tradition dictates so much causing people to behave so judgmentally and ultimately irrationally. Saying to just believe it as their tradition has said and because that is the way God is. If He wants to kill everything who are you to complain about God He can do whatever. Strange it did not seem with the life of Christ who came to be a servant that God is interested in doing whatever. You think you are defending the Bible and defending God but you are making God out to be like an irrational human someone who is cruel and unjust someone who we must serve or He will kill us. Nice.

 

[moicherie]

You think you are defending the Bible and defending God but you are making God out to be like an irrational human someone who is cruel and unjust someone who we must serve or He will kill us. Nice.

Amen! IOW we have seen God and He is just like us......sad huh

 

[Adventtruth]

Wow as MVA would say. A dramatic demonstration of just how it must be their tradition or you can't believe in God.

This really has nothing to do with tradition...thats your red herring. It has more to do with you not believing the bible.

Then you continued assumptions based upon things I never said, but I am used to that from you.

Oh now you are saying that you don't pick and choose what you believe is truth from the bible? And that I continue assumptions based upon things you never said! You are like a pot calling the kettle black RC. Look at the assumptions your attributed to me in the following quote!

Now you can assume that God really wanted to destroy Israel and start a new nation from Moses and Moses just talked Him out of it, or that God was testing Moses by God lying and you can believe in talking snakes and God destroying the whole world with a flood, not just punishing man but killing most all animal life on the planet or you can believe that God got upset at the Tower of Babel because man was working too well together (traditional Christianity rewrites the story to say they were trying to build a tower to escape a potential flood). I don't believe those are literal historical narratives. ..., I don't believe that unknown ancient writers had to have a kind of extra special connection to God, because if they did they provided little evidence as witnessed by their cruelty and subjugation of women and children and other nations. They would not have produced laws that stone people for gathering wood on the Sabbath.

Now from that paragragh I can gather a few things about you:

1) That you attributed many assumption to me that I never laid claim to. (You accused me of doing this to you, but you did it to me first)

2) That you don't believe in many parts of the bible like the story of the flood, or that God distroyed plant and animal life as well as human life.

3) You don't believe that God spoke to some directly.

4) That your faith is more in your reasoning of what truth is rather than having faith in what is written.

It is a shame how tradition dictates so much causing people to behave so judgmentally and ultimately irrationally. Saying to just believe it as their tradition has said and because that is the way God is.

Is that all you can argue is tradition....You have a real issue that you can't control so you lash out at others for it. Leave it alone RC. The real issue is that you don't have faith in what God has said He has done. You trust your own reasoning rather than Gods. I know some things seem impossible by human standards but God can do all things, which you don't seem to believe.

If He wants to kill everything who are you to complain about God He can do whatever. Strange it did not seem with the life of Christ who came to be a servant that God is interested in doing whatever. You think you are defending the Bible and defending God but you are making God out to be like an irrational human someone who is cruel and unjust someone who we must serve or He will kill us. Nice.

I would not say it like that RC...God is never unjust in anything He does. But that is the choice God leaves us with does it not RC? We can trust Him through the gospel of God, or we can reject Him through our own rerasoning of making Him out to be what we want Him to be, and be lost forever...the choice is yours RC. Just go to the back of the bible (REV) and read the rest of the story.

(Isa 55:8) For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD.
(Isa 55:9) For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.
(Isa 55:10) "For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven and do not return there but water the earth, making it bring forth and sprout, giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater,
(Isa 55:11) so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.


God does not think like you Ron...you are the one making Him out to think like us when infact the bible tells us differently. But then again...you still wont believe it and I betcha you still reject Isa 55:8-11 as well as Heb 11.


AT