SDA

[ToBeLoved]

Many Greek converts might have only heard one of Paul's letters and that was the extent of their scripture. What was of primary importance was the ACTUAL EVENT of Christ's resurrection. What is *any* amount of scripture compared to that?

Paul stayed for a while at each of those churches and often left some one or multiple people behind to give them a good grasp of teaching and to build up and begin the process of getting elders, deacons and leadership.

So even without each of the letters to different churches, they were not left high and dry with no teaching. That is a fallicy

 

[bekkilyn]

Paul stayed for a while at each of those churches and often left some one or multiple people behind to give them a good grasp of teaching and to build up and begin the process of getting elders, deacons and leadership.

So even without each of the letters to different churches, they were not left high and dry with no teaching. That is a fallicy

I didn't say they were left with NO teaching from actual people, but they didn't have a bible as we know it today that they depended on to dictate their every move as if it were God himself. The bible wasn't the foundation of their faith and therefore they did not make an idol of it.

 

[BobRyan]

Yep, doctrine can be found in the bible, and we can read what is written in ink

I really do like it when the incredibly obvious and easy part of the discussion is admitted to by both sides.

The Bible does not state "for Christians you should pay no attention to what God says the Law is -- in scripture".

Another really easy and obvious detail.

to find it there, and biblical doctrine states the law for the believer is not written in ink,

totally false - for those words you need to "quote you" -- no text says it.

2 Cor 3:3 says "YOU are OUR LETTER" -- does not mean "you are a person that refuses to read the Bible but just does what FEELs good to them".

You are "OUR LETTER" is not meant to be taken literally.

2 Cor 3: 2 You are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read by all men; (Both saved and unsaved)

2 Cor 3:3 3 being manifested that you are a letter of Christ, cared for by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.

Does not say "your law is written on your heart and never with ink"
Does not say "the Law written in ink is deleted"
Paul says it is YOU who are the letter written by Christ -- he does not say that Law is the letter.

Obviously.

The LAW of God known to Jeremiah and his readers in Jer 31:31-33 -- written on the heart -
according to the doctrine of the bible.

Yep, 2cor3:3 does not say that you can refuse to read the bible.

It states the Spirit of the living God writes the law on the heart, but does not say that the Law of Godis not written in ink or found in scripture or that it is not to be read in scripture by Christians.

That is what you find by reading the bible, not refusing to read or accept it

The bible states concerning what used to be and what now is that the Word of God is living and active and sharper than a two-edged sword and we SEE that written word used by Christ in Mark 7:6-13 as well as by true believers in Acts 17:11


Romans 7 makes the point that as a lost person that still-existing moral law of God convicted of sin and condemned, bound by law to the condemnation of the lake of fire.

But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the on who was not born-again Romm7:6

Romans 8:4-10 says that only of the lost can it be said "they do not submit to the LAW of God - neither indeed CAN they"

For Christians "what matter is KEEPING the Commandments of GOD" 1 Cor 7:19
For the Christian the "FIRST commandment with a promise" in that still-valid-for-Christian-Ten-Commandments is "honor your father and mother" Ephesians 6:2

 

[Karola]

I really do like it when the incredibly obvious and easy part of the discussion is admitted to by both sides.

The Bible does not state "for Christians you should pay no attention to what God says the Law is -- in scripture".

Another really easy and obvious detail.



totally false - for those words you need to "quote you" -- no text says it.

2 Cor 3:3 says "YOU are OUR LETTER" -- does not mean "you are a person that refuses to read the Bible but just does what FEELs good to them".

You are "OUR LETTER" is not meant to be taken literally.

2 Cor 3: 2 You are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read by all men; (Both saved and unsaved)

2 Cor 3:3 3 being manifested that you are a letter of Christ, cared for by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.

Does not say "your law is written on your heart and never with ink"
Does not say "the Law written in ink is deleted"
Paul says it is YOU who are the letter written by Christ -- he does not say that Law is the letter.

Obviously.

The LAW of God known to Jeremiah and his readers in Jer 31:31-33 -- written on the heart -
according to the doctrine of the bible.

Yep, 2cor3:3 does not say that you can refuse to read the bible.

It states the Spirit of the living God writes the law on the heart, but does not say that the Law of Godis not written in ink or found in scripture or that it is not to be read in scripture by Christians.

That is what you find by reading the bible, not refusing to read or accept it

The bible states concerning what used to be and what now is that the Word of God is living and active and sharper than a two-edged sword and we SEE that written word used by Christ in Mark 7:6-13 as well as by true believers in Acts 17:11


Romans 7 makes the point that as a lost person that still-existing moral law of God convicted of sin and condemned, bound by law to the condemnation of the lake of fire.

But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the on who was not born-again Romm7:6

Romans 8:4-10 says that only of the lost can it be said "they do not submit to the LAW of God - neither indeed CAN they"

For Christians "what matter is KEEPING the Commandments of GOD" 1 Cor 7:19
For the Christian the "FIRST commandment with a promise" in that still-valid-for-Christian-Ten-Commandments is "honor your father and mother" Ephesians 6:2

I am bored with your ridiculous attempts to explain away scripture. Rom7:6 being a perfect example. I will leave you to it

 

[Karola]

.

 

[YeshuaFan]

Hi Family,

What is SDA?

What is their doctrine?

Is it different than non-denom beliefs?

~Natsumi Lam~

They believe that they are the true Remanant restored church of the last days, and that Ellen White was an inspired prophetess. They hold to Jewish dietary laws, and to keeping the Saturday Sabbath, in fact, to them the mark pof the Beast will be Sunday worship in the end times.
The writtings of Ellen White on apr to them as scriptures, and one will be judged after death to faithfulness to het teachings and to keeping the Sabbath in order to determine if one will stay saved, or will be lost again.
The lost will simple be burned away, and cease to exist!

 

[ToBeLoved]

I didn't say they were left with NO teaching from actual people, but they didn't have a bible as we know it today that they depended on to dictate their every move as if it were God himself. The bible wasn't the foundation of their faith and therefore they did not make an idol of it.

No one makes an idol out of it. It is our relationship to Christ and His justification of us that saves us.

It is the Word of God, however. God uses it to teach us about Himself and what is good and right in His sight.

 

[bekkilyn]

No one makes an idol out of it. It is our relationship to Christ and His justification of us that saves us.

It is the Word of God, however. God uses it to teach us about Himself and what is good and right in His sight.

Here is a pretty good article about the subject of bible idolatry.

Have We Made the Bible Into an Idol?

 

[BobRyan]

Yep, doctrine can be found in the bible, and we can read what is written in ink

I really do like it when the incredibly obvious and easy part of the discussion is admitted to by both sides.

The Bible does not state "for Christians you should pay no attention to what God says the Law is -- in scripture".

Another really easy and obvious detail.

to find it there, and biblical doctrine states the law for the believer is not written in ink,

totally false - for those words you need to "quote you" -- no text says it.

2 Cor 3:3 says "YOU are OUR LETTER" -- does not mean "you are a person that refuses to read the Bible but just does what FEELs good to them".

You are "OUR LETTER" is not meant to be taken literally.

2 Cor 3: 2 You are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read by all men; (Both saved and unsaved)

2 Cor 3:3 3 being manifested that you are a letter of Christ, cared for by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.

Does not say "your law is written on your heart and never with ink"
Does not say "the Law written in ink is deleted"
Paul says it is YOU who are the letter written by Christ -- he does not say that Law is the letter.

Obviously.

The LAW of God known to Jeremiah and his readers in Jer 31:31-33 -- written on the heart -
according to the doctrine of the bible.

Yep, 2cor3:3 does not say that you can refuse to read the bible.

It states the Spirit of the living God writes the law on the heart, but does not say that the Law of Godis not written in ink or found in scripture or that it is not to be read in scripture by Christians.

That is what you find by reading the bible, not refusing to read or accept it

The bible states concerning what used to be and what now is that the Word of God is living and active and sharper than a two-edged sword and we SEE that written word used by Christ in Mark 7:6-13 as well as by true believers in Acts 17:11


Romans 7 makes the point that as a lost person that still-existing moral law of God convicted of sin and condemned, bound by law to the condemnation of the lake of fire.

But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the on who was not born-again Romm7:6

Romans 8:4-10 says that only of the lost can it be said "they do not submit to the LAW of God - neither indeed CAN they"

For Christians "what matter is KEEPING the Commandments of GOD" 1 Cor 7:19
For the Christian the "FIRST commandment with a promise" in that still-valid-for-Christian-Ten-Commandments is "honor your father and mother" Ephesians 6:2

I am bored ...<obligatory snipe deleted here>

I on the other hand will always be interested in the Word of God...

 

[BobRyan]

Here is a pretty good article about the subject of bible idolatry.

Here is a pretty good example of "Sola Scriptura" testing -- as done by Christ Mark 7:6-13 and his appeal to the "written word".

Here is another example of it Acts 17:11

I prefer the Bible - and much less "making stuff up" -- as I am sure we can all agree is best.

 

[BobRyan]

Here is a pretty good article about the subject of bible idolatry.

Have We Made the Bible Into an Idol?

And then... "wait for it"....

Moreland’s main objection seems to be with the notion that the Bible is the sole source of knowledge about God, morality, faith, and practice, when there are other forces at work, such as reason, experience and historical Creeds. I share in Moreland's reservations in this area, but also have concerns about how the term "inerrant" is used

Edges into an extreme position then lifts the "creeds" standard.

Followed by "we all get to pick and choose what part of the Bible we prefer to believe"

Picking and Choosing: Everybody’s Doing It

Last week, a reader responded to one of my posts by saying, “I guess I don’t have the luxury of picking and choosing scripture for my own personal comfort and conscience.” Another wrote, “The cold, hard fact remains that if you don’t accept all of the Bible, then you are the ultimate judge of which parts you do accept. That leaves you in the position of picking and choosing. This is a dangerous place to be since by nature we are all evil, corrupt people, bent on our own self desires.”

But don’t we all pick and choose which portions of the Bible we take literally?

So then I guess it was "a slippery slope" after all and look at how far down that slope one may slide.

 

[bekkilyn]

And then... "wait for it"....

Edges into an extreme position then lifts the "creeds" standard.

Followed by "we all get to pick and choose what part of the Bible we prefer to believe"

So then I guess it was "a slippery slope" after all and look at how far down that slope one may slide.

I don't know why you would have a problem with the concept of picking and choosing what part of the bible we prefer to believe when you yourself do it all the time in your very own posts, conveniently ignoring the parts that do not coincide with your sabbath-central theology for Christians.

 

[BobRyan]

They believe that they are the true Remanant restored church of the last days,

we believe that in every age God has had a remnant church - one with a key message for their time which is not the same as "the only ones saved" -- Noah, Moses, John the baptizer were all in that group - so also Luther, Wycliffe and many others all through history. It does not mean they were the only ones saved in their day but they had a specific message for a specific time.

and that Ellen White was an inspired prophetess

Indeed the continuation of the 1 Corinthians 12 - spiritual gifts, that Ephesians 4 said were to continue until the 2nd coming.

. They hold to Jewish dietary laws

The Leviticus 11 distinction that forbids the eating of rats, cats, dogs, bats and thus in Noah's day God tells Noah to take the clean animals by 7's and the unclean (rats, cats, dogs, bats) by two's.

, and to keeping the Saturday Sabbath,

There is no such term in the Bible as "The Saturday Sabbath" -- the real term is the "seventh day is the Sabbath" -- in fact in Exodus 20:10 "the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD (YHWH)"

And the "Bible Sabbath" of the Ten Commandments is interesting because almost every denomination on planet earth has a statement of faith affirming that all TEN of the TEN commandments are included in the moral law written on the heart under the New Covenant. (And that includes "the Baptist Confession of Faith" section 19)

(The Bible Sabbath being the 4th commandment in that unit of Ten)

in fact, to them the mark pof the Beast will be Sunday worship in the end times.

Almost gets this one -- but not quite. The mark of the beast of Revelation 13 and 14 will be a scenario where national governments forbid the keeping of the Bible Sabbath, adding civil penalties for doing so and substitute their own laws as a replacement for obeying God's Word.

The writtings of Ellen White on apr to them as scriptures,

There is no such thing in the SDA church as "The writtings of Ellen White on apr to them as scriptures" as most Seventh-day Adventists know. Rather we believe in the inspiration of the Bible as 2 Peter 1:20-21 point out and we believe that all prophets are inspired by God if they are a true prophet -- thus God is the source of prophetic statements be it scripture or a non-bible-writing prophets such as Nathan whom king David sought out for advice on building the temple.

and one will be judged after death to faithfulness to het teachings and to keeping the Sabbath in order to determine if one will stay saved, or will be lost again.

Does not come close to being what SDAs teach.

There is no SDA doctrine that all mankind will be judged after they die to see if they kept Sabbath and thus determine if they were saved or lost.

Rather - as Daniel 7 points out - God judges all just before the 2nd coming. As Rev 11 points out the judgment of the dead is where it begins, but as Rev 14:6-7 points out - at some point the judgment is applicable to the cases of the living -- after that... the 2nd coming.

The lost will simple be burned away, and cease to exist!

The SDA doctrine on hell (the Lake of Fire in Rev 20) is that the wicked "are tormented in fire and brimstone" as we are told in both Rev 14 and Rev 20. This takes place "in the presence of the Lamb and of his angels" as we are told in Rev 14:10 and at some point the Matthew 10:28 statement of Christ is shown to be fulfilled when God "destroys BOTH body AND soul in fiery hell"

 

[BobRyan]

I don't know why you would have a problem with the concept of picking and choosing what part of the bible we prefer to believe

I have a problem with it because it is what the "believe whatever you feel and don't worry so much about what the Bible says" group chooses.

I have a problem with it because it is what the "I don't like sola-scriptura testing of the Bible to see if a given doctrine is true or false" group chooses to do.

I have a problem with it - because it is foundational to the dark ages persecution of the saints.

I know this comes as a bit of a surprise to you -- but for many others on this board it is merely stating "the obvious"

 

[BobRyan]

No one makes an idol out of it. It is our relationship to Christ and His justification of us that saves us.

It is the Word of God, however. God uses it to teach us about Himself and what is good and right in His sight.

Amen!!

 

[bekkilyn]

I have a problem with it because it is what the "believe whatever you feel and don't worry so much about what the Bible says" group chooses.

I have a problem with it because it is what the "I don't like sola-scriptura testing of the Bible to see if a given doctrine is true or false" group chooses to do.

I have a problem with it - because it is foundational to the dark ages persecution of the saints.

I know this comes as a bit of a surprise to you -- but for many others on this board it is merely stating "the obvious"

I notice that you left out the other half of my quote. If you have such a problem with it, then why do you cherry-pick only the scripture that seems to support your sabbath-central theology and conveniently ignore or leave out scripture that doesn't quite match up? The thing about "sola scripture" is that it typically means the entire bible and not just the parts of it you like, including erroneously mixing and matching all the covenants in the manner that suits you.

If the bible *were* completely tossed out the window though, would it then mean that the Christian faith would no longer exist?

 

[YeshuaFan]

we believe that in every age God has had a remnant church - one with a key message for their time which is not the same as "the only ones saved" -- Noah, Moses, John the baptizer were all in that group - so also Luther, Wycliffe and many others all through history. It does not mean they were the only ones saved in their day but they had a specific message for a specific time.




Indeed the continuation of the 1 Corinthians 12 - spiritual gifts, that Ephesians 4 said were to continue until the 2nd coming.



The Leviticus 11 distinction that forbids the eating of rats, cats, dogs, bats and thus in Noah's day God tells Noah to take the clean animals by 7's and the unclean (rats, cats, dogs, bats) by two's.



There is no such term in the Bible as "The Saturday Sabbath" -- the real term is the "seventh day is the Sabbath" -- in fact in Exodus 20:10 "the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD (YHWH)"

And the "Bible Sabbath" of the Ten Commandments is interesting because almost every denomination on planet earth has a statement of faith affirming that all TEN of the TEN commandments are included in the moral law written on the heart under the New Covenant. (And that includes "the Baptist Confession of Faith" section 19)

(The Bible Sabbath being the 4th commandment in that unit of Ten)



Almost gets this one -- but not quite. The mark of the beast of Revelation 13 and 14 will be a scenario where national governments forbid the keeping of the Bible Sabbath, adding civil penalties for doing so and substitute their own laws as a replacement for obeying God's Word.



There is no such thing in the SDA church as "The writtings of Ellen White on apr to them as scriptures" as most Seventh-day Adventists know. Rather we believe in the inspiration of the Bible as 2 Peter 1:20-21 point out and we believe that all prophets are inspired by God if they are a true prophet -- thus God is the source of prophetic statements be it scripture or a non-bible-writing prophets such as Nathan whom king David sought out for advice on building the temple.



Does not come close to being what SDAs teach.

There is no SDA doctrine that all mankind will be judged after they die to see if they kept Sabbath and thus determine if they were saved or lost.

Rather - as Daniel 7 points out - God judges all just before the 2nd coming. As Rev 11 points out the judgment of the dead is where it begins, but as Rev 14:6-7 points out - at some point the judgment is applicable to the cases of the living -- after that... the 2nd coming.



The SDA doctrine on hell (the Lake of Fire in Rev 20) is that the wicked "are tormented in fire and brimstone" as we are told in both Rev 14 and Rev 20. This takes place "in the presence of the Lamb and of his angels" as we are told in Rev 14:10 and at some point the Matthew 10:28 statement of Christ is shown to be fulfilled when God "destroys BOTH body AND soul in fiery hell"

Ellen White is said to be operating in the office of a prophet, and thta has long ceased, and the Sabbath was given to israel under the Old Covenant, but we under the New One are worshipping on the first day of the week now, Sunday, the Lord's day.
And Sda does teach one is saved by grace and by keeping the Sabbath and EW teachings.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Here is a pretty good article about the subject of bible idolatry.

Have We Made the Bible Into an Idol?

I don’t think people make an idol of the Bible. That to me is a silly argument as it is God’s Word.

I think it is much more problematic those who minimize God’s Word.

 

[bekkilyn]

I don’t think people make an idol of the Bible. That to me is a silly argument as it is God’s Word.

I think it is much more problematic those who minimize God’s Word.

So do you believe that God is limited by the bible and that he only reveals himself through it alone and in no other way, and that if the bible were suddenly to be destroyed tomorrow that there would be no more God or Christianity? No Jesus? None of it ever happened? Because the very foundation of our faith (being the bible in this scenario) as Christians is no more? That God exists and Jesus was resurrected *only* because the bible tells us it is true? And that if we can't concoct all sorts of fantastic explanations to "prove" that there are no historical or scientific errors, or that there are no contradictions anywhere at all in scripture...if *biblical* (vs. *God*) inerrancy were disproved, then our entire faith would utterly collapse?

Because there *are* people that sincerely believe the above.

In fact, I just this morning read a survey from Lifeway that showed that something like 76% of evangelicals believe that Jesus Christ was *created* by God, and a large percentage believe that the Holy Spirit is simply a powerful force rather than a divine being (God), and all sorts of other similar things. And having participated in numerous conversations here on CF, I don't doubt at all the accuracy of the survey or find it difficult to imagine that many people confuse the authority of scripture with the authority of God himself.

And when people speak of God's Word, there is a difference between God's "logos" (translated as Word, but represents Jesus) and God's "biblos" (also translated as Word, but represents written scripture) and yet many people make no distinction between the two because it's not clear in English translations that there is a difference.

It's not a silly argument because this mix-up creates all sorts of confusion and even outright heresies due to the "sola" God being the bible rather than God.

 

[Karola]

So do you believe that God is limited by the bible and that he only reveals himself through it alone and in no other way, and that if the bible were suddenly to be destroyed tomorrow that there would be no more God or Christianity? No Jesus? None of it ever happened? Because the very foundation of our faith (being the bible in this scenario) as Christians is no more? That God exists and Jesus was resurrected *only* because the bible tells us it is true? And that if we can't concoct all sorts of fantastic explanations to "prove" that there are no historical or scientific errors, or that there are no contradictions anywhere at all in scripture...if *biblical* (vs. *God*) inerrancy were disproved, then our entire faith would utterly collapse?

Because there *are* people that sincerely believe the above.

In fact, I just this morning read a survey from Lifeway that showed that something like 76% of evangelicals believe that Jesus Christ was *created* by God, and a large percentage believe that the Holy Spirit is simply a powerful force rather than a divine being (God), and all sorts of other similar things. And having participated in numerous conversations here on CF, I don't doubt at all the accuracy of the survey or find it difficult to imagine that many people confuse the authority of scripture with the authority of God himself.

And when people speak of God's Word, there is a difference between God's "logos" (translated as Word, but represents Jesus) and God's "biblos" (also translated as Word, but represents written scripture) and yet many people make no distinction between the two because it's not clear in English translations that there is a difference.

It's not a silly argument because this mix-up creates all sorts of confusion and even outright heresies due to the "sola" God being the bible rather than God.

Without wishing to sidetrack the debate, I always thought roughly half of trinitarian churchgoers believed Jesus was a created being if you like, at some point pre the biblical beginning(creation) and they solely referred to Christ as the Son of God. This is based on what I have experienced, in many protestant denominations. I do not view it as surprising, as I myself have never heard it plainly stated otherwise in any sermon I have heard preached in many various denominational churches.