The Son of God is God the Son?

Me2,
Interesting that you make that which is prophetic a current phenominon. Hell, the lake of fire, is existing as we write because this heaven and this earth continue to exist, and in them evil remains a prominent power. In the New heaven and Earth, there will be no evil.

Also interesting that you claim that your spirit cannot sin. The apostle John seems to think otherwise, for he wrote to Christians in 1 John 1:9 that if we confess our sins, He (Jesus) is faithful and Just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from All unrighteousness. Presuming that the spirit that believes in Jesus is capable of continuing to sin, how is it possible that your spirit cannot sin?

Interesting too that the parable of the sower speaks of faith being able to die. That is, seeds of faith that fall on hard, rocky, or weedy soil die easily. Therefore we can only presume that you are claiming to be 'the good soil' in which seeds of faith grow into fullness producing seeds of faith in abundance. We can also assume that you have not been "tested" in a manner that could cause your faith to die. No, I do not desire that you be so tested, it is quite devastating, and shakes you to the very foundation of life itself as in the example in the book of Job.

 

Hi Yelsew,

God speaks in absolutes. he formulates and creates in the spirit and it is realized AGAIN (to us) in the physical realm. as if It already happened.

revelations is an individual message to each believer in their own walk with God. the new earth, New heaven created, and death and hell being destroyed occurs in each believers timing of their understanding in faith.

most of revelation is spoken elsewhere. its basically the process of sanctification and/or Jesus coming to us to destroy his enemies (I mean other enemies)
the world, the flesh and the devil. so that when He comes (oops did I mean comes again..ie,second coming) the battle is the flesh against the spirit.
yea, my flesh..the antichrist..the beast, babylon.

or the false prophet..the world and all of its laws..I mean idols

and the accusser of the brethren and his power of death in his kingdom (hell)..the devil.

revelation is all symbolic, futuristic(?), (depends on you) and the thousand year reign..its a reign all right, of a kingdom of one and your not even its real ruler..its the lord.

next, John in speaking to spiritual children states that they sin..to keep their minds on christ being their propitiator and christ

1Jo 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
1Jo 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

the lesson later in the Johns letter gets more detailed yet it is a futuristic statement that children will not understand until their faith is tried and they grow older in the Lord.

(do you actually realize that these children cannot profess that Jesus is their Lord yet?..nor can they go to the father in Jesus Name..they must gobefore their High priest, Jesus the CHRIST)

but 1 john is written on many levels of understanding. to children mainly, but also includes young men and fathers in the faith.

when you can profess that jesus is your lord, you are signifying that he has been risen from death, has defeated all powers against him and the father has judged you dead and has replaced your old man (spirit) with Jesus righteous spirit and now he has become lord over all, including death. thats a tall order. many dont reach that level..and it requires many tests and much time..

many called, few chosen

so that at this point the message becomes more confusing..yet true.

hold on, I sinned..but I cant because I recognize what and who is inside me. this is incomprehesable by children in the faith. and yet everything that I understand is taught me first (wisdom) and then is taught again in my understanding (trial).

1Jo 3:6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
1Jo 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

and being tested...Been there done that..

and it doesnt end..been being tested now going on 25 years..and I still cry out,
increase my faith.
only I will stand by my knowledge with my life. Its that important. i might know about alot of junk but I wouldnt tell yall about it unless it was tested in my own life and faith.
and that means being "tried by fire" or should I say...tried In the lake of fire.
only its not hot anymore.

and the sower and the seed..its a parable, yet if you include Pauls statements of:

1Co 15:36 [Thou] fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
1Co 15:37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other [grain]:
1Co 15:38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.

1Co 15:42 So also [is] the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
1Co 15:43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:

we die, he rises from "death"
by faith

30,60,100

and resurrection of the dead..thats spiritual death.

 

I agree this is technically wrong in that both death and Hell are thrown into the lake of fire. The site is made for the average lay person. It is speaking of the eternality of the punishment of the wicked, as it indicated when it put in brackets (soul sleep). Techincally is the Lake of Fire that well exist forever and ever. Whether or not God makes a new Heaven and a new earth (which He does) is a moot point). The Bible clearly says that they shall be tormented day and night forever and ever. (Rev.20:10). I must take God at His Word.
DHK

 

Technically, if one is separated from God is that not hell?

Technically, if one is cast into the lake of fire, and the lake of fire ceases to exist, do it's contents continue to exist?

Technically, if one is cast into the lake of fire once, is that not for an eternity, no matter how long the lake of fire exists?

Technically, is forever and ever not an eternity?

The idea is that the lake of fire or torment need not exist for eternity for its effect to be eternal. The effect of being cast into the lake of fire is eternal, regardless of whether or not the lake of fire exists throughout eternity.

Then we could get into the theories of matter/anti-matter. Which if the old is done away with and replaced by new, what happened to the matter of the old? Did that matter simply disappear? How is that possible?

Yes, I too believe the word of God is true. The more decades I read the word of God the more my understanding of the truth becomes clear. I am now at the stage of opaque! That is, light the result of truth, shines through that opaqueness providing light in my life, but the source of the light still remains beyond total clarity. I still cannot make out the details, though I have some general shapes, and actions, and have some knowledge of the results of my actions and movements while in the light, that are shown up by the light.

 

"The effect of being cast into..." That is allegorization. I don't believe that the Word of God should so be allegorized when there is no need for it. I take it literally.
DHK

 

"The effect of being cast into..." That is allegorization. I don't believe that the Word of God should so be allegorized when there is no need for it. I take it literally.
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]What is allegorical about the effect or affect of being thrown into something that is a final fatal act? Once one is thrown into such, it is final and yes it is fatal. It is a done deal never to be reversed, thus is it eternal and it does not matter that what one was thrown into as a finality is itself done away with in like manner, it remains eternal. God is not going to want to tend a burning lake forever.

There is nothing allegorical about that!

 

No. The SDA teaches that the Millenium will be spent in heaven. We do not believe that Christ is coming to set up an earthly kingdom before the Millenium.

We believe that Hell Fire is eternal. We just don't believe that it will burn forever. The outcome of hellfire is QUITE eternal. The person burned by it will never live again.

That statement is misleading. Worship can be done on any day. It is a matter of which day is the True Sabbath of God. There are those who keep a false sabbath in sunday. THAT is what is the Mark of the Beast. The false worship in a false religion on a false sabbath.

The investigative judgment is not 'in the future'. It started in 1844 and has been going on since then. And it is not the fate of everyone, it is only the house of God. This statement is misleading.

No it isn't. We do not believe that the dead cease to exist. We believe that at death the body returns to dust, and the soul of man sleeps through time awaiting the resurrection. NOW, anhiliation is what we believe where someone will cease to exist! That statement is misleading.

They ARE NOT. They are worded in a way that misleads the reader into thinking we believe something that we don't. They are false.

I will.

God Bless,
Kelly

 

DHK,

I took a look at the two links that you provided.

The first one seemed like an advertisement for several books.

They didn't really say much about WHAT Adventists believe other than the brief mention of hell and soul sleep and their refutation of it.

It was factual, for what it's worth, but I don't know about the books they were referencing.

The second one was doing ok until I got to part II.

These are his reasons why you shouldn't associate with SDA's.

I quote:

This is retarded. The doctrine you have learned is a verse, and the so called offense is a verse????? Give me a break. The Bible says we are justified by grace without the deeds of the law. BUT, it also says that Jesus told the rich young ruler that if he wanted to enter into life, to KEEP the commandments! NOW, the Bible doesn't contradict, so, the use of this passage by the SDA's ALSO does not contradict!

I'm sorry, but it said the only assurance of her salvation was that she was faithful and trusted in the merits of her risen Savior!!! THAT is EXACTLY the meaning of Romans 5:9! She will be saved because of her FAITH and TRUST in Christ! There is NO contradiction!

Ok, I'll give him that one, because it is a bit confusing. Let me simplify. We are not allowed to sin, just because we know we are under grace. THAT is all it says. The New Covenant states that the law is no longer just a piece of paper or letters written on stone, but now written on the fleshly tables of our hearts! That means that through the power of the Spirit of God, we obey Him, not out of requirment but out of a REAL change in us. We are NEW creatures. Since we were horrible sinners before, after conversion, there should be a DIFFERENCE. There is no contradiction.

Ok, this guy is just stupid for picking this one. The Collosians 2 passage states DO NOT LET ANYONE JUDGE YOU in your RESPECT of the days. So, he needs to keep his mouth shut, he is judging us for our respect of the day! We respect the Law of God. We CHOOSE to. It is binding on Christians, because Jesus said, if you LOVE ME, KEEP my Commandments. So, since we love Him, we KEEP His commandments, and they are not grevious.

Again, this guy is just being stupid. The quote from the GC is talking about the IJ. It is a doctrine which states that there are 3 phases of judgment. ALL OF WHICH are in the BIBLE. Anyone with a concordance and a KJV can see it, if they look up the word judgment. There is no contradiction between that verse, and the IJ. The IJ is not a 'who's going who's not' type of judgment, and he is showing his ignorance by even comparing that verse to the IJ. The IJ is ONLY for the House of God. THEREFORE, those who are IN THE HOUSE OF GOD are under investigation. It is not a deciding judgment, but a pronouncing judgment. It is proving that each person made the choice and lived in faith towards Christ. The IJ goes hand in hand with what the Bible teaches. The last sentence is referring to the people who CLAIMED the name of Christ, but will be told 'depart from me, you workers of iniquity'. Remember that verse? THOSE people, were in the House of God, but under false pretenses. They had a form of Godliness, but denied the power! There is no contradiction.

That quote is totally taken out of context. We have all gone through the concept of what the SDA believes in Soul Sleep. This quote, removed from it's context makes it appear that we don't believe in any kind of afterlife! You all know better. This man is misrepresenting the SDA.

This too is out of context. This part of the GC is talking about those who come to a saving knowledge of Jesus, and then turn away from Him. We don't believe in OSAS, which MANY orthodox Christians agree with us on. Based on that, we believe that if someone comes to a saving knowledge and then leaves, the sin that they commit after leaving Christ, is counted to them, and the blood of Christ is not covering those sins because THAT PERSON chose to leave the confines of God's Grace. Because of that, those people will be accountable for that sin, and must pay the penalty themselves. Death. Their names were in the book of life because they came to Christ at a time in their life, but it will be blotted out, because they left Him. This is totally scriptural, and Jesus Himself said it. If you deny Him before men, (and lifestyle can be a way of doing that!), then He will deny you before His Father! Anyone who can read, can see that there is a definate possibility for someone to be blotted out of the book of life.

Two different sources, taken out of context. All the WORKS of the devil will be destroyed. WORKS. And the EGW quote, we have all seen a hundred times. Don't you find it sickening to think that your mother or sister might spend eternity in an eternally burning hell? That's all she is saying! CONTEXT PEOPLE! The doctrine of the SDA Church is that the wicked dead will be resurrected, judged and then thrown into the lake of fire. That doesn't have ANYTHING to do with the devil's fate. The Bible says HE will be tormented DAY AND NIGHT, forever and ever. It doesn't say that about PEOPLE.

So I guess we should throw out the book of Ruth. And, that woman who sings in your church, needs to go sit in silence with her husband. You know, this line of thinking is so clearly IFB. That verse DOES NOT SAY that a woman cannot be a prophet. It said she couldn't be a preacher/ teacher, or an authority over men. EGW was never an authority over men. Her husband, an Elder of the SDA, was her head, and the President of the GC of SDA's, a MAN was his boss! This is so stupid to try and say that the SDA Church considered EGW an authority over the men! She helped to build a movement. Are women no longer allowed to help in the ministry? She was a leader in so much that she led the people to a closer relationship with Jesus Christ, and a more abundant life. If that's a sin, I am guilty as well.

And upon the merits of the entire Bible, I can rebuke this man as a bearer of false witness. He has falsly represented the SDA Church, and given an obviously biased view of it's doctrines.

Further down, in his response to Walter Martin (Kingdom of the Cults) he claims (and I got a kick out of this):

The truth is that Seventh-day Adventism today does not differ in any significant doctrinal way from the Seventh-day Adventism of Ellen White’s day, except that it presents its doctrines in a more subtle manner today. If the Seventh-day Adventist leaders were to change their major distinctive doctrines as outlined by Ellen White, they would be denying their prophetess and pulling the pillars from under themselves. The Adventist Church admits this in the following statement from one of their recent publications:[/quote]

THAT is HILARIOUS!!!

Walter Martin contended that in 1915 the SDA Church had changed significantly enough since 1884 to now be called Orthodox. You know what changed?

Guess. (hint: it is what this thread is supposed to be about)

The second site get's a big fat thumbs down.

You have any more?

This is kinda fun!

God Bless,
Kelly

 

Originally posted by 3AngelsMom:

You don't honestly believe that Jesus was teaching the rich young ruler to be saved by keeping the ten commandments do you?? He quoted a part of the law to demonstrate to the young man that he couldn't keep it. Though the rich young man lied, and said, "all these things have I done from my youth," Jesus demonstrated that he didn't, for no man can keep the law. "Thou shalt not covet." The man went away sorrowful. Why? He coveted his riches more than he desired Christ. How hardly shall a rich man enter into the Kingdom of God. The law is a school master to bring us to Christ. Why? It shows us our sinfulness. If we cannot see how sinful we are; that we are lost; then we won't see our need to be saved. Jesus came to seek and to save that which is lost. He came to save, not to instruct how to keep the commandments.

There is no contradition to you because he is accurately representing SDA doctrine. However, Romans 5:9 teaches that we are justified by his blood. It is a one time act. I don't have to be justified again and again, and again--every time I sin. I was justified once--when I was saved. God made me at that point in my life "just as if I never sinned." He looks down at me clothed in the righteousness of Jesus Christ. I am saved and always will be. That is what you do not believe, and why you find no contradiction.

There is a serious contradiction. Either salvation is of grace or of works. The two are mutually exclusive one of the other. Since the SDA's demand Sabbath day worship, and baptism, and other works, that may relate to salvation in particular, they do not believe one is saved by grace, but rather by works. You can't have both. It is one or the other.

Watch what you say here, especially when it seems that you haven't read the passage referred to in context.
16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.
This was actually a rebuke to those who kept the Sabbath. Let no man judge you in respect to holydays or of the sabbath. There were Judaizers in the area saying that they had to keep the Sabbath in order to be saved (sounds familiar). This matter was dealt with in Acts 15. The answer was: NO, you don't have to. Paul gives one of the reasons right here. The sabbath is only a shadow. That is what verse 17 says about the sabbath--a shadow. It is an image, a symbol of the real thing. The real thing is Christ. He is our Sabbath (Heb.4). We enter into His rest when we are saved.

Nope, no matter how much I use my Bible, and my concordance I cannot find Investigative Judgement in there. It is just not there. The whole doctrine of IJ is just a bunch of hocus pocus. Sorry, but it is not D. Cloud, that is being s----- here.
DHK

 

Soul sleep is the end of life until the resurrection. And even then life will only continue for the "saved," whoever that may be in an "SDA" frame of reference. So except for a very select few, it is the end of life.

You just reiterated a lot of heresy that Cloud himself would have openly opposed. We are saved under the blood. Once and for all! The blood covers all my sin (don't know about yours) --the past, the present, and the future. The blood covers them or makes atonement for them, because I have trusted Christ, the most High God, as my Saviour.

My feelings don't count; what the Bible says does count. What I don't understand doesn't matter; what I do understand does.
Don't you find it sickening to think that your mother or sister might spend eternity in an eternally burning hell?
Don't you find it sickening to think that those that deny the deity of Christ deliberately lead others to spend an eternity in an eternally burning hell? That is so much worse.
Revelation 20:10 The devil that deceived them was cast into the Lake of fire where the beast and the false prophet are and shall be tormented day and night.

Need I remind you that the beast spoken of in verse 10 is a man, the antichrist, but a man nevertheless. And the false prophet is also a man. There are people in the Lake of fire who will be tormented day and night for ever and ever--along with all those "whose names are not written in the book of life and are cast into the Lake of fire." (Rev.20:15). This has nothing to do with one's feelings. It has everything to do with the facts of the Bible.

Take all things in context. We don't live in the time of the judges; we live in the church age. Why bring the Book of Ruth up. It has no bearing on the subject. If this line of thinking is clearly IFB, that must be a compliment saying that it is clearly Biblical. Thank you.
"The verse does not say a woman cannot be a prophet?" Obviously it does. Who is she prophesying to? Frogs and toads?? Don't tell me it is just children and women, for we know that there are men in the SDA movement as well. Her position was entirely unbiblical. But then, most cults were started by women who couldn't keep silence in the church Take a look. There are quite a few of them.
"EGW was never an authority over men" Give me a break! She was the movements greatest authority. Of course she had authority over men. Her entire writings are authoritative in themselves, and thus have authority over men and others.
DHK

 

DHK,

If you want to argue every single doctrine of the SDA Church, you need to start an individual thread for each of them.

I didn't go through that site for the sake of argument with you.

I don't care what you think we believe.

I KNOW what we believe, and your pompus attitude is pretty sad, to say the least.

The author of that book is stupid. He has the resources in front of him to teach the truth about the SDA, and he deliberately pulls things out of context to misrepresent them.

Perhaps, a better word to describe him would be deceitful, and satanic. You like that better than stupid?

I, am not stupid. Ignorant I may be, of a great many things, but stupid is NOT something that anyone could ever accuse me of.

You, agreeing with everything that he said, simply because he is IFB is a CULT mentality.

I do not agree with everything within the SDA, and I have made that quite clear.

You have just shown us all how truly duped you are.

Cheers!

By the way, you are deceitful too. You acted like you wanted me to verify a source for you when all you wanted to do was cause more strife.

You poor Independent Fundamental cultist.

Have a great day!