More Seventh-Day Adventists

[BobRyan]

I think DHK's point about Acts is that Acts is descriptive, not prescriptive. The Bible is not all commandments. The epistles to the early churches give the directions.

I am taking NT1 right now and this is one of the first things said by the prof (although I already knew it and I think it's fairly obvious). If you want to make Acts prescriptive, then you better be raising the dead, selling possessions, striking evil men blind (as in Acts 13), and we should be seeing people transported like Philip to the Ethiopian.

Here is a good example - in Acts 17 we see the saints using the Sola Scriptura method to "SEE IF the things said by Paul were SO" and this practice for which they are blessed in Acts 17 is in fact the practice for all saints -- judging doctrine sola scriptura.

In Acts 15 we see the command not to force Gentile Christians to become Jews.

In Acts we also see the NT fact that women participated in NT church as prophets -- Philips four daughters being an example. Which means that the "EACH ONE has a revelation" statement in 1Cor 14 could not have been taken by NT saints to mean "everyone but women".

Recall that 1Cor 14 is also "reporting the news" about what is taking place in Corinth just as 1Cor 5 did.

But even more glaring -- is this notion that the OT does not contain the Gospel so we should not look to it to see what God says on dotrinal issues "no matter what 2tim 3 says to the contrary" about SCRIPTURE and the fact that it IS for doctrine and instruction.

I find this "don't use the 39 books and don't use acts and dont use..." to be a cut-and-paste model that does not hold up.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

I think it would be a stretch to say that each member of the BB has a desire or need or message for this thread. Some just read and post nothing -- others have no interest at all in the subject.

If I went to a neighbor and reported that each member of the BB has an option to post here -- it is obvious that I do not mean "everyone but the women".

If I say "each one of the BB board members posted to this thread" it is obvious I don't mean "all except the women".

In Christ,

Bob

Thus he uses the figure of speech "each one" which obviously does not literally mean "each one" as can be seen from the context of 1Cor.12:28, and the context of 1Cor.14, and then goes on to lay down stipulations on who can and cannot speak. He says that only two or three may speak at the most. We assume here that there is one pastor, one senior man (such as Apollos, whom Paul put in charge of the church of Corinth), who is preaching. He would allow two or at the most three to either speak in tongues or give some revelation. All the service couln't be taken up with such things. There could not be chaos during the service.
"Each one" has a revelation was a rebuke. It was given in the form of a literary device saying that they were all babbling at once so much so that no one could make sense of anything that anybody was saying. There was no order in the church. Thus Paul says: God is not the author of confusion, but order.

Another stipulation he sets forth is that women were to remain silent in the church. They were part and parcel of this confusion and chaos. They only added to the problem. If you don't like go and start your own cult. And that is what Ellen G. White did in rebellion to the Scripture. Women were and are to keep silent in the church. You can't get around that verse, and the others that I quoted to you. The teaching is clear. There is not to be chaos, but order. Women are to be in submission to the men, especially to those that are over them--husbands, pastors, teachers, etc. They are not to teach men--ever! Thus the stipulation for them to keep their silence in the church. The can and are quite capable of learning in quiet.

On a lighter note, maybe they aren't able to learn in silence.
Just maybe, just maybe; that is why John said:

Revelation 8:1 And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour.
--Could it be there is no women in heaven?? :smilewinkgrin:

 

[Amy.G]

Revelation 8:1 And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour.
--Could it be there is no women in heaven??

Watch it, buddy! :laugh: :tongue3:

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

DHK:
"Another stipulation he sets forth is that women were to remain silent in the church. They were part and parcel of this confusion and chaos. They only added to the problem. If you don't like go and start your own cult. And that is what Ellen G. White did in rebellion to the Scripture. Women were and are to keep silent in the church. You can't get around that verse, and the others that I quoted to you. The teaching is clear. There is not to be chaos, but order. Women are to be in submission to the men, especially to those that are over them--husbands, pastors, teachers, etc. They are not to teach men--ever! Thus the stipulation for them to keep their silence in the church. The can and are quite capable of learning in quiet."

GE:
You're right. But the issue on this Board started with Claudia T - not with mrs White. Claudia because she is a women was rebuked for venting her opinion - with which neither of agreed, nevertheless has no right to forbid. The BB is not the Church or the Assembly of God's.

 

[Marcia]

Here is a good example - in Acts 17 we see the saints using the Sola Scriptura method to "SEE IF the things said by Paul were SO" and this practice for which they are blessed in Acts 17 is in fact the practice for all saints -- judging doctrine sola scriptura.

In Acts 15 we see the command not to force Gentile Christians to become Jews.

In Acts we also see the NT fact that women participated in NT church as prophets -- Philips four daughters being an example. Which means that the "EACH ONE has a revelation" statement in 1Cor 14 could not have been taken by NT saints to mean "everyone but women".

I am not sure what your point is, but if any of these are prescriptive, then they are taught in the epistles. In Acts, they are descriptive, not prescriptive. For example, re the passage where the Bereans in Acts 17 test things by the scripture, this is taught in 1 and 2 Timothy, and elsewhere, where we are told to hold to sound doctrine, to teach the word, that scripture is inspired, etc.

But even more glaring -- is this notion that the OT does not contain the Gospel so we should not look to it to see what God says on dotrinal issues "no matter what 2tim 3 says to the contrary" about SCRIPTURE and the fact that it IS for doctrine and instruction.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I didn't say anything about the OT. I was talking about a response DHK made in regards to Acts.

 

[BobRyan]

DHK said on the SDA thread page 12 post 118...
Quote:

The SDA's are so stuck to the law of the OT that given the opportunity they could not prove their doctrine using only the NT.
Yet the gospel is a NT message. The church began at Pentecost. It is called the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is a NT message not found in the OT. In Hebrews it tells us ..."having not yet received the promise..." The gospel is a NT message.
Can the SDA's demonstrate their doctrine without the OT. Le't see what happens.
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost...&postcount=118


By Contrast to that "Good Bible vs Bad Bible" approach to SCRIPTURE - Paul says in 2Tim 3 "ALL Scripture is inspired AND is used for Doctrine".

So tossing out the book of Acts because it shows that the NT church had prophets that were women (Philips four daughters) or throwing out the OT because it defines God's teaching on the "Day of Atonement" in Lev 16 to include the type role of the High Priest -- which means the antitype of Christ as our High Priest (Heb 8-10) is not a good way to uphold the teaching of 2Tim 3:15-17 on "ALL SCRIPTURE".

A progression is often seen among some groups "do not use OT scripture for doctrine"... "and do not use scripture in Acts for doctrine"..."and do not use the Words of Christ pre-cross for doctrine..." and ...

They slice down the "all scripture" that is used for doctrine to some tiny little morsel that offers little objection to their treasury of man-made traditions.



In Christ,


Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Duplicate post

 

[BobRyan]

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobRyan
Here is a good example - in Acts 17 we see the saints using the Sola Scriptura method to "SEE IF the things said by Paul were SO" and this practice for which they are blessed in Acts 17 is in fact the practice for all saints -- judging doctrine sola scriptura.

Marcia said -
In Acts 15 we see the command not to force Gentile Christians to become Jews.

In Acts we also see the NT fact that women participated in NT church as prophets -- Philips four daughters being an example. Which means that the "EACH ONE has a revelation" statement in 1Cor 14 could not have been taken by NT saints to mean "everyone but women".

Marcia
I am not sure what your point is, but if any of these are prescriptive, then they are taught in the epistles. In Acts, they are descriptive, not prescriptive.

Indeed we see illustration and description of the NT church practicing the doctrines that it preached. We also see a description of the NT church TEACHING doctrine in Acts 15 and Acts 17 and Acts 13 and Acts 21...

Marcia said

For example, re the passage where the Bereans in Acts 17 test things by the scripture, this is taught in 1 and 2 Timothy, and elsewhere

Whatever is not repeated from Acts "is deleted"???

In Acts we see that women were prophets in 1Cor 14 we are told that "EACH one has a revelation" and in 1Cor 12 we are told that the Holy Spirit gives to "each one" gifts as He chooses without a restriction stated in the form "and to another the gift of prophecy as long as they are not a woman".

, where we are told to hold to sound doctrine, to teach the word, that scripture is inspired, etc.

Indeed but it is only in Acts that you find the instruction to test the words of the Apostles against scripture to "see IF those things are so".

Those who argue against that practice take the non-Acts texts to say that "sound doctrine" is what you GET from the Apostles so just accept whatever they say. They argue for scripture PLUS tradition accepted without discrimination whereas Acts 17 shows verbal instruction tested BY scripture EVEN if that instruction comes from an Apostle. "Sola scriptura" described by exampe in its "pure form" in other words.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

and in 1Cor 12 we are told that the Holy Spirit gives to "each one" gifts as He chooses without a restriction stated in the form "and to another the gift of prophecy as long as they are not a woman".
Bob

How do you go from "he gives to "each one" gifts as He chooses" to "He gives to "everyone" the gift of revelation. It doesn't say that Bob. It is all in your imagination. You are making things up. Not everyone has a revelation, as you claim. This verse contradicts the very thing that you are trying to prove. Each one may be given a gift, but not the same gift. The "gift of helps" or the "gift of administrations" for example, had nothing to do with the gift of revelation. Not everyone had the gift of revelation. Why are you trying to prove something so unscriptural?

 

[Marcia]

Whatever is not repeated from Acts "is deleted"???

I did not say "deleted!" You are putting words into my mouth. I merely said that what is in Acts is the history of the founding of the early church. It is not necessarily prescriptive, Bob. That's just fact.

Indeed but it is only in Acts that you find the instruction to test the words of the Apostles against scripture to "see IF those things are so".

It does not say that. It does not tell us to do anything; it is reporting what the Bereans did! What Acts tell us is that the Bereans tested the Apostles' words against the scriptures (which at that time was probably the OT). They were commended for this. We cannot test the words of any Apostles teaching today (since they are dead). But we can take this example and, combining it with instructions in some of the epistles to teach and hold to sound doctrine and see the principle: we are to hold to sound doctrine and test teachings against scripture.

You never responded to my questions as to why you are not out there raising the dead, making the lame walk, selling your possessions, etc. and other things that were done in Acts.

 

[BobRyan]

It does not say that. It does not tell us to do anything; it is reporting what the Bereans did! What Acts tell us is that the Bereans tested the Apostles' words against the scriptures (which at that time was probably the OT). They were commended for this. We cannot test the words of any Apostles teaching today (since they are dead).

Living or dead - their doctrine, their teaching can be compared to the OT text of scripture which is God's Word.

The principle remains AND more specifically we FOLLOW their example by CONTINUING to test ALL doctrine presented to us against scripture EVEN if it is from a dead ECF. hence we reject some of the errors of Augustine -- though he is dead.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

DHK:
"Acts 2:16-21 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
. . . .
It is not failed to us (only to you), for to us it is not yet fulfilled. It is yet in the future."

GE:
Cannot quite understand you, DHK. What for would this prophecy again be fulfilled when Christ comes again? There is not going to be a second preaching of the Gospel?

 

[DHK]

DHK:
"Acts 2:16-21 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
. . . .
It is not failed to us (only to you), for to us it is not yet fulfilled. It is yet in the future."

GE:
Cannot quite understand you, DHK. What for would this prophecy again be fulfilled when Christ comes again? There is not going to be a second preaching of the Gospel?

No, there doesn't need to. Part of the prophecy was fulfilled on the Day of Pentecost and in the days of the Apostles. The rest of the prophecy will be fulfilled with the Coming of Christ, and possibly shortly thereafter in the Millennial Kingdom. It is a double prophecy. Many of the prophecies of the OT were like that. It was if the prophet could stand on a mountain and look into the future and see the cross and beyond the cross to the second coming and the MK, and put it all into one prophecy. Certainly the sun hasn't turned into darkness and the moon hasn't turned into blood since that time, nor have all the other signs taken place that are described by Joel (in spite of Claudia's weird interpretation of historical events).
Christ has not come. These events have not taken place. Believe me, we will know it when it does happen!

 

[BobRyan]

DHK:
"Acts 2:16-21 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
. . . .

Certainly it is to be fulfilled in the end of time when with a great light the "everlasting Gospel goes out to the whole world" according to Rev 14:6-7.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I did not say "deleted!" You are putting words into my mouth. I merely said that what is in Acts is the history of the founding of the early church. It is not necessarily prescriptive, Bob. That's just fact.

.

Then perhaps you will accept the "doctrinal instruction" of Paul in 1Thess 1 to "follow our example" -- follow the EXAMPLE that we have in the NT saints.

5for our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction; just as you know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake.
6You also became imitators of us and of the Lord, having received the word in much tribulation with the joy of the Holy Spirit,
7so that you became an example to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia.

Hence we see even the OT saints held up as examples for us in Heb 11.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

Prophecy about the Sun and Moon and Stars

I meant to get back to this post much earlier. But the interpretation of these events (to say the least) is just plain ludicrous.
The questions were asked of Claudia and other SDA's:
Has anyone actually seen Christ return, except for the imagination of Ellen G. White who insists that he "returned" to heaven when he still was in heaven--not a return at all--just a lie when you think of it.
2. Can anyone verify when in history the sun turned everything into darkness--as in total darkness (in the middle of the day).
3. Can anyone verify when in history the moon was turned into blood (that is a blood red color), except in some of our large smog polluted city where the moon is seldom visible anyway?
4. Can anyone verify if all the other signs mentioned in the prophecy of Joel have already taken place.
The answer to these questions is a resounding NO!
And yet in spite of this, the SDA's come up with a warped theology trying to prove all this to have actually happened. How amazing it is to see what extremes a person will go to in order to prove one's own preconceived ideas.

Joel 2:28-31
Matthew 24:1-30

A. The Destruction of Jerusalem
Prophecy: "There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down." "Let them which be in Judea flee into the mountains." Matthew 24:2, 16.
Fulfillment: Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D. 70 by the Roman warrior Titus.

Indeed this was no doubt part of the fulfillment; but was it all of the fulfillment. Did it include the abomination of desolation which is included in the same passage? Why at that time would it have been necessary for them in Judea to flee into the mountains? It wasn't. The prophecy was only fulfilled in part. Its greater fulfillment still awaits. It is future. It will happen during the Tribulation (which is obviously future) when the Antichrist shall desecrate the Temple offering an unclean animal in the holy of holies. At that time, there will start a series of events that will begin a great tribulation such as never has been seen on this earth. It is referred to in the OT, as Jacob's Trouble. It will last for three and a half years, and the entire tribulation will last for only 7 years.

A Great Persecution, or Tribulation
Prophecy: "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world." Matthew 24:21.
Fulfillment: This prophecy points primarily to the long period of tribulation that took place during the Dark Ages and was instigated by the apostate church. It lasted more than 1,000 years. Over 50 million Christians were slain for their faith in this terrible tribulation period. One writer says the apostate church "has shed more innocent blood than any other institution that has ever existed among mankind." W.E.H. Lecky, History of the Rise and Influence of the Spirit of Rationalism in Europe, (Reprint; New York: Braziller, 1955) Vol. 2, pp. 40-45.

Such speculation has no foundation in Scripture and is pure fanciful imagination. The Great Tribulation is still future. It has not happened. It will begin when the Antichrist is revealed and after the church is raptured. If it has already happened who was the antichrist, and who was the false prophet? The Tribulation is described from Revelation 6 through 19. Can you describe these events for us today--the seals, the trumpets, and the vials. One of the plagues described hail with each stone weighing one hundred pounds. Have you seen that taking place yet? Isn't it odd how you can't account for these events having taken place and yet you say that the tribulation has taken place. Yet over and over the Book of Revelation uses phrases like three and a half years, 42 months, 1260 days, a time, times and half a time: all of which refer to a period of 3 and a half years. The Tribulation is divided into two halves of 3 and a half years each. You have it as already taken place and lasting for a period of over 1000 years. That is plain ridiculous and goes against the clear teaching of the Bible. Study your Bible not Ellen G. White's writings.

C. The Sun Turned into Darkness
Prophecy: "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened." Matthew 24:29.
Fulfillment: This was fulfilled by a day of supernatural darkness on May 19, 1780. It was not an eclipse. Timothy Dwight says, "The 19th of May, 1780, was a remarkable dark day. Candles were lighted in many houses; the birds were silent and disappeared, and the fowls retired to roost. ... A very general opinion prevailed, that the day of judgment was at hand." Quoted in Connecticut Historical Collections, compiled by John Warner Barber (2nd ed.; New Haven: Durrie & Peck and J.W. Barber, 1836) p. 403.

There are many dark days recorded in history. The one recorded by Joel (yet to come) will be supernatural in nature so that there will be no mistake about it. You have to give more evidence than this little anecdote. It seems that it would have been a turning point in history if it were actually true. But as it is only you and a few other SDA's have heard of it.

D. The Moon Turned into Blood
Prophecy: "The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the Lord come." Joel 2:31.
Fulfillment: The moon became as red as blood on the night of the "dark day," May 19, 1780. Milo Bostick in Stone's History of Massachusetts says, "The moon which was at its full, had the appearance of blood."

The moon becomes as blood on various occasions for different reasons. Who recorded it; when; what was going on at that time?
Smog and pollution can cause the sun to turn red.
A forest fire can cause the moon to turn red, as can any local fire of any building nearby in a town or city.
There are many reasonos why the moon can turn red. What was it then? Find out the real reason. When it happens in the time that Joel prophesies it will be supernatural and everyone will know that it is supernatural. There will be no mistake about it. This has not happened yet.
The great star shower took place on November 13, 1833.

E. The Stars Fall from Heaven
Prophecy: "And the stars shall fall from heaven." Matthew 24:29.
Fulfillment: The great star shower took place on the night of November 13, 1833. It was so bright that a newspaper could be read on the street. One writer says, "For nearly four hours the sky was literally ablaze."* Men thought the end of the world had come. Look into this. It is most fascinating, and a sign of Christ's coming.
*Peter A. Millman, "The Falling of the Stars," The Telescope, 7 (May-June, 1940) 57.

Where do you live--Pennsylvania? You poor deprived soul. I live in what might be called "the Great White North" by many. We see meteor showers on a regular basis. Once every few years a bright meteor shower (Leonid's meteor shower takes place in the fashion that you described it.) Almost every year we see other meteor showers. These are very common.
Have you ever seen the aurora borealis, otherwise known as the Northern Lights? It is a great display of "lights" of varying colors in the sky in the night time caused by the sun sending forth a cloud of elecrically charged particles, otherwise known as a solar wind which in turn interacts with the earths magnetic field. It is a phenomena which we are able to see in the north, but you are unable to see in the south. Surely these are signs in the heavens. We see them all the time. They have been here from time immemorrial. You can be easily hoodwinked. And many are.
I believe the SDA's are one such group that have been.
Suppose Christ did not come for another thousand years? Would you go back and revamp your hisorical account of what is the tribulation. History changes. Did you know that there were more Christians killed as martyrs in the 20th century than at any other time in history. What does that do to your theory. I believe it destroys it. Study your Bible, and find out the truth.

 

[Claudia_T]

But then again when it comes to Bible Prophecy, DHK cant even realize that when in Revelation 14:6-12 it talks about the Mark of the Beast then describes God's people as "they that keep the commandments of God"... that this must mean that those who ARE NOT God's people DO NOT keep the commandments of God.

Its times like this when I am glad to be one of those women who some think ought to just keep silent.

Lk:10:21: In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight.

I meant to get back to this post much earlier. But the interpretation of these events (to say the least) is just plain ludicrous.
The questions were asked of Claudia and other SDA's:
Has anyone actually seen Christ return, except for the imagination of Ellen G. White who insists that he "returned" to heaven when he still was in heaven--not a return at all--just a lie when you think of it.
2. Can anyone verify when in history the sun turned everything into darkness--as in total darkness (in the middle of the day).
3. Can anyone verify when in history the moon was turned into blood (that is a blood red color), except in some of our large smog polluted city where the moon is seldom visible anyway?
4. Can anyone verify if all the other signs mentioned in the prophecy of Joel have already taken place.
The answer to these questions is a resounding NO!
And yet in spite of this, the SDA's come up with a warped theology trying to prove all this to have actually happened. How amazing it is to see what extremes a person will go to in order to prove one's own preconceived ideas.

Indeed this was no doubt part of the fulfillment; but was it all of the fulfillment. Did it include the abomination of desolation which is included in the same passage? Why at that time would it have been necessary for them in Judea to flee into the mountains? It wasn't. The prophecy was only fulfilled in part. Its greater fulfillment still awaits. It is future. It will happen during the Tribulation (which is obviously future) when the Antichrist shall desecrate the Temple offering an unclean animal in the holy of holies. At that time, there will start a series of events that will begin a great tribulation such as never has been seen on this earth. It is referred to in the OT, as Jacob's Trouble. It will last for three and a half years, and the entire tribulation will last for only 7 years.

Such speculation has no foundation in Scripture and is pure fanciful imagination. The Great Tribulation is still future. It has not happened. It will begin when the Antichrist is revealed and after the church is raptured. If it has already happened who was the antichrist, and who was the false prophet? The Tribulation is described from Revelation 6 through 19. Can you describe these events for us today--the seals, the trumpets, and the vials. One of the plagues described hail with each stone weighing one hundred pounds. Have you seen that taking place yet? Isn't it odd how you can't account for these events having taken place and yet you say that the tribulation has taken place. Yet over and over the Book of Revelation uses phrases like three and a half years, 42 months, 1260 days, a time, times and half a time: all of which refer to a period of 3 and a half years. The Tribulation is divided into two halves of 3 and a half years each. You have it as already taken place and lasting for a period of over 1000 years. That is plain ridiculous and goes against the clear teaching of the Bible. Study your Bible not Ellen G. White's writings.

There are many dark days recorded in history. The one recorded by Joel (yet to come) will be supernatural in nature so that there will be no mistake about it. You have to give more evidence than this little anecdote. It seems that it would have been a turning point in history if it were actually true. But as it is only you and a few other SDA's have heard of it.


The moon becomes as blood on various occasions for different reasons. Who recorded it; when; what was going on at that time?
Smog and pollution can cause the sun to turn red.
A forest fire can cause the moon to turn red, as can any local fire of any building nearby in a town or city.
There are many reasonos why the moon can turn red. What was it then? Find out the real reason. When it happens in the time that Joel prophesies it will be supernatural and everyone will know that it is supernatural. There will be no mistake about it. This has not happened yet.
The great star shower took place on November 13, 1833.

Where do you live--Pennsylvania? You poor deprived soul. I live in what might be called "the Great White North" by many. We see meteor showers on a regular basis. Once every few years a bright meteor shower (Leonid's meteor shower takes place in the fashion that you described it.) Almost every year we see other meteor showers. These are very common.
Have you ever seen the aurora borealis, otherwise known as the Northern Lights? It is a great display of "lights" of varying colors in the sky in the night time caused by the sun sending forth a cloud of elecrically charged particles, otherwise known as a solar wind which in turn interacts with the earths magnetic field. It is a phenomena which we are able to see in the north, but you are unable to see in the south. Surely these are signs in the heavens. We see them all the time. They have been here from time immemorrial. You can be easily hoodwinked. And many are.
I believe the SDA's are one such group that have been.
Suppose Christ did not come for another thousand years? Would you go back and revamp your hisorical account of what is the tribulation. History changes. Did you know that there were more Christians killed as martyrs in the 20th century than at any other time in history. What does that do to your theory. I believe it destroys it. Study your Bible, and find out the truth.

 

[Claudia_T]

The Misunderstanding in 1844

The disappointed expectations for Christ’s return in 1844 were the result of a misunderstanding as to which sanctuary was to be cleansed. But before we criticize those believers we need to remember that the prophet Daniel misunderstood the same thing.

Daniel received the vision of the 2300-day prophecy in 551 B.C. But Gabriel did not provide a full explanation of the prophecy until the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, which was 538 B.C. Chapter nine reveals that during those 13 years Daniel held a misunderstanding as to which sanctuary was to be cleansed. His concern was for the temple in Jerusalem which he hoped would soon be restored. He certainly did not want to see it lay in ruins for 2300 years. That was the reason for his great anxiety and earnest prayer.

William Miller began preaching on the 2300-day prophecy in the year 1831. Until 1844 people incorrectly assumed that the sanctuary to be cleansed was the earth. Just like Daniel, for 13 years they misunderstood which sanctuary was to be cleansed!

Because God may withhold the full light of truth from His people for a time does not mean that He is not leading them. He has a reason for all that He does, and He unfolds His secrets as He sees best. Our duty is to walk in the light as He reveals it, and He will guide us into all truth.

 

[Shiloh]

The disappointed expectations for Christ’s return in 1844 were the result of a misunderstanding by posts 2940, family time 0

Question, If your fearless leader whom you canonized was wrong....don't you think it is possible for you to be wrong also?

 

[BobRyan]

William Miller was a baptist minister preaching in the early 1800's BEFORE the formation of the SDA denomination. Of the 50,000 people in the US that were part of the millerite movement - only 50 went on to form the SDA denomination and William Miller was not one of them.

Having that historic fact - Shiloh's statement above is groundless.

But getting to the point "could you be wrong" of course Shiloh "could be wrong" and Allen "Could be wrong" and Bob "could be wrong".

But the Bible CAN't BE wrong - which is why I always prove my arguments sola-scriptura and it is why I expose the doctrinal errors of those who actually post doctrinal point in opposition (as opposed to just posting ad hominem complaining) sola-scriptura.

The RCC members of this board claim THEY solve the problem using something like the Pope instead. I do not choose that solution.

So the real issue here is exegesis and Bible study.

In Christ,

Bob