SAVED even if you don't reject 1Cor 12 and 1cor 14?

[BobRyan]

HP has started a very interesting "cults" thread -- I highly recommend it.

One of the exchanges on that thread basically has DHK arguing the following points about spiritual gifts in 1Cor 12 and 14 when it comes to the gift of prophecy --

Bob, I am not going to discuss those points sola scriptura. Ellen G. White was a prophet unto herself.

BobRyan said -

I on the other hand am constrained to evaluate ALL doctrine "sola scriptura" sir.

we differ in that regard - but I accept it.

in 1cor 12 we SEE God giving the gift of prophecy to the NT church and in 1Cor 14 we SEE God saying "DESIRE earnestly spiritual gifts but ESPECIALLY that you may prophesy".

I believe you would reject that teaching of scripture today.

I do not.

so -- we differ.

DHK said --

In the same passage we read:

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

It seems that you believe only those Scriptures which are convenient to your cult. Why not believe them all?

Bob said
DHK - You focused on two main points so far --

#1. you can not be saved if you allow women to speak in church.
#2. you can not be saved if you fail to reject 1Cor 12 and 1Cor 14.

Let's start a thread -- totally dedicated to your teaching in this regard to see how long it can hold water sir!

So what about this friends? What say you?

CAN you be saved if you allow women to speak in your church??

CAN you be saved if you fail to reject 1Cor 12 and 1Cor 14 on the subject of the spiritual gift of prophecy?

What is the view of this board??

Let your views be heard - err umm seen, read...:laugh:

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

So what about this friends? What say you?

CAN you be saved if you allow women to speak in your church??

CAN you be saved if you fail to reject 1Cor 12 and 1Cor 14 on the subject of the spiritual gift of prophecy?

What is the view of this board??

Let your views be heard - err umm seen, read...:laugh:

Bob, the passage in question has nothing to do with salvation; nor did I say anything about salvation in respect to 1Cor.14. You have misrepresented me. If a woman disobeys that which is written in 1Cor.14, then obviously it is a matter of disobedience, not salvation. So, what are you trying to prove?
Secondly, I am a cessationist. I believe that the spiritual gifts ceased at the end of the first century. Thus the whole argument is moot. Thirdly Ellen G. White, by the standards of the OT, would have been stoned to death for her prophecies. The standard of the OT is 100% accuracy 100% of the time. She was not. She was a false prophet uttering false prophecies. She claimed the prophecy that Christ coming back in 1844 was true whereas it was not. That is false, bogus, and makes her false and bogus. The foundation of the SDA movement is false and bogus.

 

[Eliyahu]

I think the title of the thread doesn't reflect the true aspects of the arguments but just exaggerate the claims.

On the other hand, I would point out that even today no one is perfect in the Eschatology, one may be correct in A issue but may be wrong in B issues.

So, I would rather recommend both of you to refrain from the friendly fires. Any criticism must be specific as the random shooting would just hurt each other.

 

[BobRyan]

The OP quotes of DHK - are literal and I believe they speak for themselves.

They are in direct followup to this post from DHK - same topic, same thread, same poster, same subject.

Here is a summation of the beliefs of the SDA's which make them a cult.


I do not believe you can believe such doctrines and be saved at the same time.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1037834&postcount=49

I simply selected ONE of the points he raised in his post above to let DHK show just how broad-sweeping his views were against the spiritual gift of prophecy as defined in 1Cor 12 and 1Cor 14.

I do not dictate what DHK says - he was/is free at any time to express strong support for those scriptures.

I believe the sequence of responses as shown in the OP indicates otherwise to the objective unbiased reader -- but I could be mistaken.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Bob, the passage in question has nothing to do with salvation; nor did I say anything about salvation in respect to 1Cor.14. You have misrepresented me. If a woman disobeys that which is written in 1Cor.14, then obviously it is a matter of disobedience, not salvation. So, what are you trying to prove?

Your initial list did not include anything about women having to be absolutely silent in church. You simply volunteered that point in connection with the idea of a "cult" on your own in a response to my focus on prophecy in 1Cor 12 and 1Cor 14 --- I had no focus at all on women being silent. That was your idea alone.

But since you have now connected the "silence of women in church" with with the definition for those who can and/or can not be saved --

Is it your claim that women are not allowed to sing in your church without someone losing salvation?

What about praying or giving their testimony - must someone "not be saved" if that happens in your church as well?

Where do you draw the line on this "women silent or people not saved" idea?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

The standard of the OT is 100% accuracy 100% of the time. She was not. She was a false prophet uttering false prophecies. She claimed the prophecy that Christ coming back in 1844 was true whereas it was not. That is false, bogus, and makes her false and bogus. The foundation of the SDA movement is false and bogus.

At some point you have to say something that is actually true. I am waiting sir. Feel free to start at any time.

Let's start with a few facts to "help you along".

#1. Ellen Harmon was a 17 year old teen at the time of the 1844 Millerite (non-denominational) revival movement in the U.S. She was not a prophet at that time - had no visions and did "make any predictions" about that message from Miller as though she WERE a prophet. At that time she was "unknown" as anything but a dedicated teenage Christian United Methodist both to Millerites and the yet-to-be-invented Adventist leaders.

#2. By the time she had her first vision EVERYONE was in agreement that Christ HAD NOT come to earth in 1844. And she never had-or-related a vision saying that He DID come back to earth at that time.

However on the other thread I stated emphatically that SDAs regard every one claiming the gift of prophecy as having to pass the "test of a prophet" on a sola-scriptura basis. For that reason we NEVER argue the validity of a prophetic message within the SDA church to anyone that does not share the SDA doctrinal view on a purely sola-scriptura basis. To do otherwise would be self-conflicting -- obviously.

You have to FIRST establish the BIBLE GROUNDS for prophecy - STEP 1 and you have already claimed to fail in that area alone. There is no "STEP 2" if you can not get step 1 right sir.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

At some point you have to say something that is actually true. I am waiting sir. Feel free to start at any time.

Let's start with a few facts to "help you along".

#1. Ellen Harmon was a 17 year old teen at the time of the 1844 Millerite (non-denominational) revival movement in the U.S. She was not a prophet at that time - had no visions and did "make any predictions" about that message from Miller as though she WERE a prophet. At that time she was "unknown" as anything but a dedicated teenage Christian United Methodist both to Millerites and the yet-to-be-invented Adventist leaders.

#2. By the time she had her first vision EVERYONE was in agreement that Christ HAD NOT come to earth in 1844. And she never had-or-related a vision saying that He DID come back to earth at that time.

However on the other thread I stated emphatically that SDAs regard every one claiming the gift of prophecy as having to pass the "test of a prophet" on a sola-scriptura basis. For that reason we NEVER argue the validity of a prophetic message within the SDA church to anyone that does not share the SDA doctrinal view on a purely sola-scriptura basis. To do otherwise would be self-conflicting -- obviously.

You have to FIRST establish the BIBLE GROUNDS for prophecy - STEP 1 and you have already claimed to fail in that area alone. There is no "STEP 2" if you can not get step 1 right sir.

in Christ,

Bob

Here Bob is step one. Step one is to establish Ellen White as a false prophet. We do that through Scripture.

Deuteronomy 13:1-3 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

Deuteronomy 13:5 And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.

Ellen G. White did have (dreams) visions which did cause people to be turned away from the God of the Bible. She would have been stoned to death. She is a false prophetess.

Deuteronomy 18:22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.
--Many of the prophecies made did not come true. She was a false prophet. She would have been stoned to death. Even the false prophecies already made she asserted with all of heart to be true--that also would put her in the class of being a false prophet.

Now let us look at some of the history and visions of Ellen G. (Harmon) White, and see if your assertion--that she had no visions--is true.

Early in 1845, Foss overheard Ellen Harmon relate her first vision to the company of believers at Portland, Maine. He recognized her account as a description of what was shown him. Upon meeting her the next morning, he recounted his experience, of which she had not before known, and encouraged her to faithfully perform her work, stating: ‘I believe the visions are taken from me and given to you. Do not refuse to obey God, for it will be at the peril of your soul. I am a lost man. You are chosen of God; be faithful in doing your work, and the crown I might have had, you will receive.’ On comparing dates, they discovered that it was not until after he had been told that the visions were taken from him, that Ellen Harmon was given her first revelation. Although Hazen Foss lived till 1893, he never again manifested interest in matters religious (Arthur L. White, Ellen G. White—Messenger to the Remnant, revised to 1969, p. 30).

"...in the year 1844 ... there was a group of Advent believers among whom was manifested the gift of prophecy. The agent of this gift [Ellen Harmon] was called to service in 1844. Later those associated with this gift came in contact with the Bible teaching already referred to—the truths of the Sabbath and of the heavenly sanctuary and the judgment hour. Thus was formed the nucleus of the definite Advent Movement of the prophecy. We see the various special factors all having their roots in 1844. And from that day to this, the people of the prophecy have been hastening on toward all nations with the gospel message of preparation to meet the Lord" (Gift of Prophecy, p. 13).

[FONT=&quot]Ellen White’s father, Robert Harmon, was a follower of William Miller. Because of their acceptance of adventist theories, the Harmons, Ellen included, were dropped from the Methodist church in Portland, Maine, in 1843 (D.A. Delafield, Ellen G. White and the S.D.A., p. 87). Ellen had made a personal commitment to adventism during a sermon by Miller, and at age 17 she allegedly began receiving visions concerning this movement. This began soon after October 1844, the last date that had been set by Miller and his followers; and in these visions, many Adventists saw the leading of God in answer to their bewilderment and desperation. The teenage girl was allegedly commanded by the revealing "angel" to proclaim the visions to others, and as she did, a following of adventists rallied around her as a prophetess of God.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
"Back in December 1844, in her first prophetic vision, she was shown the advent people traveling on an elevated road to heaven, with a brilliant light illuminating their pathway. At the end of this path was the golden City of God, the New Jerusalem, described by John in the last chapters of the Revelation. The light shining from the commencement of the trail was symbolic of the Lord’s presence with the movement from its beginning until the second coming of the Lord ... ‘In my second vision ... about a week after the first, the Lord gave me a view of the trials through which I must pass, and told me that I must go and relate to others what He had revealed to me ... Said the angel ... Deliver the message faithfully; endure unto the end, and you shall eat the fruit of the tree of life and drink of the water of life’" (Ellen G. White and the SDA Church, pp. 12- 13).
file:///C:/FundamentalBaptistLibrary2000/WWW/Ency/ency0068.htm

Ellen White had plenty of visions--all false. She was a false prophet.
The prophetic gift had already ceased. It ceased in the first century and was not given to women. Women were commanded to keep quiet in the church when it came to prophetic gifts, teaching gifts, and anything that had to do with authority in the church. The Bible clearly instructs that a woman shall not have authority over a man. (Obviously this has nothing to do with congregational singing). But Ellen White became the head of an entire denomination instructing all those beneath her both men and women--totally unscriptural.

1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

For all the and teaching that White did, it was all in vain. She is a false teacher; a false prophet; a wolf in sheep's clothing.

 

[BobRyan]

Apparently your doctrine on prophecy revolves around Ellen White DHK - I find your approach quite amazing - frankly!!

My view of prophecy starts first and foremost with scripture. I start with the scriptures that you reject.

1Cor 12 - Spiritual gifts given by God the church. I find that God tells us that the gift of prophecy is one of the gifts given to the church - actively given EVEN at the time that Paul was writing to the Church of corinth.

1Cor 14 - Paul tells the church of Corinth to "desire earnestly spiritual gifts ESPECIALLY that you may prophesy" 1Cor 14:1 EVEN though Peter, Paul, John, James, Matthew Mark Luke etc had ALREADY been given their gifts. Paul did not say to the Church of Corinth "DO NOT seek the gift of prophecy for ALL the Bible writers have ALREADY been given THEIRs so they can write scripture and that is the only reason for having the git - so there is no more of that to go around".

(Much as some might have expected Paul to have said this by the time the letter to the Corinthians was being written".)

Instead of taking this "step 1" DHK - you seem to want to go straight to "Ellen White" and start "making stuff up" using nothing but your imagination as "data". Using that "method" you come up with Ellen White making a prophetic statement about William Miller's 1844 movement declaring that Christ was supposed to come to earth Oct 22 1844.

THEN your latest post uses ACTUAL data - showing that Ellen HARMON had a vision AFTER the Oct 22 1844 event but saying NOTHING to the effect that Christ was supposed to have come in 1844!!

How amazing that your OWN selection of sources does NOT back up your wild vaccuous accusations DHK!!

I frankly am surprised at the lack of substance in that effort. Surely you actually HAVE some evidence to back up your wild claim that Ellen Harmon (or as you say - Ellen White) predicted in vision that Christ would come in 1844!!

come on DHK - surely there is ONE actual factual statement to back you up on that point!

I already stated SEVERAL TIMES that by the sola-scriptura test - the prophetic teaching - the message of ALL who claim to be prophets has to be validated "sola scriptura" and that by that reason alone - no SDA expects a non-SDA to evaluate Ellen White as a true prophet. That is a GIVEN. Yet you wildly seek "vaccuous empty claims" ANYWAY even though I have given you a VALID fom of objection that wouild actually have SUBSTANCE you cling to "story telling" anyway???!!! What is up with that???

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

DHK posted this on another thread -- not sure why he did not post it here since this IS THE point of the OP!!

As far as the gift of prophecy is concerned:
#1. It ceased by the end of the first century, and thus White could not have possessed. What she possessed was a demonic imitation of it.
#2. The prophetic gift was not given to women.
#3. The women were told to keep quiet in the church, and not to speak at all.
#4. No women was to have any authority over any man.

Now that is what the Scripture teaches. You have all of these four truths that you must reconcile and deal with. Ellen G. White went against each one. Her prophecies failed demonstrating she was a false prophet. She taught contrary to the Word of God demonstrating that she was a false teacher. And yet she remains the revered leader of the movement that you are still a follower of. Amazing!

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1039105&postcount=40

 

[DHK]

Apparently your doctrine on prophecy revolves around Ellen White DHK - I find your approach quite amazing - frankly!!

My view of prophecy starts first and foremost with scripture. I start with the scriptures that you reject.

1Cor 12 - Spiritual gifts given by God the church. I find that God tells us that the gift of prophecy is one of the gifts given to the church - actively given EVEN at the time that Paul was writing to the Church of corinth.

1Cor 14 - Paul tells the church of Corinth to "desire earnestly spiritual gifts ESPECIALLY that you may prophesy" 1Cor 14:1 EVEN though Peter, Paul, John, James, Matthew Mark Luke etc had ALREADY been given their gifts. Paul did not say to the Church of Corinth "DO NOT seek the gift of prophecy for ALL the Bible writers have ALREADY been given THEIRs so they can write scripture and that is the only reason for having the git - so there is no more of that to go around".

(Much as some might have expected Paul to have said this by the time the letter to the Corinthians was being written".)

Why not read all the related Scripture. Paul never tells the women that they have permisson to prophecy in the church. They are not permitted, nor can they have authority over man. This gift was not for them. Compare Scripture with Scripture. All spiritual gifts were not for all people.

Instead of taking this "step 1" DHK - you seem to want to go straight to "Ellen White" and start "making stuff up" using nothing but your imagination as "data". Using that "method" you come up with Ellen White making a prophetic statement about William Miller's 1844 movement declaring that Christ was supposed to come to earth Oct 22 1844.

I already know what the Bible says about prophecy and the prophetic gift. In that area White fails miserably. She is a false prophet. I have not made anything up. I have used well-researched quotes. (BTW, my method is no different than yours in debating the Catholics--why should you object?) It is not my imagination. It is data I have presented. Give up on the false accusations please. I realize that Miller made the original prophecy of Christ coming in 1844. Later Miller realized he was wrong. He repented never to be a date-setter again, and went back to the preaching of the Word of God. (Harmon) White did not do that. She held on to Miller's prophecy as absolute inspired truth, and as the basis of the SDA movement. In addition to that she had thousands of other visions which became the basis of doctrine of the SDA movement. FYI, Bob, I too own a copy of "The Great Controversy."

THEN your latest post uses ACTUAL data - showing that Ellen HARMON had a vision AFTER the Oct 22 1844 event but saying NOTHING to the effect that Christ was supposed to have come in 1844!!

When she saw that Christ did not come to earth visibly, she did not want to be seen as wrong, or Miller as being seen as wrong, so she made up this wild story that Christ indeed did return. He returned to the inner sanctuary up in heaven and started an investigative judgement. That was his return! What garbage is this! It is man-made doctrine in the same category as the assumption of Mary.

How amazing that your OWN selection of sources does NOT back up your wild vaccuous accusations DHK!!

Do you have a deficit in reading skills? What have I not backed up? And if you need further documentation I will be glad to give it to you.

I frankly am surprised at the lack of substance in that effort. Surely you actually HAVE some evidence to back up your wild claim that Ellen Harmon (or as you say - Ellen White) predicted in vision that Christ would come in 1844!!

I didn't say that. Miller gave the original prophecy. But even when Miller admitted that he was mistaken, White wouldn't give the lie up. She pressed on believing the lie that Christ had actually come, only in a different manner that Miller had described. She was a false teacher, a false prophet!

come on DHK - surely there is ONE actual factual statement to back you up on that point!

I already have.

I already stated SEVERAL TIMES that by the sola-scriptura test - the prophetic teaching - the message of ALL who claim to be prophets has to be validated "sola scriptura" and that by that reason alone - no SDA expects a non-SDA to evaluate Ellen White as a true prophet. That is a GIVEN. Yet you wildly seek "vaccuous empty claims" ANYWAY even though I have given you a VALID fom of objection that wouild actually have SUBSTANCE you cling to "story telling" anyway???!!! What is up with that???

Nothing (or very little) that White taught can be verified sola scriptura. It was from the devil. What you imply is that for more than 1800 years no Christian had the truth of the Word of God. No one had the actual truth until Ellen G. White came into existence. How arrogant!! This is truly the mark of a cult--that "we" only have the true information.

 

[BobRyan]

Why not read all the related Scripture. Paul never tells the women that they have permisson to prophecy in the church. They are not permitted, nor can they have authority over man. This gift was not for them. Compare Scripture with Scripture. All spiritual gifts were not for all people.

Paul claims "EACH one has a revelation" not "EACH man has revelation".

Paul says "DESIRE earnestly spiritual gives ESPECIALLy that you may prophesy" not "Especially that the MEN may prophesy.

Philip's four daughters were all prophetesses - contrary to your imagined restriction for the saints.

Deborah was both prophetess AND judge contrary to your imagined restriction.

Miriam was declared by God to be a prophetess contrary to your imagined restriction on this gift for women.

When it comes to "sola-scriptura" your objection does not hold water sir.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I already know what the Bible says about prophecy and the prophetic gift. In that area White fails miserably. She is a false prophet.

I already HANDED you the way out on that one by showing that doctrinally her prophetic statements do NOT fit a Baptist doctrinal position and that on that basis alone ADVENTISTS insist that baptists should reject Ellen White as a prophet.

In fact PAUL argues this same thing in 1Cor 14 saying that Prophecy is only a sign to BELIEVERS.

I have not made anything up. I have used well-researched quotes.

Then now is a good time to defend the claim that Ellen White EVER predicted (via dream, vision etc) that Christ would come in 1844.

(BTW, my method is no different than yours in debating the Catholics--why should you object?)

Actually it is different. If you check my sources they are all PRO-Catholic documents. They are not an anti-catholic document trying to find a few Catholic sources.

It is not my imagination. It is data I have presented. Give up on the false accusations please.

You have yet to actually quote from the readily available SDA doctrinal statemetns --

http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/fundamental/index.html

I realize that Miller made the original prophecy of Christ coming in 1844. Later Miller realized he was wrong. He repented never to be a date-setter again, and went back to the preaching of the Word of God.

Miller did a Bible study and predicted Christ would come but did not claim to have any vision or prophecy of his own regarding that point. Pure Bible study.

(Harmon) White did not do that. She held on to Miller's prophecy as absolute inspired truth,

Ellen Harmon was a teenager -- she and her family were among the United Methodists that accepted Miller's Bible study.

But nobody was "following that teen" around sir.

and as the basis of the SDA movement. In addition to that she had thousands of other visions which became the basis of doctrine of the SDA movement.

Would be better to PROVE that some doctrine (I would think that integrity would demand that you at least show ONE) relies on Ellen White to either define it or prove it -- you know the way Mormon's would use Joseph Smith in Pearl of Great price. Should be pretty easy -- "if true"

FYI, Bob, I too own a copy of "The Great Controversy."
When she saw that Christ did not come to earth visibly, she did not want to be seen as wrong, or Miller as being seen as wrong, so she made up this wild story that Christ indeed did return.

There is no "christ returned" message from Ellen White. Especially not in Great Controversy.

What you have is the "Coming of the Son of Man" in Dan 7 coming "TO the Ancient of Days" as Dan 7 states regarding the judgment scene being highlighted in that same chapter.

Details details.

Do you have a deficit in reading skills? What have I not backed up? And if you need further documentation I will be glad to give it to you.

You claimed that Ellen White supported in vision or prohecy Miller's prediction that Christ returned to earth in 1844.

She never did that.

Then here you claim that she said "Christ DID RETURN" in 1844 (as if to claim that Miller was right in saying Christ would RETURN in 1844) but INSTEAD she states flatly that Miller was WRONG about Christ RETURNING.

She argues that Miller thought Christ would "cleans the sanctuary" according to Dan 8 and that the "popular view" at that time was that this term was to be interpreted to mean "SECOND COMING to cleanse the earth". She stated that this was flat wrong.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

Paul claims "EACH one has a revelation" not "EACH man has revelation".

Paul says "DESIRE earnestly spiritual gives ESPECIALLy that you may prophesy" not "Especially that the MEN may prophesy.

Philip's four daughters were all prophetesses - contrary to your imagined restriction for the saints.

Deborah was both prophetess AND judge contrary to your imagined restriction.

Miriam was declared by God to be a prophetess contrary to your imagined restriction on this gift for women.

When it comes to "sola-scriptura" your objection does not hold water sir.

in Christ,

Bob

Isn't it odd that the only Scripture that you can quote to defend your position is
#1. Some verses from 1Cor where Paul was rebuking the use if these gifts (and you took them out of context at that!).
#2. Some verses from the Book of Acts--a historical book, a book of transition when the church was in a state of change. Doing this puts you in the same category as the Oneness Pentecostal who cannot present their "version" of the gospel without the book of Acts. Why? Because they too are a cult.
#3. The only other example you have is from the OT. Surely you don't think that God using a woman in the OT validates the prophetic gift of the NT church. If that logic were true we all could expect donkeys like Balaam's to be speaking the truth to us and warning us from imminent danger. But that is not the case is it?
Your hermeneutics is terrible. You need to learn to rightly divide the word of truth. It is also interesting that you do avoid those books of the NT which do specifically teach doctrine concerning church order:

1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

You also ignore the other scripture in the midst of the teaching of spiritual gifts that puts a caveat on women using certain spiritual gifts such as prophecy:

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Why are do you avoid the Scriptures?

 

[BobRyan]

I didn't say that. Miller gave the original prophecy. But even when Miller admitted that he was mistaken, White wouldn't give the lie up.

When 1844 Oct 22 came and went EVERYONE agreed that Christ did not come as expected and that they were wrong.

But Miller ALSO gave up on the 2300 day prophecy entirely where as a Hazen Foss and others figured out that the EVENT pointed to was NOT the 2nd coming but something closely related to it that Daniel had already described in Daniel 7.

She pressed on believing the lie that Christ had actually come, only in a different manner that Miller had described.

She was not the one that came up with this. It was Foss and other Bible students who after hearing with Foss had to say looked again at Daniel 7 to see what scripture had to say about it.

Later it is true that she ALSO had a vision on that point - but the idea had alread been accepted by a number of the Advent believers by that time and the teen Ellen Harmon was stil lnot a "leader" to be followed.

The argument for the Oct 22, 1844 is not "Ellen White figured it out" it is "William Miller figure it out" but got the event wrong. And the one who discovered the correct Dan 7 event that would occur at the end of the 2300 days was not Ellen Harmon but rather Hazen Foss.

Yet even that would not have been enough without the solid evidence that already exists in Daniel 7.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Isn't it odd that the only Scripture that you can quote to defend your position is
#1. Some verses from 1Cor where Paul was rebuking the use if these gifts (and you took them out of context at that!).

As great as it would be to accept THAT kind of reponse as having "Actual substance" sir -- it does not.

you actually have to DEAL with the content of 1Cor 14 that plainly debunks your theory where YOU claim in essence "EACH one does NOT have a revelation" no matter WHAT scripture says to the contrary.

#2. Some verses from the Book of Acts--a historical book,

Indeed it SHOWS GOD making a selection that YOU claim He should not be doing!!

Your false idea is totally debunked "sola scriptura" and your only response is to COMPLAIN about the scriptures that debunk your failed idea???

It should be noted that ACCEPTING the spiritual gifts doctrine of 1Cor 12 and 1Cor 14 is NOT unique to SDAs.

Your entire line of reasoning is failing you here DHK.

Try again.

#3. The only other example you have is from the OT. Surely you don't think that God using a woman in the OT validates the prophetic gift of the NT church.

SOLA-SCRIPTURA -- my Bible has 66 books not just 27 sir.

Your's seems "a bit short" -- maybe there has been too much slicing and dicing done on your side sir.


in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

a book of transition when the church was in a state of change. Doing this puts you in the same category as the Oneness Pentecostal who cannot present their "version" of the gospel without the book of Acts. Why? Because they too are a cult.

You seem to have "no end" of scripture that you reject and Christian groups that you condemn.

I find that facinating all by itself sir.

If that logic were true we all could expect donkeys like Balaam's to be speaking the truth to us and warning us from imminent danger. But that is not the case is it?

In fact NOBODY uses such failed logic to deny the God of the Bible or the DOCTRINES of scripture. The "ignore the OT or beware of donkeys" defense dies all on it's own.

Your hermeneutics is terrible.

You need to learn to rightly divide the word of truth.

It is also interesting that you do avoid those books of the NT which do specifically teach doctrine concerning church order:

1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Again - "no singing in DHK's church" for women?

No reading of acts, or the Gospels (Anna was prophetess in the Gospels... Philips Daughters in Acts, EVERY ONE IN CHURCH in 1Cor 14...)

So much scripture for you to cut out DHK??

How do you find time to do it?

You also ignore the other scripture in the midst of the teaching of spiritual gifts that puts a caveat on women using certain spiritual gifts such as prophecy:

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak;

That would prohibit them from praying, giving testimonies, singing, saying amen....

hmmm - I have to wonder JUST HOW MANY Baptists on this thread are swallowing this DHK doctrinal position????!!

Surely you can not POSSIBLY be imaging that SDAS are the only group having women that sing, pray, give testimonies, SPEAK in church???!!

but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

The LAW???

DHK is in FAVOR of the LAW of GOD???

I learn something every day.

"Hint: Learn what LAW it is and you will SEE how it is that Deborah is both prophetess AND judge under that LAW".

(oops -- wrong part of the 66 for DHK!!)


in Christ,

Bob

 

[hillclimber1]

Bob, this, that you present doesn't have any continuity, or structure to it. You don't even respond rationally to DHK's corrections. You must return to the Bible, without all that stuff they've filled you with. I know that's difficult, but it's absolutely necessary, in my opinion. The Bible only. Leave all commentaries, and other writings by anyone alone, and ask the Lord to show you what he will. I know how this sounds, and I can't help it, but man oh man.

 

[BobRyan]

My appeal starts out from and CONTINUES from a "sola-scriptura" basis in ALL 66 books. No slicing and dicing God's Word into "not-the-bible" vs "yes-good-bible".

DHK
#3. The only other example you have is from the OT. Surely you don't think that God using a woman in the OT validates the prophetic gift of the NT church.

Bob said

SOLA-SCRIPTURA -- my Bible has 66 books not just 27 sir.

Your's seems "a bit short" -- maybe there has been too much slicing and dicing done on your side sir.

Paul claims "EACH one has a revelation" not "EACH man has revelation".

Paul says "DESIRE earnestly spiritual gives ESPECIALLy that you may prophesy" not "Especially that the MEN may prophesy.

Philip's four daughters were all prophetesses - contrary to your imagined restriction for the saints.

Deborah was both prophetess AND judge contrary to your imagined restriction.

Miriam was declared by God to be a prophetess contrary to your imagined restriction on this gift for women.

When it comes to "sola-scriptura" your objection does not hold water sir.

These "Bible examples" are being defined by "some" as "not the Bible" I guess. They come from BOTH OT and NT in the range of 66 -- but still there are those who object to these texts.

The interesting thing about THIS specific objection (rejecting the spiritual gifts teaching of 1Cor 12 AND 1Cor 14 and demanding silence from women in church) is that this attacks many Baptist churchs and other denominations as well. It does not single out SDAs!!

In actual Christian churches - All across the world WOMEN are singing, giving testimonies, praying, and yes calling for the offering!!:applause: :thumbs:

( I too have attended a few Baptist churches gentlemen)

Here is my point gentlemen - you a free to sit in your little circle and say "we are right because we always say we are right" but if you are willing to step outside and read the 66 for light and instruction - I believe that you will see two blatant facts that ARE apparent to the objective unbiased reader.

#1. The BIBLE DOES provide examples of what YOU claim "should not exist".
#2. Your objection to spiritual gifts AND your insistence on absolute silence for women - places you in opposition to Baptists AS WELL as Almost all other Christian churches. NOT simply "Adventists alone"!!

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

My appeal starts out from and CONTINUES from a "sola-scriptura" basis in ALL 66 books. No slicing and dicing God's Word into "not-the-bible" vs "yes-good-bible".

Is taking Scripture out of context and making it say something completely different than what it was intended your method of interpretation. We can make the Bible say anything we want whe we try hard enough. You have done a good job at that. But what does the Bible really say:

Paul claims "EACH one has a revelation" not "EACH man has revelation".

Let's quote the entire verse:
1 Corinthians 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

All things were not being done to edifying. There was chaos and confusion in the church. The verse you quoted Bob is a rebuke! They all had a psalm, a revelation, etc. He rebukes them for this. This was not to be the case. Read onward and you find that only two or three were to speak, and that in order--one by one, and each to have an interpreter. To expect all to have an revelation was not of God; it was of Satan, causing confusion. God was a God of order not confustion. You have made the verse say the opposite of what it was intended to teach.

Paul says "DESIRE earnestly spiritual gives ESPECIALLy that you may prophesy" not "Especially that the MEN may prophesy.

Now what does he really say? Look at the verse:
1 Corinthians 12:31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

This is the last verse of chapter 12. They were coveting or desiring what they thought were the best gifts (carnal), but Paul tells them to nevermind the gifts. Translated more accurately it could be put: "You are desiring the best gifts, but I will show you a better way." He was going to show them something better than all the gifts put together. He then launches into one of the most beautiful chapters in the Bible, a chapter on love--1Cor.13. Again you have taken this verse out of its context and tried to make it mean something other than it teaches. Paul's emphasis was on love, not on spiritual gifts at all. Why did you ignore the last part of the verse, Bob?

Philip's four daughters were all prophetesses - contrary to your imagined restriction for the saints.

Here you have to dig this out of the Book of Acts, an historical book where the church is in transition. Notice the name of the book: The Book of the Acts of the Apostles. Notice what the book is not called "The Book of the Acts of Ellen G. White." These were the acts of the Apostles. They ceased by the end of first century with the death of John. No one can repeat the gift of healing as exemplified by Peter in Acts 5:16, for example. He healed all that came to him--thousands that came from Jerusalem, and from all the cities all around Jerusalem; he healed them all--every one of them. It didn't matter if they were cripples, maimed, had the palsy, or whatever the ailment--he healed it. No one today has that gift. Those gifts are no longer in operation. If they were we would be able to see someone demonstrate it, but no one can.
Likewise the gift of prophecy has ceased. Their were special one-time events. The daughters of Philip were a part of the fulfillment of Joel in Acts 2. That prophecy was fulfilled in the first century. It was a one time event, and does not continue for 20 or more centuries. It was for that generation only. It will happen again--when the Millennial Kingdom comes. It did not happen in the 19th century. What happened then was a demonic imitation of the real thing. The real spiritual gifts all ceased at the end of the first century. They were no longer needed after that.

Deborah was both prophetess AND judge contrary to your imagined restriction.

God made Deborah a prophetess and a judge. Who made Ellen White a prophetess and a judge. Certainly not God! God spoke to Deborah directly. God didn't speak to White. The visions that came to White came from the same source as the visions that came to Mohammed. They were not of God.

Miriam was declared by God to be a prophetess contrary to your imagined restriction on this gift for women.

Who is Miriam? Perhaps you mean Anna. Is this the verse you are referring to?

Luke 2:36 And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity;

Barnes suggests that the only reason she may have been called a prophetess is that her husband was a prophet. At any rate, the reason is unclear why she was called a prophetess. The text says that served the Lord for a long period of time. She never prophesied of his coming. She gave thanks when she saw him. There is a difference. Again you have distorted Scripture.

When it comes to "sola-scriptura" your objection does not hold water sir.

Speak for yourself.

These "Bible examples" are being defined by "some" as "not the Bible" I guess. They come from BOTH OT and NT in the range of 66 -- but still there are those who object to these texts.

The interesting thing about THIS specific objection (rejecting the spiritual gifts teaching of 1Cor 12 AND 1Cor 14 and demanding silence from women in church) is that this attacks many Baptist churchs and other denominations as well. It does not single out SDAs!!

These are Scriptures, every one of which, you have taken out of context. And instead of giving an intelligent answer to 1Cor.14:34,35, you mock it. You don't believe the Bible Bob?

In actual Christian churches - All across the world WOMEN are singing, giving testimonies, praying, and yes calling for the offering!!

Is this the only answer you can give, the only explanation you can offer for:

1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Your MO is to mock the Word of God, when you have no answer for it! Interesting.

Here is my point gentlemen - you a free to sit in your little circle and say "we are right because we always say we are right" but if you are willing to step outside and read the 66 for light and instruction - I believe that you will see two blatant facts that ARE apparent to the objective unbiased reader.

#1. The BIBLE DOES provide examples of what YOU claim "should not exist".
#2. Your objection to spiritual gifts AND your insistence on absolute silence for women - places you in opposition to Baptists AS WELL as Almost all other Christian churches. NOT simply "Adventists alone"!!
Bob

Bob you don't read the Bible very well do you? You also have a habit of avoiding the obvious. The word authority and teach have specific meanings. I suggest you study the verse well.

 

[steaver]

Very sound and informative post DHK! (#19)

God Bless! :thumbs: