The 3abn Massachusetts Lawsuit Poll Options

[Pickle]

Okay.

[sonshineonme]

One of my favorite authors appears to have, at least to some degree:

"The Bible, and the Bible alone, is to be our creed, the sole bond of union; all who bow to this Holy Word will be in harmony. Our own views and ideas must not control our efforts. Man is fallible, but God's Word is infallible" (1SM 416).

I do like this quote...it's what I try to live by. It's enough for me. It's simple, or should be. Does it stop there? I am sure I not nearly as astute in "theology" as you all are, as I have been striving for simplicity and less confusion in my walk with the Lord...but as I have been following this discussion, while many things have come to my mind I would like to say, I will say this (I know it matters not to most what I think, so forgive me, sometimes I can not help myself )....

I think the bible is "infallible" as far as the principal of what God/Jesus want to convey through it to us. Why can't we just accept that HE can accomplish what HE wants to, any way HE wants to, and if that is through fallible men, which is our privaledge to be used although we are fallible, it (the Word) is what it is - it will speak for itself. Faulty humans being used by God to get the message/principal down in writing for us to get the big idea of what we are to know. Why must we complicate it with so much other "stuff"?? Do we not trust the God can do this great tast inspite of US??

Man will be foolish, knowingly and unknowingly, thinking THEY know what God is trying to say, wants from us, expects from us, the how's and why's and so on, and it often seems to lead us so many different ways, I have to stop and ask WHY SO HARD IT IS FOR US TO GET THIS? Is there only ONE WAY in all things? For example, why babtize, when babtize, how babtize, who should be or shouldn't be babtized, basis for babtism? I mean, we can discuss all day long these things, as well as applying to all others "thoughts" and "beliefs" but where does it lead? Does it help? Does it truely accomplish "something"?

There are things that are very clear in the word, simple things that anyone can see if just listening (such as babtism by emersion, as it states to be babtized as Jesus was) but there are many things that are not so clear...such as what all beliefs had to be accepted before babtism? Was that there? I missed that I guess. Just an example from my little pea-mind.

I am not saying do not discuss...for reasoning together with the word is necessary as well, but, if it leads to more confusion??? Help me here...and maybe, we need this moved to a diff thread?

JMHO.

[Pickle]

Mt 18:3 "And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven."

As far as moving it to another thread, that would probably be more on topic, but I don't mind it being here.

Baptism has often been compared to a wedding ceremony. Two people can get to know each other, and then they tie the knot with the ceremony and the vows. I believe people should know what they are getting into whether it be baptism or the wedding, so they need to have a basic understanding of the prospective spouse/what God is calling His people to know and do in these last days.

Now as far as having a list of things to know and do, explicitly stated in Scripture, it isn't there. But the list incorporated into the baptismal vows sounds fairly reasonable to me, especially the part about the Bible being the only rule of faith and practice for the Christian.

[Clay]

I would feel more comfortable if you would say that you believe that the church can't say such and such rather than that it can't say such and such. Especially given what Jesus testified by His Spirit through His prophets.

But we don't have to agree.

we don't agree and I feel comfortable saying that the church CANNOT say that it is the remnant. It can only be a part of the remnant because only God knows 100% all who comprise the remnant.

[PeacefulBe]

Okay, now that some of you have agreed to disagree, let's discuss the ramifications of Ellen G. White's penchant for squirrel meat. Is this truth or merely a rumor?

[Clay]

Okay, now that some of you have agreed to disagree, let's discuss the ramifications of Ellen G. White's penchant for squirrel meat. Is this truth or merely a rumor?

thought it was quail and oysters.....

[LaurenceD]

"It is from the standpoint of the light that has come through the Spirit of Prophecy, that the question will be considered, believing as we do that the Spirit of Prophecy is the only infallible interpreter of Bible principles, since it is Christ through this agency giving the real meaning of his words." (G.A. Irwin, General Conference president, The Mark of the Beast , p. 1)

"we reaffirm our abiding confidence in the Testimonies of Sister White to the church, as the teaching of the Spirit of God." (SDA Year Book for 1914, p.253)

"If you had made God's word your study, with a desire to reach the Bible standard and attain to Christian perfection, you would not have needed the ‘Testimonies’." (Testimonies, V. 5, p.605).

"Think you that he would choose an inferior mouthpiece through whom to instruct the remnant church? On the other hand, as it is the greatest crisis of all ages, we should naturally expect that the mouthpiece God would use for this period would be inferior to none in the past ages." (R&H, August 26, 1915).

"Sister White was in very feeble health, and while prayers were offered in her behalf, the Spirit of God rested upon us. We soon noticed that she was insensible to earthly things. This was her first view of the planetary world. After counting aloud the moons of Jupiter, and soon after those of Saturn, she gave a beautiful description of the rings of the latter. She then said, ‘The inhabitants are a tall, majestic people, so unlike the inhabitants of earth. Sin has never entered here’." (Mrs. Truesdale, letter dated January 27, 1891)

[Johann]

"It is from the standpoint of the light that has come through the Spirit of Prophecy, that the question will be considered, believing as we do that the Spirit of Prophecy is the only infallible interpreter of Bible principles, since it is Christ through this agency giving the real meaning of his words." (G.A. Irwin, General Conference president, The Mark of the Beast , p. 1)

"we reaffirm our abiding confidence in the Testimonies of Sister White to the church, as the teaching of the Spirit of God." (SDA Year Book for 1914, p.253)

"If you had made God's word your study, with a desire to reach the Bible standard and attain to Christian perfection, you would not have needed the ‘Testimonies’." (Testimonies, V. 5, p.605).

"Think you that he would choose an inferior mouthpiece through whom to instruct the remnant church? On the other hand, as it is the greatest crisis of all ages, we should naturally expect that the mouthpiece God would use for this period would be inferior to none in the past ages." (R&H, August 26, 1915).

"Sister White was in very feeble health, and while prayers were offered in her behalf, the Spirit of God rested upon us. We soon noticed that she was insensible to earthly things. This was her first view of the planetary world. After counting aloud the moons of Jupiter, and soon after those of Saturn, she gave a beautiful description of the rings of the latter. She then said, ‘The inhabitants are a tall, majestic people, so unlike the inhabitants of earth. Sin has never entered here’." (Mrs. Truesdale, letter dated January 27, 1891)

You have give us quite a challenge.

[gracetoyou]

"Sister White was in very feeble health, and while prayers were offered in her behalf, the Spirit of God rested upon us. We soon noticed that she was insensible to earthly things. This was her first view of the planetary world. After counting aloud the moons of Jupiter, and soon after those of Saturn, she gave a beautiful description of the rings of the latter. She then said, ‘The inhabitants are a tall, majestic people, so unlike the inhabitants of earth. Sin has never entered here’." (Mrs. Truesdale, letter dated January 27, 1891)[/indent]

Ellen White did not name specific planets in her "astronomy" vision of 1846. Some witnesses assumed she was referring to Jupiter and Saturn. Read "The Astronomy Vision" in the book Ellen G. White and Her Critics by Francis D. Nichol.

[Pickle]

we don't agree and I feel comfortable saying that the church CANNOT say that it is the remnant. It can only be a part of the remnant because only God knows 100% all who comprise the remnant.

Ahh! Now I think I see the difficulty. Your statement above gives me the impression that for you being a part of the remnant suggests being saved and not being a hypocrite. Am I getting it?

For me, being a part of the remnant only means being given special light and being called to give a special message, nothing more. Kind of like Israel who were the chosen people of God because they had special light and a special message, but of whom most will not be in the kingdom.

Probably we agree that the Seventh-day Adventist Church has been given special light and a special message? But just differ on what being identified as the remnant really means?

[Pickle]

Okay, now that some of you have agreed to disagree, let's discuss the ramifications of Ellen G. White's penchant for squirrel meat. Is this truth or merely a rumor?

I had a college professor who suggested that Ellen White might have eaten squirrel, which didn't impress me much at the time. Whatever documentation I've seen since then concerned an occasion in the mountains in the winter when provisions were disappearing, yet the documentation looked inconclusive to me.

[Pickle]

"It is from the standpoint of the light that has come through the Spirit of Prophecy, that the question will be considered, believing as we do that the Spirit of Prophecy is the only infallible interpreter of Bible principles, since it is Christ through this agency giving the real meaning of his words." (G.A. Irwin, General Conference president, The Mark of the Beast , p. 1)

"Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow" (1 Pet. 1:10, 11).

"The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy" (Rev. 19:10).

"Yet many years didst thou forbear them, and testifiedst against them by thy spirit in thy prophets: yet would they not give ear: therefore gavest thou them into the hand of the people of the lands" (Neh. 9:30).

"Yet the LORD testified against Israel, and against Judah, by all the prophets, and by all the seers, saying, Turn ye from your evil ways, and keep my commandments and my statutes, according to all the law which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent to you by my servants the prophets" (2 Ki. 17:13).

[Pickle]

Ellen White did not name specific planets in her "astronomy" vision of 1846. Some witnesses assumed she was referring to Jupiter and Saturn. Read "The Astronomy Vision" in the book Ellen G. White and Her Critics by Francis D. Nichol.

The whole chapter can be read online at http://www.whiteestate.org/books/egwhc/EGWHCc07.html.

[Voktar of Zargon]

"who regards the bible as infallible? How can that be if the people who wrote the bible were fallible? God did not dictate the bible word for word, nor do we believe that, so the bible written by inspired men must be fallible. You guys worry me.... The bible contains correct information about God and what is needed to be saved.... but to attribute to it infallibility... that is a stretch... "

"The church's official doctrine is not the issue here; it's the variants and divergences from said doctrine that one finds among the members in the pews... and the bible is not infallible, my friend.. it's flaws do not render the gospel it preaches null and void but it is still not infallible..."

Perhaps the church's official doctrine is at issue here.

"1. Holy Scriptures:
The Holy Scriptures, Old and New Testaments, are the written Word of God, given by divine inspiration through holy men of God who spoke and wrote as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. In this Word, God has committed to man the knowledge necessary for salvation. The Holy Scriptures are the infallible revelation of His will. They are the standard of character, the test of experience, the authoritative revealer of doctrines, and the trustworthy record of God's acts in history. (2 Peter 1:20, 21; 2 Tim. 3:16, 17; Ps. 119:105; Prov. 30:5, 6; Isa. 8:20; John 17:17; 1 Thess. 2:13; Heb. 4:12.)"

[awesumtenor]

"who regards the bible as infallible? How can that be if the people who wrote the bible were fallible? God did not dictate the bible word for word, nor do we believe that, so the bible written by inspired men must be fallible. You guys worry me.... The bible contains correct information about God and what is needed to be saved.... but to attribute to it infallibility... that is a stretch... "

"The church's official doctrine is not the issue here; it's the variants and divergences from said doctrine that one finds among the members in the pews... and the bible is not infallible, my friend.. it's flaws do not render the gospel it preaches null and void but it is still not infallible..."

Perhaps the church's official doctrine is at issue here.

"1. Holy Scriptures:
The Holy Scriptures, Old and New Testaments, are the written Word of God, given by divine inspiration through holy men of God who spoke and wrote as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. In this Word, God has committed to man the knowledge necessary for salvation. The Holy Scriptures are the infallible revelation of His will. They are the standard of character, the test of experience, the authoritative revealer of doctrines, and the trustworthy record of God's acts in history. (2 Peter 1:20, 21; 2 Tim. 3:16, 17; Ps. 119:105; Prov. 30:5, 6; Isa. 8:20; John 17:17; 1 Thess. 2:13; Heb. 4:12.)"

In a word... no... saying that the Holy Scriptures are the infallible revelation of His will and saying they are infallible are not synonymous. Again I refer you to Selected Messages Book 1:

The Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God's mode of thought and expression. It is that of humanity. God, as a writer, is not represented. Men will often say such an expression is not like God. But God has not put Himself in words, in logic, in rhetoric, on trial in the Bible. The writers of the Bible were God's penmen, not His pen. Look at the different writers. {1SM 21.1}

It is not the words of the Bible that are inspired, but the men that were inspired. Inspiration acts not on the man's words or his expressions but on the man himself, who, under the influence of the Holy Ghost, is imbued with thoughts. But the words receive the impress of the individual mind. The divine mind is diffused. The divine mind and will is combined with the human mind and will; thus the utterances of the man are the word of God.-- Manuscript 24, 1886 (written in Europe in 1886). {1SM 21.2}

For scripture to be infallible, inherently in and of itself, God, as a writer, would need to be represented. Absent said representation, the revelation to the writers, aka inspiration, was infallible but those who received it were not...and said revelation was transmitted accurately via the fallible reflections of finite men through the power of the Holy Ghost. The bible is fallible because, as Paul states in 1Cor 13, "we know in part and prophesy in part"; God has given no man... or woman, for that matter... "full disclosure".

In His service,
Mr. J