Rhema: The Basic Belief Of The "word Of Faith Movement"..., How does it relate to Adventism? Options

[LaurenceD]

Page 44, two paragraphs above the subtitle, Glimpses of grace.

[Observer]

I'm a little uncomfortable with someone saying they could write the Bible if it hadn't alrady been written.

"I would write a book on this if it hadn't already been written. Most likely, you have the book on your night table or desk or on a shelf somewhere. It's the Bible." (Chapter 4)

In the partial edition that has been posted on the Internet, the quotation appears on page 44, as stated, but in Chapter 5, not Chapter 4.

I do not know if there is more than one version of this book, with the citation appearing in Chapter 4 in one edition, and in Chapter 5 in another edition.

But, I wanted to point out that in the Internet, partial, ediltion that I have been reading it appars in Chapter 5.

This post has been edited by Observer: Sep 22 2007, 07:03 AM

[LaurenceD]

Correct. Chapter 5. I simply scrolled down and saw chapter 5 was next, except it was referring to the chapter I was in!!

[LaurenceD]

I most distinctly recall that picture of EGW....I have it in several of her books....and NO ......Shelly Quinn does not hold that position.....Not in my mind anyway......and never will................

The more I look at that picture, and read the title, the more convinced I become that Ms. Quinn means the Bible when she uses the word Word, rather than who it points to.

[Observer]

I vaguely recall seeing a picture (or drawing) of EGW in a similar position...and holding the Bible. Does anyone recall seeing that picture? Is SQ suppose to be the new EGW?

This is a very valid question.

This question is further complicated by the fact that she has commented on Page 44, of Chapter 5 in a manner that appears to say that she would be capable of writing the Bible if it had not already been written.

Ellen White never claimed that her writings were on an equality to the Bible.

The comment that SQ would be able to write the Bible, if it had not already been written, appears to me to state that she considers herself to be above the Bible. One who produces (writes) the Bible in effect decides what goes into the Bible. Yes, the claim would be that those decisions were guided by the Holy Spirit. But, even as mediated by the Holy Spirit, the author of the Bible (the one who writes it) determines the content of the Bible. If that is not placing ones self above the Bible, I do not know what it is to place ones self above the Bible.

I will say again that EGW never claimed to be able to write or produce the Bible under any set of circumstances. EGW never claimed to be above the Bible.
EGW did not claim to be equal to the Bible.

I am left with no other conclusion that SQ claims to be above the Bible.

If I were to speculate, I would wonder when she would produce someting that would superceed the Bible.

I am astounded.

I am dumbfounded.

I am beginning to understand why 3-ABN can claim that they preach a unique message the is proclaimed by no one else.

I am beginning to understand why 3-ABN could claim that they are not doctrinely affiliated with the SDA CHruch. I am not certain that they have done thils yet. But, I can see it as a potential.

[watchbird]

Jesus as the "Tao" of God? That could be an interesting point of view...

Actually it is typical of Theosophically influenced philosophies (new age, new religions, etc) to conflate Jesus Christ with the "holy men" of all other world religions.... past as well as present. In doing so they make significant "worldview" level changes in such things as the nature of God, the nature of Christ, AND the nature of man.

I have seen in this thread where people can become confused about the use of the name "Pentecostal." Apparently some people use the term generically when referencing Charismatics. That can be confusing to those of us who know Pentecostals, and know them to be a specific denomination, which they are.

Sorry Beartrap, in this case it is you who are the one who is "confused". I understand how this might be confusing to someone who knows them "to be a specific denomination"... for there are indeed specific denominations which are Pentecostal and are "denominations". However, the term Pentecostal is much broader than that and is the generally accepted term to use when speaking of all denominations that call themselves Pentecostal as well as of the basic beliefs which have infiltrated other churches of many denominations... as well as independent groups which do not align themselves with any denomination.

Charismatic is a later term which rose out of Pentecostalism.... and usually... though not always... refers to various types of teaching and practics which have entered other denominational churches.

Besides these designators, Pentecostal groups can be classified as first, second, and third wave (of the Spirit). And the Word/Faith Movement is also a subset of Pentecostalism.

I will return with more specific information on these, but not immediately, for I want to do enough internet research so as to be able to recommend specific urls where concise and accurate information may be found.

An understanding of the world view of a writer will often be helplful in understanding that writer. It will often be helplful to be able to contrast that writer's world view with other world views.

Not only helpful, but in the case of religious veiws, absolutely essential. Even among those who take the Bible as the Word of God, there are vastly different ways of interpreting it... and many of these are only comprehendable if one understands how one's worldview affects interpretation and application.

One problem with us Adventists is that we think so exclusively on a doctrine and/or practics level... never realizing that these are dependent upon world view. And one simply cannot understand differences in belief systems without taking into consideration the differences in world view... where ever they exist.

[LaurenceD]

This is a very valid question.

This question is further complicated by the fact that she has commented on Page 44, of Chapter 5 in a manner that appears to say that she would be capable of writing the Bible if it had not already been written.

Ellen White never claimed that her writings were on an equality to the Bible.

The comment that SQ would be able to write the Bible, if it had not already been written, appears to me to state that she considers herself to be above the Bible. One who produces (writes) the Bible in effect decides what goes into the Bible. Yes, the claim would be that those decisions were guided by the Holy Spirit. But, even as mediated by the Holy Spirit, the author of the Bible (the one who writes it) determines the content of the Bible. If that is not placing ones self above the Bible, I do not know what it is to place ones self above the Bible.

I will say again that EGW never claimed to be able to write or produce the Bible under any set of circumstances. EGW never claimed to be above the Bible.
EGW did not claim to be equal to the Bible.

I am left with no other conclusion that SQ claims to be above the Bible.

If I were to speculate, I would wonder when she would produce someting that would superceed the Bible.

I am astounded.

I am dumbfounded.

I am beginning to understand why 3-ABN can claim that they preach a unique message the is proclaimed by no one else.

I am beginning to understand why 3-ABN could claim that they are not doctrinely affiliated with the SDA CHruch. I am not certain that they have done thils yet. But, I can see it as a potential.

In all sympathy, I think what Ms. Quinn meant to say was...

"if another book, and a better one, hadn't already been written about Identity Crisis I would write one. But, one has already been written, you don't really need mine."

If she'd used just a little wisdom, and said something to that effect, I think it would have come across a lot better and less arrogant. But the way she structured her Words, one can't help but think she's talking about writing the Bible. Poor choice, IYAM.

But you do raise a fair point...which makes me wonder if there is a small group at 3abn that considers itself especially annointed to carry on where EGW left off, sidestepping the whole denominational trail...which they may consider off-base. And...I wonder if a little actual oil hasn't been spilled around the compound on certain peoples heads.

[Observer]

In all sympathy, I think what Ms. Quinn meant to say was...

"if another book, and a better one, hadn't already been written about Identity Crisis I would write one. But, one has already been written, you don't really need mine."

If she'd used just a little wisdom, and said something to that effect, I think it would have come across a lot better and less arrogant. But the way she structured her Words, one can't help but think she's talking about writing the Bible. Poor choice, IYAM.

But you do raise a fair point...which makes me wonder if there is a small group at 3abn that considers itself especially annointed to carry on where EGW left off, sidestepping the whole denominational trail...which they may consider off-base. And...I wonder if a little actual oil hasn't been spilled around the compound on certain peoples heads.

You may be correct. All of us, to include myself, make rather poor statements. At times I have to back up, admit that I made a poor statement, and rephrase it again.

You raise a second issue:

Who is involved in editing and reviewing the books that 3-ABN produces? I am reminded of a well-known SDA theololgian. He has written many books that he has self-published. Some are of excellent quality. Others are of lesser quality. In my mind, that has occured due to the lack of review by others prior to publication.

I will assume that 3-ABN books are reviewed by some. But, are the reviewed by the people who should review them.

A proper book review will be done by competent people. The typical person on the street is likely not to know the subject well enough to give a good review. In addition, a proper review will include people who might be expected to differ with the author. This will often reveal the weak points which the author may correct.

A proper review of SQs book might have pointed out that some would think that she was placing herself above the Bible. AT that p;oint, SQ would have had to opportunity to correct that, if she wanted to do so.

[LaurenceD]

But, then again, if the compound is operating under the new Rhema premise that once receiving it you cannot error, then there can be no mistakes. Everyone else is wrong. Perhaps that is what happens with their books also?

[PeacefulBe]

I'm a little uncomfortable with someone saying they could write the Bible if it hadn't alrady been written.

"I would write a book on this if it hadn't already been written. Most likely, you have the book on your night table or desk or on a shelf somewhere. It's the Bible." (Chapter 4)

Indeed it would be a problem if that is what Shelly Quinn meant. Is that what she really said?

"What I would like to share with you is everything the Holy Spirit has taught me about overcoming my identity crisis, In fact, I would write a book on this if it hadn't already been written. Most likely, you have the Book on your night table or desk or on a shelf somewhere. It's the Bible. Every word that the Spirit inspired men to record reveals to us the character of God, His loving plan, and our passage to a new identity." (Pg. 44, paragraph 1)

It appears to me she is referring to writing a book about what the Holy Spirit has taught her about overcoming her identity crisis but that there is no need to since the Bible already deals with that. I have quoted the entire paragraph here so that those who don't go to the link may read for themselves what she wrote and decide if she is inferring that she would be able to write the Bible if it wasn't already written. I see it more as Shelly Quinn pointing to the Bible as the book with the answers, but that is JMO.

[awesumtenor]

Indeed it would be a problem if that is what Shelly Quinn meant. Is that what she really said?

"What I would like to share with you is everything the Holy Spirit has taught me about overcoming my identity crisis, In fact, I would write a book on this if it hadn't already been written. Most likely, you have the Book on your night table or desk or on a shelf somewhere. It's the Bible. Every word that the Spirit inspired men to record reveals to us the character of God, His loving plan, and our passage to a new identity." (Pg. 44, paragraph 1)

It appears to me she is referring to writing a book about what the Holy Spirit has taught her about overcoming her identity crisis but that there is no need to since the Bible already deals with that. I have quoted the entire paragraph here so that those who don't go to the link may read for themselves what she wrote and decide if she is inferring that she would be able to write the Bible if it wasn't already written. I see it more as Shelly Quinn pointing to the Bible as the book with the answers, but that is JMO.

She is not inferring anything since readers/hearers infer; writers/speakers imply...that said... an inference could be drawn from her statement that if the bible did not already exist, she'd write it... this is, however one of those places where understanding her worldview and the perspective from whence she speaks is necessary to know whether what one can infer from this is what she implied... but if this inference is correct... the lid to Pandora's box was just thrown open.

In His service,
Mr. J

[LaurenceD]

Indeed it would be a problem if that is what Shelly Quinn meant. Is that what she really said?

"What I would like to share with you is everything the Holy Spirit has taught me about overcoming my identity crisis, In fact, I would write a book on this if it hadn't already been written. Most likely, you have the Book on your night table or desk or on a shelf somewhere. It's the Bible. Every word that the Spirit inspired men to record reveals to us the character of God, His loving plan, and our passage to a new identity." (Pg. 44, paragraph 1)

It appears to me she is referring to writing a book about what the Holy Spirit has taught her about overcoming her identity crisis but that there is no need to since the Bible already deals with that. I have quoted the entire paragraph here so that those who don't go to the link may read for themselves what she wrote and decide if she is inferring that she would be able to write the Bible if it wasn't already written. I see it more as Shelly Quinn pointing to the Bible as the book with the answers, but that is JMO.

That's a possibility. I noted something similar above (post #97). But surely she would not have written a book on exalting the Word and at the same time not have taken into careful consideration the use of her own words. The problem lies in her choice of using the word "it." "I would write a book...if it hadn't already been written." Like I noted above, the structure of her words and sentencing could have been vastly improved if she'd simply used the word "one" instead of "it" and noting that her book would never hold the dimmest light against the Bible. That might have helped disolve the apparent arrogancy implied there. Poor choice.

[Ian]

Indeed it would be a problem if that is what Shelly Quinn meant. Is that what she really said?

"What I would like to share with you is everything the Holy Spirit has taught me about overcoming my identity crisis, In fact, I would write a book on this if it hadn't already been written. Most likely, you have the Book on your night table or desk or on a shelf somewhere. It's the Bible. Every word that the Spirit inspired men to record reveals to us the character of God, His loving plan, and our passage to a new identity." (Pg. 44, paragraph 1)

It appears to me she is referring to writing a book about what the Holy Spirit has taught her about overcoming her identity crisis but that there is no need to since the Bible already deals with that. I have quoted the entire paragraph here so that those who don't go to the link may read for themselves what she wrote and decide if she is inferring that she would be able to write the Bible if it wasn't already written. I see it more as Shelly Quinn pointing to the Bible as the book with the answers, but that is JMO.

Context is always important. Thank you for posting this. I also took it the way you did.

When she said I would like to "write a book on this", my understanding was by "this" she was referring to her personal experience and testimony, We are all unique, but God's people have many things in common and learning his character, his loving plan, and how he can transform us by his Word and give us a new identity with a spiritual rather then carnal nature is surely revealed in His written Word, through the Word made flesh, and in each of our own lives when we take him at His word by faith.

It makes sense to me. The Holy Spirit led men to write the same truths, he leads us to. Just as Christ being the Word of God made flesh lived and revealed the same Character and truths of God that the inspired and written word reveals. They are one.

And he prayed that we may all be one.

Happy Sabbath.

[LaurenceD]

When she said I would like to "write a book on this", my understanding was by "this" she was referring to her personal experience and testimony.

But, doesn't that logic cave in on itself?

"This" may well have been referring to her personal life experience and tesimony, but no book has already been written about her personal experience and testimony--that I'm aware of. And if the Bible is the book that educates us on how to overcome out identity crisis, what would give someone the nerve to come right out and say they are also capable of writing such a book, even about themselves, esp when it is well known that one already exists? What ever happened to the sound-mind principle of 1Tim 1?

I think God gives people opportunities to do a little self-reassessment sometimes...and this may be one of her times.

[Ian]

But, doesn't that logic cave in on itself?

"This" may well have been referring to her personal life experience and tesimony, but no book has already been written about her personal experience and testimony--that I'm aware of. And if the Bible is the book that educates us on how to overcome out identity crisis, what would give someone the nerve to come right out and say they are also capable of writing such a book, even about themselves, esp when it is well known that one already exists? What ever happened to the sound-mind principle of 1Tim 1?

I think God gives people opportunities to do a little self-reassessment sometimes...and this may be one of her times.

Because it isn't about ourselves, but God, and our testimony is to His glory?

Amazingly, God has told us in Rev 14, that the redeemed still alive at the 2nd coming will stand with the Lamb and sing a song together which no man but them can sing, they do that although all are unique. It is the song of Moses and the Lamb, (recorded in scripture- the song of physical AND spiritual delieverance). It is also the song of their experience, their testimony, and the glory is ALL to God almighty.

You might try re-reading my post in context, and also what Shelley Quinn, one of the brethren, wrote. As I previously shared, I think that is important.

There are some in this world, with their world views who have the spirit of criticism and always seek to find fault. So of course they always find that.

It seems to be a true saying that people find what they seek.

When you read Shelley Quinn's book and even the other posts here in this thread, and even in this 3ABN forum. What do you seek?

I ask, because I don't know you, but all of your posts here appear to me to be negative and critical.

I'm sorry, I don't like to be critical myself, but negativity is contagious, and you appear to me to be very critical and negative, as if that is all you can see in every issue which comes up here.

I'd rather avoid that type of discussion.

Can you understand that?

If you have something good or encouraging or positive to say? I will listen and rethink my position.

Thanks.

This post has been edited by Ian: Sep 22 2007, 06:05 PM