10 Commandments Twice Removed - Amazon $0.01, what does it say in a nutshell? Options

[SoulEspresso]

Quinn says God used her and that she was able to write her book in only three weeks...inferring that was somehow a remarkable or miraculous accomplishment. From my perspective in reading her other book, I don't think Quinn fits the usual definitions of "channeling" which associated with communications with the dead, or UFOs, or disembodied entities, etc., but she does fit within the definitions of "automatic writing" IMO, which is a related aspect of channeling.

I've been thinking a lot about this lately. Calling her a "channeler" was an exaggeration on my part. According to her book Exalting His Word she heard an inaudible voice emphasizing things from the Bible in a certain way. My thing with Shelley Quinn is, you'd better do a thorough examination of Scripture to test such voices, and if what it's saying holds up, you'd better be real careful in assuming the voice is authoritative for anyone else.

In the Rhema thread the consensus was that her ideas do not stand the scrutiny of Scripture, so they're not from God.

This post has been edited by SoulEspresso: Oct 26 2007, 07:02 PM

[LaurenceD]

According to her book Exalting His Word she heard an inaudible voice emphasizing things from the Bible in a certain way. My thing with Shelley Quinn is, you'd better do a thorough examination of Scripture to test such voices, and if what it's saying holds up, you'd better be real careful in assuming the voice is authoritative for anyone else.

Sorting through all these voices we are exposed to, or potentially exposed to, have been the source of much angst, or confusion, amongst not only us, but the authorities too. How many voices do you count?

1. voice of reason
2. voice of conscience
3. voice of memory
4. voice of imagination
5. voice of God
5. voice of temptation (the boogie man)
6. various combinations of the above

There must be more to add to the broth.

This post has been edited by LaurenceD: Oct 26 2007, 07:49 PM

[Pickle]

I can't quite picture a Catholic, Islamic, Protestant, or atheistic government in this country without that government enacting some type of theonomical laws. ... I agree there is a line of distinction between the two tables, generally, but from the second table I only see a couple that are the basis for some of our civil laws.

A. T. Jones' study went like this:

• Israel was a theocracy, ruled by God, and the later kings were but representatives of Him. "Then Solomon sat on the throne of the LORD as king" (1Ch 29:23).
• The authority of the theocracy of Israel was transferred to Babylon from Zedekiah, and then was overturned three times, to Medo-Persia, Grecia, and Rome. Then it would be no more until Christ comes. "Thus saith the Lord GOD; Remove the diadem, and take off the crown: this shall not be the same: exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high. I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him" (Ezek. 21:26, 27).
• Christ will not take the throne of the theocracy until the second coming. "When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory" (Mt 25:31).
• Until then, some things belong to Caesar, and some things belong to God. "They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's" (Mt 22:21).
• Paul discusses the role of the state in Rom. 13, and then moves on to taxes, using wording similar to Jesus above. "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour" (Rom. 13:1-7).
• Then Paul quotes some of the 10 Commandments, but seemingly ignores any of the first table. "Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
  For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself" (Rom. 13:8, 9).
• Why does Paul ignore the first table? Because he is discussing things that belong to Caesar, and the first table is off limits to Caesar. Jesus alone will enforce those when He comes.

For a Protestant government to enforce laws against blasphemy or Sabbath breaking or idolatry is an apostasy from following Scripture. Scripture forbids it, and for a Protestant government to do what Scripture forbids would be an abjuring of one of the most basic principles of Protestantism, that the Bible is the final authority.

[appletree]

Now, back to my orginal query that may or may not be completely off topic, so can you all please indulge me a moment. Can someone explain to me how Danny hijacked the t'en Commandments weekend? It iwas not his idea. I first heard about it on TBN. It was the religious right and those affiliated with them, also with some of the most prominent of the chrismatic movement who stated this thing.....website and all. I went there before I heard anything about 3ABN participating. In fact, I initially thought that 3ABN had just joined that group. However, when all was said and done, it looked to be pretty much cancelled by the others with 3ABN solely making a hug progamming project of it, complete with a book hastily thrown together by he and Shelly. If someone can just explaint hat to me, I realy would appreciate it.

Sure be glad to. You are exactly right about the origination of the idea. When it came to the attention of 3abn the powers that be said Wow, what an opportunity to proclaim the Adventist message. Right now organized relegions are coming together to focus the whole world on the TC's. Trouble is, as we all know, they are leaving out one of them. This would be a fantastic time to join in but, from another angle which is, the importance of all 10 commandments and our responsibility to honor all 10. That's what they did. Turned out they were right. It was and is an awesome outlet and opportunity to introduce people to the Sabbath and the honor of keeping all 10. Many many have come into the church from the simple truths of the book. They might never have been interested enough to read it without all the beginning hoopla about a 10 commandment weekend.
I saw on TV that a child's movie has been made and they have titled it The Ten Commandments. Reviews are good up to this point that it is for adults as well as children. I hope 3abn takes advantage of this new opportunity and publicity to once again show people the truth.
Many thank God everyday that Danny & 3abn "hijacked" the TC weekend.

[Pickle]

AppleTree,

1) Whose idea was it to use the evangelical Ten Commandment Day as a springboard for evangelism?

2) In what ways did the person benefit who came up with the idea and shared it with Danny?

This post has been edited by Pickle: Oct 27 2007, 07:15 AM

[PrincessDrRe]

....all I know is after my Mamma read it she said she threw her copy away and also threw away the other 4 she was supposed to give out....

...she didn't like it.

[sonshineonme]

The same could be true of religious television and donations.

Unfortuantely, this is dead on. All evangelists have their target audience that they are "marketing" to. The only thing that seperates an evangelist who is marketing to his target audience is his/her motives. But I don't think I had to tell any of you that one!

ANYTHING that brings bad light on to something that should be great light, makes me wonder if the motive at the heart of the action is the cause of the bad light.

[Skyhook]

Sure be glad to. You are exactly right about the origination of the idea. When it came to the attention of 3abn the powers that be said Wow, what an opportunity to proclaim the Adventist message. Right now organized relegions are coming together to focus the whole world on the TC's. Trouble is, as we all know, they are leaving out one of them. This would be a fantastic time to join in but, from another angle which is, the importance of all 10 commandments and our responsibility to honor all 10. That's what they did. Turned out they were right. It was and is an awesome outlet and opportunity to introduce people to the Sabbath and the honor of keeping all 10. Many many have come into the church from the simple truths of the book. They might never have been interested enough to read it without all the beginning hoopla about a 10 commandment weekend.
I saw on TV that a child's movie has been made and they have titled it The Ten Commandments. Reviews are good up to this point that it is for adults as well as children. I hope 3abn takes advantage of this new opportunity and publicity to once again show people the truth.
Many thank God everyday that Danny & 3abn "hijacked" the TC weekend.

It was interesting that as it turned out, from what I understand, very few protestant churches got on the bandwagon. The originators of the idea had a few promotional items they sold to their churches and that was about it. I suspect Danny caught on to that from the beginning. If he didn't, Hal and Molly certainly would have. A great promotional opportunity to sell a book. It is just too bad they were not willing to promote a book that would actually be worth reading.

I wonder if the people at 3abn have ever heard of the concept of obtaining professional editorial counsel when considering writing a book? Even a few minutes on the phone to the right person at Pacific Press or R&H would have hopefully either caused them to change their mind or caused them to engage the services of a professional scholar/writer.

[lurker]

It was interesting that as it turned out, from what I understand, very few protestant churches got on the bandwagon. The originators of the idea had a few promotional items they sold to their churches and that was about it. I suspect Danny caught on to that from the beginning. If he didn't, Hal and Molly certainly would have. A great promotional opportunity to sell a book. It is just too bad they were not willing to promote a book that would actually be worth reading.

I wonder if the people at 3abn have ever heard of the concept of obtaining professional editorial counsel when considering writing a book? Even a few minutes on the phone to the right person at Pacific Press or R&H would have hopefully either caused them to change their mind or caused them to engage the services of a professional scholar/writer.

When you feel like you are led by the spirit in writing it exactly as the prophets of old were when writing the Bible, professional editorial counsel would just mess it up. Maybe even dampen the spirit.

[princessdi]

God given inspiration is done decently and in order, as in ALL Godly things.

Thanks Appletree for the explanation, but is doesn't help. The way this should have been done could have been a powerful witness. Instead it further perpetuates the distance and issues between Adventists and ALL other denominations. It could have been done in conjunction or answer to the original idea with insulting everyone else. Using it as just another opportunity to point out, rather heave handed, BTW, where they ALL are wrong. That is not how you witness. I am not suprprised th at there are those who are glad that Danny "hijacked" this event. After all, we have that whole "remnant", "you ain't goin' to heaven unless you join us, so the rest of ya'll are just spinning your wheels and going to hell" kind of mentality going on.

Danny got his hats mixed up. He was supposed to have the ministry hat and not go in like a corporate raider. It really was an opportunity, if handled correctly to witness and change some of this bad, low or no press Adventist seem to be suffering from. Instead, nobody is questioning why are books are in the cult section of the bookstore.

When you feel like you are led by the spirit in writing it exactly as the prophets of old were when writing the Bible, professional editorial counsel would just mess it up. Maybe even dampen the spirit.

[Pickle]

....all I know is after my Mamma read it she said she threw her copy away and also threw away the other 4 she was supposed to give out....

...she didn't like it.

Just to clarify, the person who came up with the idea of the event (Adventist version of Ten Commandment Weekend) did not necessarily come up with the idea of Danny's book. But if Danny profited from his book, it seems only fair for him to share some of those profits with the one who enabled him to make those profits by suggesting the idea of the event.

[Brick Step]

A. T. Jones' study went like this:

• Israel was a theocracy, ruled by God, and the later kings were but representatives of Him. "Then Solomon sat on the throne of the LORD as king" (1Ch 29:23).
• The authority of the theocracy of Israel was transferred to Babylon from Zedekiah, and then was overturned three times, to Medo-Persia, Grecia, and Rome. Then it would be no more until Christ comes. "Thus saith the Lord GOD; Remove the diadem, and take off the crown: this shall not be the same: exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high. I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him" (Ezek. 21:26, 27).
• Christ will not take the throne of the theocracy until the second coming. "When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory" (Mt 25:31).
• Until then, some things belong to Caesar, and some things belong to God. "They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's" (Mt 22:21).
• Paul discusses the role of the state in Rom. 13, and then moves on to taxes, using wording similar to Jesus above. "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour" (Rom. 13:1-7).
• Then Paul quotes some of the 10 Commandments, but seemingly ignores any of the first table. "Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
  For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself" (Rom. 13:8, 9).
• Why does Paul ignore the first table? Because he is discussing things that belong to Caesar, and the first table is off limits to Caesar. Jesus alone will enforce those when He comes.

For a Protestant government to enforce laws against blasphemy or Sabbath breaking or idolatry is an apostasy from following Scripture. Scripture forbids it, and for a Protestant government to do what Scripture forbids would be an abjuring of one of the most basic principles of Protestantism, that the Bible is the final authority.

Thanks for the summary. Appreciated.

[Brick Step]

...Try this from an earlier discussion.
...

Quoting a portion of the post referenced above:

2) TCTR also spends a lot of time on Col. 2:14 ("blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross") trying to prove that the ten commandments were not nailed to the cross--only the ceremonial law. Well, the cross did render the ceremonial law obsolete--and of course the Sabbath still stands. But you don't get that from this text, you have to go elsewhere.

The "handwriting of ordinances" is actually a technical word in Greek that would translate to English as "debt-record." In other words, Col. 2:14 is about neither the ceremonial nor the moral law--it's about the record of our sins. The record of our sins was nailed to the cross--good news, eh?

This is sloppy scholarship--if the authors had used a current Bible dictionary there should have been no problem. A knowledgeable Bible scholar would get frustrated with the book in about two seconds for problems like this.

I also rejoice that the record of my sins was “nailed to the cross” in AD 31. All of Scripture testifies that Jesus took upon Himself our sins, that we might have the gift of His perfect righteousness, and receive eternal life. "Good news" indeed! But whatever other troubles there might be, as I understand things at the moment, I don’t think it is fair to pull Shelley Quinn and Danny Shelton down (especially on a website called “BSDA”) for using Colossians 2:14 as they do in their book, Ten Commandments Twice Removed. Adventists have acknowledged the two interpretations of this text (see e.g. 7BC 204), and have for decades favoured the less popular view, i.e. that what was “nailed to the cross" was the ceremonial law.

Sacred history frequently sounds a loud caution that truth and righteousness are not of necessity to be associated with the majority.

The following paragraphs are taken from the book, Seventh-day Adventists Believe: A Biblical Exposition of 27 Fundamental Doctrines, published by the Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventist, 1988, pp. 243, 244. It is a small section of the comment on the 18th Fundamental (now the 19th of 28 Fundamental Doctrines), “The Law of God.”

The Law and the Gospel After the Cross. As many Christians have observed, the Bible indicates that while Christ’s death abolished the ceremonial law, it affirmed the continued validity of the moral law. Note the evidence:

1. The ceremonial law. When Christ died, He fulfilled the prophetic symbolism of the sacrificial system. Type met antitype, and the ceremonial law came to an end. Centuries earlier Daniel had predicted that the death of the Messiah would “bring an end to sacrifice and offering” (Dan.9:27; …) When Jesus Died, the veil of the temple was supernaturally torn in two from top to bottom (Matt.27:51), indicating the end of the spiritual significance of the Temple services.

Although the ceremonial law filled a vital role before the death of Christ, it was deficient in many ways, being only “a shadow of the good things to come” (Heb.10:1). It served a temporary purpose and was imposed on God’s people until the coming of “the time of reformation” (Heb.9:10; cf. Gal.3:19)—until the time when Christ died as the true Lamb of God.

At the death of Christ the jurisdiction of ceremonial law came to an end. His atoning sacrifice provided forgiveness for all sins. This act “wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross” (Col.2:14; cf. Deut.31:26). Then it was no longer necessary to perform the elaborate ceremonies that were not, in any case, able to take away sins or purify the conscience (Heb.10:4; 9:9, 14). No more worries about the ceremonial laws, with their complex requirements regarding food and drink offerings, celebrations of various festivals (Passover, Pentecost, etc.), new moons, or ceremonial Sabbaths (Col.2:16; cf. Heb.9:10), which were only a “shadow of things to come” (Col.2:17).

With Jesus’ death, believers no longer had any need to deal with shadows—reflections of the reality in Christ. Now they could approach the Saviour Himself directly, for the “substance is of Christ” (Col.2:17).

As interpreted by the Jews, the ceremonial law had become a barrier between them and other nations. It had become a great obstacle to their mission to enlighten the world with the glory of God. Christ’s death abolished this “law of commandments contained in ordinances,” breaking down “the middle wall of division” between Gentiles and Jews so as to create one new family of believers reconciled into “one body through the cross” (Eph.2:14-16).

2. The Decalogue and the cross. While Christ’s death ended the authority of the ceremonial law, it established that of the Ten Commandments. …

I will also make mention of Ellen White’s usage of this text.

“The ceremonial law was that given to Moses, and by him written in a book. But the law of Ten Commandments spoken from Sinai had been written by God Himself on the tables of stone, and was sacredly preserved in the ark [the ceremonial law, by contrast, was placed “in the side of the ark of the covenant” Deut.31:26].

“There are many who try to blend these two systems, using the texts that speak of the ceremonial law to prove that the moral law has been abolished; but this is a perversion of the Scriptures. The distinction between the two systems is broad and clear. The ceremonial system was made up of symbols pointing to Christ, to His sacrifice and His priesthood. This ritual law, with its sacrifices and ordinances, was to be performed by the Hebrews until type met antitype in the death of Christ, the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. Then all the sacrificial offerings were to cease. It is this law that Christ “took … out of the way, nailing it to His cross.” Colossians 2:14. But concerning the law of Ten Commandments the psalmist declares, “Forever, O Lord, Thy word is settled in heaven.” Psalm 119:89. And Christ Himself says, “think not that I am come to destroy the law …” The law of God is as immutable as His throne. It will maintain its claims upon mankind in all ages.” Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 365.

Evidence is that the book Ten Commandments Twice Revealed was arresting reading for thousands. The fact that others were turned off by it is no proof the book is bad. Isn't everyone allowed to defend their own faith? Nobody appeals to everybody. Not even Jesus was able to preach the gospel in a way that avoided turning many people away, even those in positions of authority in the church. Every evangelist should knows, and every listener to an evangelist needs to know, - there's a great controversy raging. When the truth is presented, many might hear gladly, and maybe a bigger “many” won’t, even to seeking to stone the preacher.

The beautiful part is that through the work of Jesus, Providence, the Holy Spirit--and all-out, non-compromising witnesses to the truth like Stephen--some of that stone-throwing “many”, like Paul, experience a change of heart, and at the last become believers and evangelists themselves.

I'm also remembering a counsel once given by Elder Mark Finley. He was encouraging everyone to take up the work of evangelism. "Don't hold back for fear of making a mistake," he said - and he was addressing a common hindrance to evangelist endeavour. "When I was just starting out, I preached so hard about David in the lion's den I nearly had everyone believing David was there."

I have at times been wonderfully blessed by the love and ministry of Christians from other denominations, even when they have made comments and taken positions that I think misrepresent and put down my faith.

It's not always easy to be faithful like Stephen or Paul, while at the same time actively cultivating the spirit of tolerance. But, this is the challenge all Christians are called to take up.

This post has been edited by Brick Step: Oct 28 2007, 07:49 PM

[roxe]

Quinn says God used her and that she was able to write her book in only three weeks...inferring that was somehow a remarkable or miraculous accomplishment. From my perspective in reading her other book, I don't think Quinn fits the usual definitions of "channeling" which associated with communications with the dead, or UFOs, or disembodied entities, etc., but she does fit within the definitions of "automatic writing" IMO, which is a related aspect of channeling.

Thank you, Laurence! for answering the question for me.

The womens ministries here had her for their weekend retreat. All the women who went came back all starry-eyed...
"OH!! It was just WONDERFUL!!"

But, there were a few who listened to reason and decided to stay home...

and that's what it is all about... choices.

[Rosyroi]

The womens ministries here had her for their weekend retreat. All the women who went came back all starry-eyed...
"OH!! It was just WONDERFUL!!"

Was wondering if the "starry-eyed" feelings were from gaining some heavenly insights or just 'startruck' because a celebrity came to town?

Just wondering...